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

[Kray007]

First of all, apologies to William Shakespeare for plagiarizing Julius Caesar.

Second, I know that there’s a lot of anger and hostility flowing in the direction of the Colts front office. Somewhere east of the White River, crowds are gathering, heating up tar and feathers, and passing out torches and pitchforks.

Most of the angst Centers around Anthony Richardson, Daniel Jones, and the quarterback position. Let me be the first to say that I join you in your unhappiness. So far in his career, Anthony has disappointed. Some of the blame, of course, falls on Chris Ballard’s shoulders. He drafted the man and he entrusted Shane Steichen with the responsibility of developing the young man’s vast potential. Ultimately, we have no idea of how the Richardson experiment will play out. The Colts aren’t cutting ties anytime soon, and there is still a glimmer of hope that things will work out.

But, even if they don’t, I’m not ready to crucify the general manager. Drafting a quarterback might well be the biggest crapshoot in the NFL. The majority, no matter how talented, will fail. That’s a simple fact of life. The Colts spent the better part of a quarter century looking for a replacement for Bert Jones. In the interim between Jones and Manning, we saw a host of quarterbacks lining up under center, the likes of which included names like Don Majkowski, Chris Chandler, Marty Domres, Blair Kiel, and Dan Orlovsky. One first round draft choice was spent on Art Schlichter, another on Jeff George. If Anthony doesn’t work out, we simply have to suck it up, move on, and take a shot in a 2026 draft class that Mel Kiper says is six deep.

I’m not sure that there’s any potential GM hire I trust more than Chris Ballard to make the call. No less an eminence than Bill Polian peered out over the draft landscape in 1998 and, save for the intervention of a stiff necked Jim Irsay, would’ve gifted us with Ryan Leaf.

At the end of the day, after all the grumbling, we face the stark fact that our perception of this club is shaped by Anthony Richardson‘s struggles. Last year‘s club was on the cusp of the playoffs even though they were helmed by a quarterback who completed less than 50% of his passes. That is a testament to the kind of team that Chris Ballard puts on the field. As I see it, this is a team with at least a dozen pro bowl quality players…Pittman, Pierce, Downs, Raimann, Nelson, Warren, Taylor, Buckner, Franklin, Bynum, Ward, and Moore.

There is nothing wrong with Chris Ballard’s ability to identify talent. There’s no reason to burn the organization to the ground and start over from scratch with another GM, especially when you consider that finding another Bill Polian is almost as elusive as finding another Peyton Manning.

[ChaosTheory]

Drafting a quarterback might well be the biggest crapshoot in the NFL.

Agree. Apparently, not everyone does.

When they come for you (and they will shortly), ask them who is good at finding quarterbacks.

[rm1369]

Agree. Apparently, not everyone does.

When they come for you (and they will shortly), ask them who is good at finding quarterbacks.

My top issues do not include not finding a QB. It’s with a philosophy that was all but guaranteed to result in mediocrity. Something I’ve been saying since he had Luck and said he was going to waste years with an elite QB building slowly. I blame Ballard for signing Rivers and doing jack shit with the rest of the roster. I blame him for acquiring Ryan and then trusting a 3rd round rookie who had only played LT for 2 yrs in college, and a journeyman guard to play LT. I blame him for acquiring Wentz and then trotting out a DE group with no player with double digit sacks COMBINED for their CAREERS. And I blame him for drafting the rawest rookie QB ever, starting him game 1 and then benching him, starting him again, and benching him again - in basically two calendar years.

He is a decent talent evaluator but he has no plan besides "next year" and no idea how to construct a team to win. None. He seems to believe a journeyman QB is sufficient to win, but he has never assembled a complete team to make that possible. Every team has had a major obvious hole that he has been continent to wait to fill 1-3 yrs down the line.

It’s hard as fuck to find a QB. IMO if you don’t have a franchise guy you have two options 1) be aggressive in finding that guy or 2) build a complete team that can support a journeyman. To this point Ballard has done neither. The only reason they were in the position to draft a QB high was because of Irsay. And this is the best team he has ever put together and it is only because he is finally scared for his job. Otherwise CB and safety would have continued to wait like we’ve seen every other year under Ballard.

So combine my complete disagreement with his team building philosophy, with his gifting players spots and his belief that veterans don’t matter, and I can’t wait for Ballard to be gone. I’m not scared of finding a worse GM, because honestly what Ballard has done is worse than swinging big and losing. He’s made me and the fanbase apathetic. I’m turning in my season tickets at the end of this year regardless of the results. I’m tired of spending my money on a team that clearly has had no plan.

[Hoopsdoc]

For all the good Ballard has done, and he’s done a lot, he’s also had some pretty egregious brain farts.

For instance, Ballard was convinced that Danny Pinter and Matt Freaking Pryor were competent starters on the offensive line.

That decision alone basically cost us an entire season and would have been enough to get him fired in most places.

[ChoppedWood]

He fucking sucks, one of the most incompetent ass clowns in the history of the NFL. Has snuck by on the grace of a very distracted and overly loyal owner.

That time is rapidly coming to an end and soon he will be gone, and that will be a great day for this franchise.

[Racehorse]

The roster is decent. Ballard has found talent in the late rounds. I think a lot of the talent on defense was wasted under Bradley, and injuries got a few.

As to the QB, and the idea that Ballard does not want a complete team, preferring a slow build, I will give my thoughts. First, I think Irsay (may he rest in peace) had a lot to do with the QB situation, both with the Ryan, Wentz, and Rivers experiments, and how the AR situation played out He was impatient to get a guy in there, and said get the vets, and then said start the rookie. He was also the catalyst for Grigson trading for Trent Richardson. Second, Ballard said he wanted a complete team that was not 100% dependent on a Manning or Mahomes type to bail them out. I think the fact Irsay's fortune was not as liquid as most played a part in free agency, ashas been mentioned in previous years. Third, I think he made it clear that he was planning to build from the lines first, and then work out from there. He has invested a lot of capital on both lines. Yes, edge rushers don't seem to have been a hit, but Bradley's scheme was a big factor in that. Glad that guy is gone. I think it was a year too late. Last year's team could have won the division despite poor QB play if the defense was not so soft in coverage, leading to death by 1000 paper cuts. There was no Maniac to create the turnovers any longer.

This is not to say Ballard is blameless, but it puts a lot into perspective. This roster is talented enough that average QB play would win the division, and possibly get us to 11-12 wins.

[ChaosTheory]

I blame Ballard for signing Rivers and doing jack shit with the rest of the roster.

Give me a break. He signs two FA this offseason and everyone loses their minds like he's had some awakening... But in 2020 him bringing in Rivers, Xavier Rhodes, and trading a 1st for Buckner is "jack shit."

By the way, without a first he still got Pittman, Taylor, Blackmon, Pinter, and Rodgers in that draft. Top-10 in both offense and defense that year.

I blame him for acquiring Wentz and then trotting out a DE group with no player with double digit sacks COMBINED for their CAREERS.

https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/free-agents/_/year/2021/position/ed/type/ufa

There you go, big dog. It's even sorted for you. Show me the move you were clamoring for Ballard to make. Was it Carl Lewis? Romeo Okwara?

I somehow doubt the difference between your criticism and acceptance is the highly fussed-over Denico fucking Autry.

Top-9 in scoring for both offense and defense that year, too.

I blame him for acquiring Ryan and then trusting a 3rd round rookie who had only played LT for 2 yrs in college, and a journeyman guard to play LT.

Yes, bad move. But he wasn't relying on Raimann. He wasn't supposed to go in yet, although, unlike with Richardson: baptism-by-fire worked well for him.

Pryor was supposed to be the bridge, and he never looked anything like he did in 2022 prior (heh) to that. Pinter also never looked like that before or since. 2022 was fucking bizarro world.


