I come to praise Chris Ballard, not to bury him.

[Dam8610]

Originally Posted by IndyNorm

Not sure how you got that I was saying or suggesting that AR beat out Minshew in '23. He was clearly handed the starter job from pretty much day one. As far as Irsay pressuring the FO and coaches to start AR here's what Ballard said about it:



The article then goes to state that Irsay did say he thought AR would get better by playing right away, but that was aligned w/ what Steichen had said from the point right after we drafted AR. So based off of all of their comments it seems like Irsay, Ballard, and Steichen were all aligned in starting AR from day 1.





You guys are really underestimating how soft our schedules have been, especially last year. We played 6 games against the bottom 4 teams in the league, another 2 against bottom 10 teams, and 1 against a Tua-less Phins which is a bottom 5 team. 7/8 wins in '24 came in those games.


Some other thoughts I have based on the discussion:

On Ballard - yes, he's a good GM, but IMO he's not a great GM. He's a pretty good talent evaluator and for the most part has drafted well, but his phobia of top tier FAs has handicapped his effectiveness and has been a big factor in our mediocrity over the past 5 seasons. I agree w/ rn that his decision to bring in win now QBs and slow play other parts of the roster is not a winning strategy. It was really good to see him finally step out of his comfort zone this offseason, so if we have a good season and he keeps his job then hopefully he doesn't go back into his shell.

Also, I don't think the fear of bringing in someone worse should be the reason we keep Ballard. If we think we can go get someone better then we should go get them.

On Grigson - Yeah he was god awful, and his incompetence has definitely made Ballard look better than he actually is. Something I've always found interesting about Grigson's tenure is that he made a lot of really good moves when we were backed up against the cap in '12, but once the cap handcuffs were taken off things went to shit. We lost Tom Telesco after the '12 season, so I think a lot of the success from the Grig's first offseason probably came from Telesco.

I will say that if you can get someone better, I'm 1000% on board with that. The only problem is Howie Roseman and Brandon Beane already have jobs, and hiring one of their underlings doesn't mean they'll be any good. IIRC we got Grigson from Philly.

[IndyNorm]

Originally Posted by ChaosTheory

Well, for one: Joe Mixon. The guy who is also notoriously bad in pass-pro and also played in 14 games like JT. And he didn't squeak in... he was 58th.

Mixon: 72.6 rush ypg, 4.1ypc, 94.6 scrimmage ypg, 12 tds

Taylor: 102.2 rush ypg, 4.7ypc, 111.9 scrimmage ypg, 12tds

----


To have him above JT at all, let alone a minimum of 42 guys between them, is silly. These aren't coaches or analysts.

Yeah, Mixon's a head scratcher. Not just ahead of JT, but guys like Bijan Robinson and Kyren Williams as well.

Also, FWIW there are no OGs on the list.

[YDFL Commish]

Originally Posted by IndyNorm

Yeah, Mixon's a head scratcher. Not just ahead of JT, but guys like Bijan Robinson and Kyren Williams as well.

Also, FWIW there are no OGs on the list.

I like Mixon's NFL game, but still, he couldn't carry JT's jock. Don't forget I'm a JT hater, and I still believe this to be true.

[ChaosTheory]

Originally Posted by HoosierinFL

Has Mixon ever dropped the ball at the 1/2 yard line?

No, but he did drop a girl in that restaurant in Oklahoma.

[Oldcolt]

Originally Posted by Dam8610

Ballard absolutely gets paid to evaluate NFL players as well as college players. His job is to assemble the most talented roster possible. By definition, that will include some acquisitions that are not draft picks. Trading for Buckner was a big risk as well. He gave up the 13th pick, and that was a home run in terms of value. Of course in hindsight it seems obvious that it was the right move, but Buckner could've come in and been terrible, and everyone would've said he never should've traded away such a valuable asset for Buckner. That's what everyone said about the Trent Richardson trade, and rightfully so, because Trent Richardson was awful. Once again, this highlights the difference good talent evaluation makes.

I understand that sometimes change is a necessary catalyst, but change for its own sake is how you become the Cleveland Browns or the New York Jets.