And I blame him for drafting the rawest rookie QB ever, starting him game 1 and then benching him, starting him again, and benching him again - in basically two calendar years.

The whole team benched him. Sorry, tapping out of a game, turns out, rubs guys the wrong way. Buckner, Nelson, and whoever else had words with him. It wasn't a small thing. That's not even considering the 47%.

AR was not benched this summer, Jones beat him out. They said it since January that they tried the baptism-by-fire route, and he was drowning. They're trying an alternate route. I'm sorry you and most others didn't believe them.


And this is the best team he has ever put together and it is only because he is finally scared for his job. Otherwise CB and safety would have continued to wait like we’ve seen every other year under Ballard.

That's great. We haven't seen a down played, but you'll say this is the best team? I guess he did sign two FA's, which is goal. I know it doesn't occur to people... but consider that we brought in, not just a new DC, but one that is radically and fundamentally different than the previous.

This one has a particular type of DB room he wants which, maybe, factors into what the GM looks for and prioritizes.

It’s hard as fuck to find a QB. IMO if you don’t have a franchise guy you have two options 1) be aggressive in finding that guy or 2) build a complete team that can support a journeyman. To this point Ballard has done neither.

1.) I don't see how drafting AR wasn't aggressive. If you listen to every pundit out there today, apparently everyone knew AR never should have been drafted at #4 (except that whole consensus top-3 QB label).

2.) This is outcome bias. There's no other way to put it. Ballard has kept his job for a decade precisely and ONLY because of what he puts around the QB. I mean, 9 years... He doesn't have Epstein files on the Irsays despite what Chopped will tell you. It's his rosters.

[YDFL Commish]

The roster is decent. Ballard has found talent in the late rounds. I think a lot of the talent on defense was wasted under Bradley, and injuries got a few.

As to the QB, and the idea that Ballard does not want a complete team, preferring a slow build, I will give my thoughts. First, I think Irsay (may he rest in peace) had a lot to do with the QB situation, both with the Ryan, Wentz, and Rivers experiments, and how the AR situation played out He was impatient to get a guy in there, and said get the vets, and then said start the rookie. He was also the catalyst for Grigson trading for Trent Richardson. Second, Ballard said he wanted a complete team that was not 100% dependent on a Manning or Mahomes type to bail them out. I think the fact Irsay's fortune was not as liquid as most played a part in free agency, ashas been mentioned in previous years. Third, I think he made it clear that he was planning to build from the lines first, and then work out from there. He has invested a lot of capital on both lines. Yes, edge rushers don't seem to have been a hit, but Bradley's scheme was a big factor in that. Glad that guy is gone. I think it was a year too late. Last year's team could have won the division despite poor QB play if the defense was not so soft in coverage, leading to death by 1000 paper cuts. There was no Maniac to create the turnovers any longer.

This is not to say Ballard is blameless, but it puts a lot into perspective. This roster is talented enough that average QB play would win the division, and possibly get us to 11-12 wins.

You Sir have put the whole situation in the proper context, that most of fandom disagrees with.

Jim became Robert, in his last few years, and was a detriment to winning. Don't get me started on Bradley though. He made Eberflus look like Belichick.

[Oldcolt]

The bottom line is winning. Ballard has what, two playoff appearances and one playoff win in 9 years. We win 9 games or so a year yes, but we wouldn't if we didn't play in the worst division in football, which we cannot seem to win. How many years do you give a guy to show you who he is? None of his teams have ever won an opening game (we aren't close to the record, it's 29 straight games without a win by the Cardinals). He chose the coach and the players for these teams. He is a mediocre talent evaluator if you go by results.

[ChoppedWood]

The bottom line is winning. Ballard has what, two playoff appearances and one playoff win in 9 years. We win 9 games or so a year yes, but we wouldn't if we didn't play in the worst division in football, which we cannot seem to win. How many years do you give a guy to show you who he is? None of his teams have ever won an opening game (we aren't close to the record, it's 29 straight games without a win by the Cardinals). He chose the coach and the players for these teams. He is a mediocre talent evaluator if you go by results.

Well said.

[Colts And Orioles]

The roster is decent. Ballard has found talent in the late rounds. I think a lot of the talent on defense was wasted under Bradley, and injuries got a few.

As to the QB, and the idea that Ballard does not want a complete team, preferring a slow build, I will give my thoughts. First, I think Irsay (may he rest in peace) had a lot to do with the QB situation, both with the Ryan, Wentz, and Rivers experiments, and how the AR situation played out He was impatient to get a guy in there, and said get the vets, and then said start the rookie. He was also the catalyst for Grigson trading for Trent Richardson. Second, Ballard said he wanted a complete team that was not 100% dependent on a Manning or Mahomes type to bail them out. I think the fact Irsay's fortune was not as liquid as most played a part in free agency, as has been mentioned in previous years. Third, I think he made it clear that he was planning to build from the lines first, and then work out from there. He has invested a lot of capital on both lines. Yes, edge rushers don't seem to have been a hit, but Bradley's scheme was a big factor in that. Glad that guy is gone. I think it was a year too late. Last year's team could have won the division despite poor QB play if the defense was not so soft in coverage, leading to death by 1000 paper cuts. There was no Maniac to create the turnovers any longer.

This is not to say Ballard is blameless, but it puts a lot into perspective. This roster is talented enough that average QB play would win the division title, and possibly get us to 11-12 wins.





o


Posts like this are so reactionary, biased, and irrational ...... I prefer the more objective and articulate takes, such as this one.

o





He fucking sucks, one of the most incompetent ass-clowns in the history of the NFL. He has snuck by on the grace of a very distracted and overly loyal owner.

That time is rapidly coming to an end, and soon he will be gone ...... and that will be a great day for this franchise.

[rm1369]

Give me a break. He signs two FA this offseason and everyone loses their minds like he's had some awakening... But in 2020 him bringing in Rivers, Xavier Rhodes, and trading a 1st for Buckner is "jack shit."
…….

2.) This is outcome bias. There's no other way to put it. Ballard has kept his job for a decade precisely and ONLY because of what he puts around the QB. I mean, 9 years... He doesn't have Epstein files on the Irsays despite what Chopped will tell you. It's his rosters.

I started to type out an individual response to your points, like who the leading WRs were the Rivers year and how everyone except apparently Ballard knew it was an issue. How long everyone knew the secondary was an issue but we always liked our guys. How low balling Autry is a prime example of Ballard’s conservatism that keeps the books looking good but loses games, and an example of his stated disregard for the value of veteran leadership. Etc. But then I read Oldcolts post and thought better of it. None of it matters. Ballard’s fans consistently see a genius and find excuses for his consistent failures. I’ll just ask this - why has such a well run team filled with so much talent never won the worst division in football under his brilliant leadership? They aren’t in a division with a power house. In fact all three other teams in the division have finished first. Houston and Jacksonville have finished last in the division and turned around and won the division all within Ballard’s tenure with the Colts. Tennessee finished last in the division a year before Ballard and won the division during his tenure. So every other team in the division has faced adversity and won. But not a Ballard led team. Seems strange for such a good GM….

[Dam8610]

My top issues do not include not finding a QB. It’s with a philosophy that was all but guaranteed to result in mediocrity. Something I’ve been saying since he had Luck and said he was going to waste years with an elite QB building slowly. I blame Ballard for signing Rivers and doing jack shit with the rest of the roster. I blame him for acquiring Ryan and then trusting a 3rd round rookie who had only played LT for 2 yrs in college, and a journeyman guard to play LT. I blame him for acquiring Wentz and then trotting out a DE group with no player with double digit sacks COMBINED for their CAREERS. And I blame him for drafting the rawest rookie QB ever, starting him game 1 and then benching him, starting him again, and benching him again - in basically two calendar years.

He is a decent talent evaluator but he has no plan besides "next year" and no idea how to construct a team to win. None. He seems to believe a journeyman QB is sufficient to win, but he has never assembled a complete team to make that possible. Every team has had a major obvious hole that he has been continent to wait to fill 1-3 yrs down the line.

It’s hard as fuck to find a QB. IMO if you don’t have a franchise guy you have two options 1) be aggressive in finding that guy or 2) build a complete team that can support a journeyman. To this point Ballard has done neither. The only reason they were in the position to draft a QB high was because of Irsay. And this is the best team he has ever put together and it is only because he is finally scared for his job. Otherwise CB and safety would have continued to wait like we’ve seen every other year under Ballard.

So combine my complete disagreement with his team building philosophy, with his gifting players spots and his belief that veterans don’t matter, and I can’t wait for Ballard to be gone. I’m not scared of finding a worse GM, because honestly what Ballard has done is worse than swinging big and losing. He’s made me and the fanbase apathetic. I’m turning in my season tickets at the end of this year regardless of the results. I’m tired of spending my money on a team that clearly has had no plan.

I agree with you about the handling of Richardson, but as Racehorse said, I think that's the result of ownership meddling in part. I strongly felt AR should sit for a year. It sounds like the coaches and scouts may have also felt that way. But pressure from ownership can change those opinions.

In regard to the issues you bring up with the team building philosophy, he inherited Grigson's mess when he came in, he knew those teams overachieved because Andrew Luck drug them to success. He wanted to build slowly because he wanted to put a talented roster around his franchise QB. Then his franchise QB did the unthinkable and retired at 30. So there was a roster of talented players with no QB. The QB position had to get settled first, and after 1 successful experiment, 1 failed experiment, and 1 colossal failure of an experiment, the Colts finally had a top 5 pick and Irsay insisted on drafting a QB with it. That was Richardson. As far as the secondary issue in 2023, why invest in a position when you expect to be bad? In 2024, he found Womack off the street who played like a starter.

The OL issue I can't really say anything about other than I hope he learned from it, because trusting Matt Pryor as your LT was far from ideal.

For all the good Ballard has done, and he’s done a lot, he’s also had some pretty egregious brain farts.

For instance, Ballard was convinced that Danny Pinter and Matt Freaking Pryor were competent starters on the offensive line.

That decision alone basically cost us an entire season and would have been enough to get him fired in most places.

Ballard came from KC, and his team building philosophy is nearly identical to Brett Veach's, the latter of whom just came 1 game short of winning 3 consecutive Super Bowls. The only tangible differences I can find between their team building styles is that Veach drafted Mahomes, and Veach had an opportunity to get a haul of draft picks for a player he didn't want to sign long term.

The roster is decent. Ballard has found talent in the late rounds. I think a lot of the talent on defense was wasted under Bradley, and injuries got a few.

As to the QB, and the idea that Ballard does not want a complete team, preferring a slow build, I will give my thoughts. First, I think Irsay (may he rest in peace) had a lot to do with the QB situation, both with the Ryan, Wentz, and Rivers experiments, and how the AR situation played out He was impatient to get a guy in there, and said get the vets, and then said start the rookie. He was also the catalyst for Grigson trading for Trent Richardson. Second, Ballard said he wanted a complete team that was not 100% dependent on a Manning or Mahomes type to bail them out. I think the fact Irsay's fortune was not as liquid as most played a part in free agency, ashas been mentioned in previous years.

Third, I think he made it clear that he was planning to build from the lines first, and then work out from there. He has invested a lot of capital on both lines. Yes, edge rushers don't seem to have been a hit, but Bradley's scheme was a big factor in that. Glad that guy is gone. I think it was a year too late. Last year's team could have won the division despite poor QB play if the defense was not so soft in coverage, leading to death by 1000 paper cuts. There was no Maniac to create the turnovers any longer.

This is not to say Ballard is blameless, but it puts a lot into perspective. This roster is talented enough that average QB play would win the division, and possibly get us to 11-12 wins.

I think this is pretty much accurate. Owners typically have more say in QB decisions than we realize, because ultimately they're the ones dishing out the ridiculous contracts attached. Are there things I feel could've been done differently, both with regard to the QB position and general roster building? Yes, the primary one being that I think the "moving heaven and earth" talk from Ballard should've been followed through by trading whatever it took to get to 1 and take Stroud. That said, everyone has their pet QB move that should've been made, whether it's Stafford, Mayfield, Hurts, Love, Herbert, etc. They ultimately went with Richardson, and the book isn't fully closed on him yet. It's not a good look for him to lose a QB battle with Janiel Dones, but he's 23. He could come back next year, or maybe even later this year, and have everything click.

The bottom line is winning. Ballard has what, two playoff appearances and one playoff win in 9 years. We win 9 games or so a year yes, but we wouldn't if we didn't play in the worst division in football, which we cannot seem to win. How many years do you give a guy to show you who he is? None of his teams have ever won an opening game (we aren't close to the record, it's 29 straight games without a win by the Cardinals). He chose the coach and the players for these teams. He is a mediocre talent evaluator if you go by results.

So would you say Ryan Grigson was a better GM?

[ChaosTheory]

He is a mediocre talent evaluator if you go by results.


So would you say Ryan Grigson was a better GM?

Beat me to it. But, yeah, it's a dead horse. It's not about comparing Ballard to Grigson. It's the flaw in the reasoning.

It's the same approach I see people take in the Manning-Brady debate where they point to 2008 when the Patriots went 11-5 without Brady... "they missed the playoffs without him."

Or the Seahawks winning the division and a playoff game at 7-9 in 2010.

Two HC/GM's in these examples. I guess the former is Belichick failing without Brady and the latter is Carroll getting "results." Outcome bias, same as poker.

[Oldcolt]

Dam, not sure how I felt about Grigson has anything to do with how I feel about Ballard. I am not upset because of any one QB I think he should have gotten. He just has not gotten anyone. Nine years is enough to find at least one competent QB. As far as excuses for why you lose, every loser has a ton of them. What ifs abound with teams like ours.

[rm1369]

I agree with you about the handling of Richardson, but as Racehorse said, I think that's the result of ownership meddling in part. I strongly felt AR should sit for a year. It sounds like the coaches and scouts may have also felt that way. But pressure from ownership can change those opinions.

In regard to the issues you bring up with the team building philosophy, he inherited Grigson's mess when he came in, he knew those teams overachieved because Andrew Luck drug them to success. He wanted to build slowly because he wanted to put a talented roster around his franchise QB. Then his franchise QB did the unthinkable and retired at 30. So there was a roster of talented players with no QB. The QB position had to get settled first, and after 1 successful experiment, 1 failed experiment, and 1 colossal failure of an experiment, the Colts finally had a top 5 pick and Irsay insisted on drafting a QB with it. That was Richardson. As far as the secondary issue in 2023, why invest in a position when you expect to be bad? In 2024, he found Womack off the street who played like a starter.

The OL issue I can't really say anything about other than I hope he learned from it, because trusting Matt Pryor as your LT was far from ideal.



Ballard came from KC, and his team building philosophy is nearly identical to Brett Veach's, the latter of whom just came 1 game short of winning 3 consecutive Super Bowls. The only tangible differences I can find between their team building styles is that Veach drafted Mahomes, and Veach had an opportunity to get a haul of draft picks for a player he didn't want to sign long term.