We have totally different memories of the Buckner trade. I remember everyone on this board as well as every single article praising this deal and pointing out that it was only possible because there were two stud tackles in SF and they couldn't pay both. There was only real the risk of injury. I do understand how valuable Ballard and apparently you feel that thirteenth pick was, especially after the stud Malik Hooker we got at 15. My point being that draft choice was a much bigger gamble than Buckner was (it turned out to be that other stud Tristan Wirfs was taken at 13). My larger point is that the primary and by far most important evaluation made is trying to project how college players will play in the NFL. That is still the basis for building teams. Of course you evaluate NFL players but that isn't where you make your money as a GM.

[apballin]

Originally Posted by Oldcolt

We have totally different memories of the Buckner trade. I remember everyone on this board as well as every single article praising this deal and pointing out that it was only possible because there were two stud tackles in SF and they couldn't pay both. There was only real the risk of injury. I do understand how valuable Ballard and apparently you feel that thirteenth pick was, especially after the stud Malik Hooker we got at 15. My point being that draft choice was a much bigger gamble than Buckner was (it turned out to be that other stud Tristan Wirfs was taken at 13). My larger point is that the primary and by far most important evaluation made is trying to project how college players will play in the NFL. That is still the basis for building teams. Of course you evaluate NFL players but that isn't where you make your money as a GM.

Anyone can evaluate these guys from birth til draft what nobody can account for or predict is what these guys will do once they get lottery ticket money.

[Dam8610]

Originally Posted by Oldcolt

We have totally different memories of the Buckner trade. I remember everyone on this board as well as every single article praising this deal and pointing out that it was only possible because there were two stud tackles in SF and they couldn't pay both. There was only real the risk of injury. I do understand how valuable Ballard and apparently you feel that thirteenth pick was, especially after the stud Malik Hooker we got at 15. My point being that draft choice was a much bigger gamble than Buckner was (it turned out to be that other stud Tristan Wirfs was taken at 13). My larger point is that the primary and by far most important evaluation made is trying to project how college players will play in the NFL. That is still the basis for building teams. Of course you evaluate NFL players but that isn't where you make your money as a GM.

The best GMs use all avenues of talent acquisition consistently to build the best possible roster. I know everyone here thought Ballard was "afraid" of free agency prior to this past offseason, but Ballard had up to that point used free agency to get the only good year of Eric Ebron's career, starting caliber pass rushers in Denico Autry and Justin Houston, a #1 corner in Stephone Gilmore, and if you count the waiver wire, used it to pick up players like Kenny Moore, Samuel Womack, Pierre Desir, Al-Quadin Muhammad, Zach Pascal, Mark Glowinski, etc., including Chad Muma this year. In order to not end up like Grigson blowing tons of free agent dollars on very little production, or to be able to make waiver wire acquisitions that can be valuable starters, a GM has to be able to effectively evaluate NFL talent. Ballard has higher than average success rates in every avenue of talent acquisition. If you're going to get rid of that, you should be certain that you're going to get someone who can do the job better.

In regard to the Buckner trade, I wasn't saying Buckner was considered a risky acquisition at the time, but similarly Trent Richardson wasn't considered a risky acquisition when he was acquired. Clearly those two trades went very differently.

[YDFL Commish]

Okay, I want to ask this question...What result from this season will get the Ballard haters off his ass?

Will 10-7, and 1 win in the playoffs do it?

Will a division title do it?

Will winning the opener, beating the Jags in Jacksonville, but missing the playoffs at 9-8 do it?

What are you're measurements of success, that will convince you that Ballard is the man for the job?

[Thorgrim]

I don’t think expecting a playoff win is unreasonable. This is taking into account injuries, bad calls, and some bad bounces that all teams must contend with. I also expect them to show up prepared to play and be competitive in every game. Even a playoff win followed by a shit-show would be unacceptable.

[Colts And Orioles]

Originally Posted by YDFL Commish

OK, I want to ask this question ...... what result from this season will get the Ballard haters off of his ass?

Will 10-7, and 1 win in the playoffs do it?

Will a division title do it?

Will winning the opener, beating the Jaguars in Jacksonville, but missing the playoffs at 9-8 do it?

What are you're measurements of success that will convince you that Ballard is the man for the job?

o


My guess would be that their criteria would be 14-3, an AFC Championship, and the Colts' first trip to the Super Bowl since 2009 ...... but then he'll be back hot-seat the following year if the Colts don't win it all in the 2026 season.

o