I think this is pretty much accurate. Owners typically have more say in QB decisions than we realize, because ultimately they're the ones dishing out the ridiculous contracts attached. Are there things I feel could've been done differently, both with regard to the QB position and general roster building? Yes, the primary one being that I think the "moving heaven and earth" talk from Ballard should've been followed through by trading whatever it took to get to 1 and take Stroud. That said, everyone has their pet QB move that should've been made, whether it's Stafford, Mayfield, Hurts, Love, Herbert, etc. They ultimately went with Richardson, and the book isn't fully closed on him yet. It's not a good look for him to lose a QB battle with Janiel Dones, but he's 23. He could come back next year, or maybe even later this year, and have everything click.



So would you say Ryan Grigson was a better GM?

As I pointed out, the three other teams bottomed out and then won the division in less time the Ballard as been GM. The team Ballard inherited was not significantly worse than those teams. Believing they were is the result of the same outcome bias Chaos is accusing people of using.

Is Ballard a better GM than Grigson. Yes, maybe? IMO Grigson has the correct philosophy for the modern NFL, Ballard’s philosophy is antiquated. Grigson’s primary issue was that he sucked at a talent evaluator. In that regard, Ballard is certainly superior, no argument. But I don’t believe Ballard will ever win a SB, and I believe that even if he had Luck at QB. Why? Because he’s too risk adverse to ever make the moves to help his team peak. Ballard supporters always talk out of both sides of their mouths on this point. They claim that he’s not been aggressive only because he hasn’t had the QB. They say he didn’t move up to get the QB because it was too risky without drafting high. Then they defend his decisions that kept the team from bottoming out and drafting high. Irsay’s decision is the only reason the team was in a position to draft AR.

Rivers wasn’t a successful experiment, he was an example of Ballard’s failed philosophy. I don’t know how anyone can defend signing rivers and not going all in. He was a 1-2 yr QB max. Either swing for a deep run or don’t sign him.

Everyone talks about how talented the team has been over this run, but every single year it has had some aspect that is bottom of the league that he just does nothing with. Of course pointing that out does no good because it gets in to what I mentioned before - “why solve CB (or DE or TE, or LT, etc) when the team doesn’t have a QB…” And yes the DC sucked,but how was he ever brought here? Ballard.

I see plenty of differences between KC and Ballard. How did they draft Mahomes? They made a risky move and went and got him. The exact thing Ballard has not done for a QB, always stating it was too risky. There are plenty of other things they have done that are completely unlike Ballard.

[ChoppedWood]

As I pointed out, the three other teams bottomed out and then won the division in less time the Ballard as been GM. The team Ballard inherited was not significantly worse than those teams. Believing they were is the result of the same outcome bias Chaos is accusing people of using.

Is Ballard a better GM than Grigson. Yes, maybe? IMO Grigson has the correct philosophy for the modern NFL, Ballard’s philosophy is antiquated. Grigson’s primary issue was that he sucked at a talent evaluator. In that regard, Ballard is certainly superior, no argument. But I don’t believe Ballard will ever win a SB, and I believe that even if he had Luck at QB. Why? Because he’s too risk adverse to ever make the moves to help his team peak. Ballard supporters always talk out of both sides of their mouths on this point. They claim that he’s not been aggressive only because he hasn’t had the QB. They say he didn’t move up to get the QB because it was too risky without drafting high. Then they defend his decisions that kept the team from bottoming out and drafting high. Irsay’s decision is the only reason the team was in a position to draft AR.

Rivers wasn’t a successful experiment, he was an example of Ballard’s failed philosophy. I don’t know how anyone can defend signing rivers and not going all in. He was a 1-2 yr QB max. Either swing for a deep run or don’t sign him.

Everyone talks about how talented the team has been over this run, but every single year it has had some aspect that is bottom of the league that he just does nothing with. Of course pointing that out does no good because it gets in to what I mentioned before - “why solve CB (or DE or TE, or LT, etc) when the team doesn’t have a QB…” And yes the DC sucked,but how was he ever brought here? Ballard.

I see plenty of differences between KC and Ballard. How did they draft Mahomes? They made a risky move and went and got him. The exact thing Ballard has not done for a QB, always stating it was too risky. There are plenty of other things they have done that are completely unlike Ballard.

When I hear Ballard pontificate, there is no way any team in the NFL can be any good, just not possible. Every team should be very tightly banded together in a 7 to 10 win window and that is the very best any team could accomplish because it is SO DAMN HARD.

Yet every single year I seem to see multiple teams that win 12,13,14, and even an occasional 15 games, some of them even do this for several years in a row. I am sure they must be cheating or something because I believe in Ballard and by God, 8 wins is pretty damn good, he should get a raise!

[ChaosTheory]

Yet every single year I seem to see multiple teams that win 12,13,14, and even an occasional 15 games, some of them even do this for several years in a row.

Aside from the scarce true elites, these are short bursts. When you compare a team against the field rather than another team... There's always going to be a different slant to it.

I wonder how many people realize that since 2018, when Pagano left and the new regime started, the Colts have the best record in the division.

Colts 58-57-1
Titans 57-59
Texans 52-63-1
Jaguars 37-79

[apballin]

Ballard isn’t solely making decisions, clearly Jim would intervene when he felt necessary and clearly he gives his coaching staff creative control based on players they like for whatever reason.

Certain moves have Ballards name written on them and you can tell, certain moves were specifically for a coach and at the time it was obvious, and then hiring a guy off ESPN set, obviously the owner.

I think Ballard does a good job of balancing it all

[Hoopsdoc]

When I hear Ballard pontificate, there is no way any team in the NFL can be any good, just not possible. Every team should be very tightly banded together in a 7 to 10 win window and that is the very best any team could accomplish because it is SO DAMN HARD.

Yet every single year I seem to see multiple teams that win 12,13,14, and even an occasional 15 games, some of them even do this for several years in a row. I am sure they must be cheating or something because I believe in Ballard and by God, 8 wins is pretty damn good, he should get a raise!

The 12+ win teams, without exception, have great quarterbacks. The nfl is a never ending search for a good quarterback. Without that, you have nothing and you’re better off winning 1 game than 9, because the only real way of GETTING a good quarterback is through the draft.

And even then it’s a crapshoot as Colts fans know all too well.

[rm1369]

Aside from the scarce true elites, these are short bursts. When you compare a team against the field rather than another team... There's always going to be a different slant to it.

I wonder how many people realize that since 2018, when Pagano left and the new regime started, the Colts have the best record in the division.

Colts 58-57-1
Titans 57-59
Texans 52-63-1
Jaguars 37-79

I did. It’s an example of my issue with his philosophy. Best record and not a division title to show for it. Just year after year of middle of the road finishes. Mediocrity. The numbers would be even “better” (worse) if not for Irsay’s intervention. You can crow about it, but it’s exact what I hate about Ballard’s style. And I expect a similar outcome this year.

[rm1369]

Ballard is solely making decisions, clearly Jim would intervene when he felt necessary and clearly he gives his coaching staff creative control based on players they like for whatever reason.

Certain moves have Ballards name written on them and you can tell, certain moves were specifically for a coach and at the time it was obvious, and then hiring a guy off ESPN set, obviously the owner.

I think Ballard does a good job of balancing it all

You can probably convince me Irsay added pressure to start AR. After year after year of reclamation projects I could see it taking its toll on Jim’s patience. It did with the majority of the fan base. I’m sure that played into the one thing we know was Irsay’s decision- hiring Saturday and tanking the season to actually be in a position to draft a QB. Everything else is Ballard. You likely can’t convince me otherwise. Signing an aging QB and doing a slow rebuild with the rest of the roster is exactly Ballard’s philosophy at work.

[Dam8610]

Dam, not sure how I felt about Grigson has anything to do with how I feel about Ballard. I am not upset because of any one QB I think he should have gotten. He just has not gotten anyone. Nine years is enough to find at least one competent QB. As far as excuses for why you lose, every loser has a ton of them. What ifs abound with teams like ours.

Because firing Ballard isn't the end. He has to be replaced. He could be replaced by a talentless hack that Lucks into a franchise QB and gets him killed to the point that said franchise QB retires because of his injury history.

There haven't been many opportunities to add a franchise QB since Luck's retirement.

Current starters drafted 2020 or later: Joe Burrow, Tua Tagovailoa, Justin Herbert, Jordan Love, Jalen Hurts, Trevor Lawrence, Justin Fields, Brock Purdy, Bryce Young, C.J. Stroud, Caleb Williams, Jayden Daniels, Drake Maye, Michael Penix Jr., J.J. McCarthy, Bo Nix, Cam Ward

Eliminating the ones that were drafted before the Colts had a pick, we are left with: Jalen Hurts, Brock Purdy

Current starters acquired via trade or free agency since 2020: Matthew Stafford, Jared Goff, Baker Mayfield, Geno Smith, Sam Darnold

So, realistically, the current starting QBs the Colts had the opportunity to acquire were: Jalen Hurts, Matthew Stafford, Jared Goff, Baker Mayfield, Brock Purdy, Geno Smith, and Sam Darnold

Jalen Hurts: The Eagles sat Hurts for the better part of a year, and that was after he had over 40 college starts. Given what happened with AR, do we think the Colts would have done the same, or that he would have turned out to be as good here?

Matthew Stafford: Many Colts fans wanted him, but three 1s was far too high a price for Stafford.

Jared Goff: Offloaded in the Stafford trade, was thought to be on his way out of the league at the time he was traded. I will say this was an opportunity missed, but it may have been a completely unknown opportunity to the FO.

Baker Mayfield: Also thought to be on his way out of the league when he was a free agent, he appeared to be a bridge signing for the Bucs after Brady retired.

Brock Purdy: The whole league missed on him, including the 49ers, who luckily stumbled into him.

Geno Smith: Was considered a bust as a free agent and an aging league average starting QB when traded to the Raiders this offseason.

Sam Darnold: Started for two different teams and performed horribly before having a career renaissance under Kevin O'Connell last year.

MAYBE three of those guys (Goff, Mayfield, Purdy) would've been as successful with the Colts, and it's questionable for each. What this exercise tells me more than anything is that being patient with AR is the right move since the Colts chose to draft him instead of trading up for Stroud.

As I pointed out, the three other teams bottomed out and then won the division in less time the Ballard as been GM. The team Ballard inherited was not significantly worse than those teams. Believing they were is the result of the same outcome bias Chaos is accusing people of using.

Is Ballard a better GM than Grigson. Yes, maybe? IMO Grigson has the correct philosophy for the modern NFL, Ballard’s philosophy is antiquated. Grigson’s primary issue was that he sucked at a talent evaluator. In that regard, Ballard is certainly superior, no argument. But I don’t believe Ballard will ever win a SB, and I believe that even if he had Luck at QB. Why? Because he’s too risk adverse to ever make the moves to help his team peak. Ballard supporters always talk out of both sides of their mouths on this point. They claim that he’s not been aggressive only because he hasn’t had the QB. They say he didn’t move up to get the QB because it was too risky without drafting high. Then they defend his decisions that kept the team from bottoming out and drafting high. Irsay’s decision is the only reason the team was in a position to draft AR.

Rivers wasn’t a successful experiment, he was an example of Ballard’s failed philosophy. I don’t know how anyone can defend signing rivers and not going all in. He was a 1-2 yr QB max. Either swing for a deep run or don’t sign him.

Everyone talks about how talented the team has been over this run, but every single year it has had some aspect that is bottom of the league that he just does nothing with. Of course pointing that out does no good because it gets in to what I mentioned before - “why solve CB (or DE or TE, or LT, etc) when the team doesn’t have a QB…” And yes the DC sucked,but how was he ever brought here? Ballard.

I see plenty of differences between KC and Ballard. How did they draft Mahomes? They made a risky move and went and got him. The exact thing Ballard has not done for a QB, always stating it was too risky. There are plenty of other things they have done that are completely unlike Ballard.

Each of those teams has drafted a QB at 1 or 2 in that time as well. That makes a huge difference. If the Colts had Joe Burrow, C.J. Stroud, Caleb Williams, or Jayden Daniels, they'd be running away with this division every year.

Ballard is unquestionably a better talent evaluator than Grigson, and I would wholeheartedly disagree with the idea that "Try to cover talent evaluation and drafting deficiencies by throwing a bunch of money around in free agency" is a winning roster building philosophy in the modern NFL.

Rivers got the Colts to the playoffs and retired a year earlier than expected. His time here was a success (and I hate Rivers, so I don't like admitting that), it was just shorter than expected. As someone else pointed out, I think Wentz could've been a success had he not been an idiot and gotten the COVID vaccine. Everyone here knows I would've traded whatever it took to get to 1 and draft Stroud, but AR isn't necessarily done. Again, if you get rid of Ballard, you have to replace him. I know I would be pissed if 5 years from now, we're talking about how another Ryan Grigson type has destroyed the team while we watch top 10 QB AR start for the Rams or Raiders or Seahawks.

The team has had a lot of talent with no QB, it's a truth that anyone who knows football can recognize. You don't get to near .500 with bad QB play if your roster sucks. Those teams typically pick 1 or 2. The 2011 Colts earned the #1 pick because the roster around Manning was bad or aging, and Manning got hurt. Not fixing the CB position in 2023 makes sense because it allowed for a lot of the players the Colts just drafted to get PT, which allowed Jaylon Jones to develop into a starter, and in 2024, Ballard found a starter off the street in Womack. I agree that Matt Pryor as starting LT was a terrible decision, I won't defend that, but you can find bad decisions on any GM's resume. As for hiring Bradley, was that Ballard’s pick, or Reich's? That said, firing Reich was an opportunity to fire Bradley that Ballard didn't take.

I see two major differences between Veach and Ballard as team builders:

1) The Chiefs lucked into a franchise QB being available at 10 and traded up to get him. They also sat him for the first year and he credits that for a great deal.of his NFL success.

2) Veach was able to trade Tyreek Hill for an extra half of a draft in 2022 and 2 extra picks in 2023. That trade has been the catalyst of their recent success.

The Colts have not had the level of good fortune to have a franchise QB available at 10 or to have a player that another team would trade as much as the Dolphins traded to get Hill. They have Taylor, but the RB position is devalued in the modern NFL and I doubt anyone would trade a 1, let alone a package of picks like the Dolphins traded, for him.

[apballin]

You can probably convince me Irsay added pressure to start AR. After year after year of reclamation projects I could see it taking its toll on Jim’s patience. It did with the majority of the fan base. I’m sure that played into the one thing we know was Irsay’s decision- hiring Saturday and tanking the season to actually be in a position to draft a QB. Everything else is Ballard. You likely can’t convince me otherwise. Signing an aging QB and doing a slow rebuild with the rest of the roster is exactly Ballard’s philosophy at work.

He’s 28 and I’m sure Steichen had a say in this. If Ballard just called shots and slammed the gavel we would have Jordan Love right now

[Oldcolt]

If I understand you Dam you're perfect for this team. You do not want to get rid of Ballard because there would be a chance we get someone worse. So let's play this safe and stay with proven mediocrity. The issue is that there are teams out there that don't play it safe. Yes, most of them fail (like this 'safe' team has the last decade) but every once in a while they hit, and when they do you cannot compete with them by being safe and mediocre. In addition Ballards philosophy has never worked and never will. He believes you buy physical talent and ignore how they play football. He believes his coaches can coach them up. They have failed miserably at that. So yes I want him gone (if he hit on one physically talented guy-AR for instance- I would change my mind, but he hasn't)

[rm1369]

He’s 28 and I’m sure Steichen had a say in this. If Ballard just called shots and slammed the gavel we would have Jordan Love right now

I’m talking about Rivers, not Jones. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not a fan of the DJ decision, but I think it was a completely stupid move to sign rivers and not go all in with him. All Ballard’s supporters will point out (like Dam is) that Ballard hasn’t drafted high enough to get a franchise guy. The reason he hasn’t drafted high enough is because of moves like that. I would have been fine going all in for 1-2 years with Rivers origins with starting a complete scrub and bottoming out. I wasn’t fine with splitting the middle like Ballard did. Moves like that are why the team is where it is - the only team in the division to not have a division title in Ballard’s tenure.

[Racehorse]

I’m talking about Rivers, not Jones. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not a fan of the DJ decision, but I think it was a completely stupid move to sign rivers and not go all in with him. All Ballard’s supporters will point out (like Dam is) that Ballard hasn’t drafted high enough to get a franchise guy. The reason he hasn’t drafted high enough is because of moves like that. I would have been fine going all in for 1-2 years with Rivers origins with starting a complete scrub and bottoming out. I wasn’t fine with splitting the middle like Ballard did. Moves like that are why the team is where it is - the only team in the division to not have a division title in Ballard’s tenure.

I feel this is the year that ends. I know a lot of you don't want that to happen, because of irrational hate for Ballard, but I think our roster is good enough, if we can get solid QB play out of Jones. Houston is not as good as some think, and neither is Stroud. Jaguars are in the same boat, although Hunter might be a huge help. Lawrence is JAG at QB. Titans are the Titans, talentless, and starting a rookie QB. Maybe one of those three surprises me, but I think we have just as good of a shot as anyone in the division, with solid QB play. Heck, we were close with the 55th ranked QB last year.

[rm1369]

If I understand you Dam you're perfect for this team. You do not want to get rid of Ballard because there would be a chance we get someone worse. So let's play this safe and stay with proven mediocrity. The issue is that there are teams out there that don't play it safe. Yes, most of them fail (like this 'safe' team has the last decade) but every once in a while they hit, and when they do you cannot compete with them by being safe and mediocre. In addition Ballards philosophy has never worked and never will. He believes you buy physical talent and ignore how they play football. He believes his coaches can coach them up. They have failed miserably at that. So yes I want him gone (if he hit on one physically talented guy-AR for instance- I would change my mind, but he hasn't)

The best thing that ever happened to Ballard was Grigson. It has allowed Ballard to be Teflon with certain portions of the fan base. Guys like Dam are scared to change because it could be worse. The crazy thing is that when you point out how other teams have rebuilt quicker that the Colts, they will point out (like Dam has) that they were able to do it because they had higher draft picks than the Colts have had. That’s the whole point! Ballard’s philosophy helps keep them in mediocrity. His conservatism limits their valleys but it also clips their peaks. And you don’t win without peaks. Evidenced by the constant 2nd and 3rd place division finishes in each year.

The other thing you notice is that when other teams make a move it was always that they got lucky. It’s never that they went and made something happen, it’s always that they are lucky. Now when Ballard hits a franchise LT in the 3rd it’s an example of his genius, not luck that bailed him out like other teams. But fuck it, what’s the saying- Better to be lucky than good. I guess I’d prefer a “lucky” GM then. According to his supporters he’s had the worst run of luck in the history of the NFL. Time to move on from Bad Luck Ballard.

[Oldcolt]

Racehorse not sure who you meant this for but for me I have supported Ballard until this year. I don't hate him and it is certainly not irrational to want change after 9 years of mediocrity. We have been mediocre so long that your dream scenario is us making the playoffs. It is a dream probably only possible in our division.

[Racehorse]

Racehorse not sure who you meant this for but for me I have supported Ballard until this year. I don't hate him and it is certainly not irrational to want change after 9 years of mediocrity. We have been mediocre so long that your dream scenario is us making the playoffs. It is a dream probably only possible in our division.

No, the ones who have been griping for the past 6 years.

[Oldcolt]

I think Ballards idea of drafting for physical talent and trying to coach them up was an interesting one and was worth the attempt. I supported him in trying this method. At some point I think most would have to admit it just doesn't work at this level.

[ChaosTheory]

I did. It’s an example of my issue with his philosophy. Best record and not a division title to show for it. Just year after year of middle of the road finishes. Mediocrity. The numbers would be even “better” (worse) if not for Irsay’s intervention. You can crow about it, but it’s exact what I hate about Ballard’s style. And I expect a similar outcome this year.

I'm not crowing. I don't think I've ever even brought that stat up, let alone bragged about it. I'm just pointing out that the "no division titles" narrative has a particular connotation and I would wager that most fans would be surprised to learn that the Colts have the best record.

Division titles aren't meaningless, but they're also not binary like they're being presented. Like any stat, there is context. Nobody here cared too much about a division title in 2018 when we beat the division champs twice on the road, including the playoffs. Neither did the Texans.

Congrats to JAX for taking the division in 2022 at 9-8 while the rest of the division was imploding. We were 11-5 in 2020 and lost a tie-breaker. Steichen was a bad 4-yard pass away from the division title with Gardner fucking Minshew at QB in '23.

The Texans earned the 3rd, 3rd, and 2nd overall draft picks consecutively from '22-'24 after two overrated years with Watson. And then the retarded Browns gave HOU THREE more 1st-rounders, a 3rd, and two 4ths in that same stretch. And they barely got by the Colts the past two years with Gardner fucking Minshew and a 47% passer.

TEN was in a similar boat with a solid roster and underwhelming QB play until Ryan Tannehill was available. They had four straight 9-win seasons, but by chance, that resulted in two playoff berths. Both of our 9-win seasons sent us home.


I think it was a completely stupid move to sign rivers and not go all in with him.

What does that mean?

[ChaosTheory]

Guys like Dam are scared to change because it could be worse.

Not to speak for him, but I've read him say it, and I agree... It's not so much fear of something worse.

It's fear of booting a guy who puts out a good roster and THEN landing a QB. He's right. If we had one of those QB's listed, the Colts would run away with this division yearly.

[rm1369]

No, the ones who have been griping for the past 6 years.

That would be me. Actually I’ve criticized him since his 2nd offseason when he cut vets, rolled out his long term rebuild plan with a franchise QB in place, made statements minimizing the importance of the QB (IMO), and started minimizing the importance of veteran leadership on a team (coaches job). None of my criticisms have been hindsight. I said then that his methods would lead to mediocrity. I went so far as to do an analysis of the turnover starters on SB winning rosters to show how the little continuity there actually is year to year in the NFL. What in the world has he done that has proven me wrong or should make me rethink my position?

I haven’t always wanted him fired. I even stated early that he needed time to fully prove out his philosophy. I recognize that starting down a path and switching quickly usually isn’t productive. I also constantly heard he’d flip a switch and become aggressive - next offseason. Season after season it didn’t happen and I heard all the excuses. This is the first offseason where maybe it’s true, but only because he’s finally about to be fired. IMO his philosophy has been proven out. It’s lead to exactly what I thought it would- a consistent record that doesn’t bottom out but never reaches anything higher either. Give Ballard a franchise QB and certainly the bar is raised some. But the team IMO would never peak due to his philosophy. I loved the Polian Colts, but Bill had a very similar philosophy that saw the greatest QB ever IMO win only one SB. I’ve seen a similar philosophy play out in GB with the same results. I’m simply not a fan even when paired with a historically great QB. Paired with mediocre QB play and it has me turning in my season tickets.

[Oldcolt]

Why on earth does everyone think we have such a great team? The only quasi all pro on this team is a guard. We have zero difference makers on defense, unless you count Buckner, who wasn't even drafted by us.

[omahacolt]

You can probably convince me Irsay added pressure to start AR. After year after year of reclamation projects I could see it taking its toll on Jim’s patience. It did with the majority of the fan base. I’m sure that played into the one thing we know was Irsay’s decision- hiring Saturday and tanking the season to actually be in a position to draft a QB. Everything else is Ballard. You likely can’t convince me otherwise. Signing an aging QB and doing a slow rebuild with the rest of the roster is exactly Ballard’s philosophy at work.

starting Gardner minshew wouldn't have really inspired much confidence in the fan base

[Racehorse]

That would be me. Actually I’ve criticized him since his 2nd offseason when he cut vets, rolled out his long term rebuild plan with a franchise QB in place, made statements minimizing the importance of the QB (IMO), and started minimizing the importance of veteran leadership on a team (coaches job). None of my criticisms have been hindsight. I said then that his methods would lead to mediocrity. I went so far as to do an analysis of the turnover starters on SB winning rosters to show how the little continuity there actually is year to year in the NFL. What in the world has he done that has proven me wrong or should make me rethink my position?

I haven’t always wanted him fired. I even stated early that he needed time to fully prove out his philosophy. I recognize that starting down a path and switching quickly usually isn’t productive. I also constantly heard he’d flip a switch and become aggressive - next offseason. Season after season it didn’t happen and I heard all the excuses. This is the first offseason where maybe it’s true, but only because he’s finally about to be fired. IMO his philosophy has been proven out. It’s lead to exactly what I thought it would- a consistent record that doesn’t bottom out but never reaches anything higher either. Give Ballard a franchise QB and certainly the bar is raised some. But the team IMO would never peak due to his philosophy. I loved the Polian Colts, but Bill had a very similar philosophy that saw the greatest QB ever IMO win only one SB. I’ve seen a similar philosophy play out in GB with the same results. I’m simply not a fan even when paired with a historically great QB. Paired with mediocre QB play and it has me turning in my season tickets.

Again, you have to consider the markets. Green Bay and Indianapolis are small markets. It takes them a generational quarterback to get them into elite territory. We had manning, GB had Favre, and then Rodgers. KC has Mahomes. Small markets do not attract free agents like the big ones do, and their owners do not have cash to overpay signing bonuses. Then we had Luck to mask deficiencies and get us to 11-5 nearly every year. Do I wish Ballard had dome some things differently? You bet I do, but I understand why a lot of things we wanted did not happen. The only real miss I see at QB was not getting Baker. I remember most here were against it, too. It seemed like an illogical choice, and it took him three teams to find success. Maybe Jones can do that for us.

I will give you props for coming and admitting your position.

[omahacolt]

Why on earth does everyone think we have such a great team? The only quasi all pro on this team is a guard. We have zero difference makers on defense, unless you count Buckner, who wasn't even drafted by us.

it is a solid roster. that is a problem with Ballard that I see. he gets a lot of B players and very few super stars. not really been killing the 1st round

[YDFL Commish]

I feel this is the year that ends. I know a lot of you don't want that to happen, because of irrational hate for Ballard, but I think our roster is good enough, if we can get solid QB play out of Jones. Houston is not as good as some think, and neither is Stroud. Jaguars are in the same boat, although Hunter might be a huge help. Lawrence is JAG at QB. Titans are the Titans, talentless, and starting a rookie QB. Maybe one of those three surprises me, but I think we have just as good of a shot as anyone in the division, with solid QB play. Heck, we were close with the 55th ranked QB last year.

I honestly don't know how a team with the 55th ranked QB and 28th ranked defense wins 8 games? Statistical anomaly, a credit to offensive coaching, or a better than average roster?

I sincerely doubt that this has ever happened in the NFL before.

[rm1369]

I honestly don't know how a team with the 55th ranked QB and 28th ranked defense wins 8 games? Statistical anomaly, a credit to offensive coaching, or a better than average roster?

I sincerely doubt that this has ever happened in the NFL before.

Because the toughest strength of schedule this team has had in the Ballard era is 23rd. Divisions play a huge role in that and the AFC South has also been the worst division in football over Ballard’s tenure. That’s how good he has been. Imagine if he played in an actually competitive division.

[Dam8610]

Not to speak for him, but I've read him say it, and I agree... It's not so much fear of something worse.

It's fear of booting a guy who puts out a good roster and THEN landing a QB. He's right. If we had one of those QB's listed, the Colts would run away with this division yearly.

I mean that would suck as well, but my biggest fear is another Grigson, whether or not he gets a franchise QB. Ballard can build a roster. If you replace him, will the new guy be able to build a roster?

Why on earth does everyone think we have such a great team? The only quasi all pro on this team is a guard. We have zero difference makers on defense, unless you count Buckner, who wasn't even drafted by us.

What does it matter how talent was acquired? If the Colts signed a QB no one here had ever heard of off the street tomorrow and he won 2025 NFL MVP, would you care that the Colts didn't draft him? Also, you realize there are less than 50 All-Pro players every year in a league of 2,240 players, right? If you just do a per team average, it works out to 1.56 All-Pros per team, and that's first and second team, by the way. Oh, and the Colts had 2 All-Pros last year, and while Franlin probably shouldn't have made it, Buckner should have over Zach Allen.

Regardless, how can we say the roster is good? Because with bad QB play, it's still a ~.500 team. All that's needed is good QB play.

starting Gardner minshew wouldn't have really inspired much confidence in the fan base

Why not? 2023 was supposed to be a down year, and starting Minshew would've meant sitting AR for the year, which would've been good for his development.

[Oldcolt]

Dam, it doesn't matter how you get players but that isn't what I was pointing out. Buckner required almost zero evaluation. He was an established player who was flirting with all pro. That isn't who Ballard gets paid to evaluate. My point was he has evaluated and drafted very few perennial top 100 type impact defensive players over the past 9 years. All pros are hard to find and to draft. Somehow you think that gives Ballard a pass. I just don't get that. It is damn hard to find that GM that can do that but it doesn't mean we should be satisfied with ok. I sure hope new ownership isn't.

Oh and I don't give a shit who you think or don't think should have been all pro.

[IndyNorm]

I was out of town this weekend (saw Oasis in Chicago then in Indy for a couple of days visiting family), but I did follow the topic on my phone and have been somewhat chomping at the bit to put in my .02.

I don't think anyone on here is upset w/ Ballard selecting AR. He took a big swing for the fences, and if he ends up striking out then so be it. Where we (or at least I) have issues is with the clear lack of vision in the development plan for AR. They draft one of if not the rawest QB prospects in history, hand him the starters keys from the get go, and just 2 years and 15 starts into his career they've pretty much given up on him. So maybe the issue is more Steichen than Ballard, or maybe there's something to Jim pressuring them to start AR. But Ballard was pretty quick to say that Irsay didn't do this in his presser last week. Of course he could be just saying that to avoid any additional controversy, etc.

I'm guessing that if DJ struggles (which despite what a lot of you believe is a distinct possibility) combined w/ AR not improving both Ballard and Steichen will be gone, since one of the two will in all likelihood have to play well for us to make the playoffs.

I have plenty more thoughts on everything discussed, but it's late so will post more tomorrow.

[YDFL Commish]

I was out of town this weekend (saw Oasis in Chicago then in Indy for a couple of days visiting family), but I did follow the topic on my phone and have been somewhat chomping at the bit to put in my .02.

I don't think anyone on here is upset w/ Ballard selecting AR. He took a big swing for the fences, and if he ends up striking out then so be it. Where we (or at least I) have issues is with the clear lack of vision in the development plan for AR. They draft one of if not the rawest QB prospects in history, hand him the starters keys from the get go, and just 2 years and 15 starts into his career they've pretty much given up on him. So maybe the issue is more Steichen than Ballard, or maybe there's something to Jim pressuring them to start AR. But Ballard was pretty quick to say that Irsay didn't do this in his presser last week. Of course he could be just saying that to avoid any additional controversy, etc.

I'm guessing that if DJ struggles (which despite what a lot of you believe is a distinct possibility) combined w/ AR not improving both Ballard and Steichen will be gone, since one of the two will in all likelihood have to play well for us to make the playoffs.

I have plenty more thoughts on everything discussed, but it's late so will post more tomorrow.

Irsay, handed AR the starters keys. I hope that nobody on this forum believes that AR beat out Minshew after a week of TC, and then 2 years later, couldn't beat out Daniel Jones? He didn't beat out Minshew and probably wouldn't beat out Minshew today.

[Racehorse]

I honestly don't know how a team with the 55th ranked QB and 28th ranked defense wins 8 games? Statistical anomaly, a credit to offensive coaching, or a better than average roster?

I sincerely doubt that this has ever happened in the NFL before.

Jonathan Taylor is good, but not THAT good. Maybe the 55th ranked QB was not actually the 55th best QB, but still not solid enough to manage a team well.

[IndyNorm]

Irsay, handed AR the starters keys. I hope that nobody on this forum believes that AR beat out Minshew after a week of TC, and then 2 years later, couldn't beat out Daniel Jones? He didn't beat out Minshew and probably wouldn't beat out Minshew today.

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:

Ballard said earlier this offseason that he regretted playing Richardson right away as a rookie, a revelation that prompted a question to Ballard on Wednesday about whether the front office and coaching staff were pressured by late owner Jim Irsay to play the rookie immediately.

Ballard bristled at the question.

“No, not at all,” Ballard said. “We made the decision. You learn sometimes with decisions that didn't go the way you wish they would have gone and so – but no, there was no pressure.”

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.

I honestly don't know how a team with the 55th ranked QB and 28th ranked defense wins 8 games? Statistical anomaly, a credit to offensive coaching, or a better than average roster?

I sincerely doubt that this has ever happened in the NFL before.

Jonathan Taylor is good, but not THAT good. Maybe the 55th ranked QB was not actually the 55th best QB, but still not solid enough to manage a team well.

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.

[rm1369]

Again, you have to consider the markets. Green Bay and Indianapolis are small markets. It takes them a generational quarterback to get them into elite territory. We had manning, GB had Favre, and then Rodgers. KC has Mahomes. Small markets do not attract free agents like the big ones do, and their owners do not have cash to overpay signing bonuses. Then we had Luck to mask deficiencies and get us to 11-5 nearly every year. Do I wish Ballard had dome some things differently? You bet I do, but I understand why a lot of things we wanted did not happen. The only real miss I see at QB was not getting Baker. I remember most here were against it, too. It seemed like an illogical choice, and it took him three teams to find success. Maybe Jones can do that for us.

I will give you props for coming and admitting your position.

Sorry man, I’m not buying the small market thing. First, being aggressive doesn’t just mean in free agency. You mentioned Mahomes and KC. That’s a great example. How did KC get Mahomes? They had a QB that had gotten them to the playoffs 3 of 4 years and was a pro bowl alternate several times, but it wasn’t good enough to get them over the hump. So they traded UP in the first round to get Mahomes. From 27 to 10. And then they traded Alex Smith after another playoff and Pro Bowl alternate selection to give the keys to Mahomes. All of that seems like a no brainer NOW because it’s Mahomes, but that wasn’t the case at the time. Mahomes was another unproven QB with question marks. Now be honest - do you see Ballard making those moves? I sure as hell don’t.

Second, Irsay seemed to pride himself in handing out big contracts. The signing bonus is still real money regardless if it’s resigning your own guy or paying an outside free agent. And Grigson didn’t have much issue signing free agents. He spent money. Some well, a lot poorly. Regardless it’s proof to me the small market isn’t as big an issue as many pretend.

Third, even when talking about being free agency most of us criticizing Ballard’s approach aren’t necessarily calling for the top free agents. We are asking for competent avg level players at obvious needs. Look at the secondary over a couple years. The team had an obvious glaring need that Ballard threw a collection of 1st and 2nd yr UDFA and 6th and 7th rounders at. Because he was content living with a shitty secondary until he could fix it in the draft. “We like our guys.” Of course the game that’s always played is to give a list of free agents, say why any that were known good wouldn’t sign here, disregard any that unexpectedly played well as nobody could have known, and then presenting the remaining list and saying “so what great player should he have signed”. Great isn’t the point. Often average or even a little below average would have improved the team. A mediocre vet in the secondary is often going to make less mistakes than a mediocre (at best) 1st or 2nd yr player. And we saw it often. But Ballard needs to keep spots open for his draft picks and he doesn’t believe in the value of vets.

Go back to that Mahomes question - think Ballard would have pulled the trigger? Hell no he wouldn’t. Now go look at what KC did after their SB loss to the Bucs where their OL let them down. Do you see Ballard aggressively fixing the line the way KC did? Again, Hell no. They used the draft, free agency and trades to fix an issue. You know exactly what Ballard would have done - “we like our guys”. I just laugh when I hear people say Ballard shares the KC front office philosophy. I’m sure there are some similarities and things he learned there, but aggression wasn’t one of them. His teams have consistently had glaring holes that have cost them in season. He’s always been content to deal with it later.

[Oldcolt]

I think Green Bay just threw your small market argument a curve with being able to acquire and pay Parsons almost 50 million a year

[Discflinger]

I was out of town this weekend (saw Oasis in Chicago...

Blocked

[Racehorse]

I think Green Bay just threw your small market argument a curve with being able to acquire and pay Parsons almost 50 million a year

I considered that argument would come up. I am not sure how GB does some things they do, as they are a publicly owned team. It is a unique arrangement, so I am not sure how they do signing bonuses. Care to educate me on their structure? Google does not explain it well.

[Colts And Orioles]

I considered that argument would come up. I am not sure how GB does some things they do, as they are a publicly owned team. It is a unique arrangement, so I am not sure how they do signing bonuses. Care to educate me on their structure? Google does not explain it well.





o


The Green Bay Packers are the only publicly-owned professional sports franchise in North America in which the team CANNOT move to another city and/or other part of the country, because the team is owned by stockholders. I actually met a woman at my gym here in Brewster, NY who owns 1 share of the Packers (she is originally from Wisconsin.) There are 539,000 stockholders overall.

Mark Murphy, who was the President and CEO of the Packers from 2007 through 2025, called the shots as to who gets hired and fired for the team's head coach and General Manager positions ...... Murphy just retired a little over a month ago, and the Packers share-holders voted for Ed Policy to be their new President and CEO.

o

[Oldcolt]

I considered that argument would come up. I am not sure how GB does some things they do, as they are a publicly owned team. It is a unique arrangement, so I am not sure how they do signing bonuses. Care to educate me on their structure? Google does not explain it well.

I'm not sure, but obviously it can be done. I've heard that some believe that because they pay no dividends there is no real pressure to make money for the shareholders. Most owners feel like it is their own money that is being spent so paying someone $50 million of your money sits in some craws. All the Packers care about is winning, nobody who owns shares makes any money off of the team.

[Oldcolt]

The top 100 players as voted on by NFL players are finally out. Zero Colts. Again voted on by their peers.

[Racehorse]

The top 100 players as voted on by NFL players are finally out. Zero Colts. Again voted on by their peers.

I have not seen the list, but I am very curious which 100 players were considered better than Nelson, Taylor and Buckner.

[Oldcolt]

I have not seen the list, but I am very curious which 100 players were considered better than Nelson, Taylor and Buckner.

Maybe true (I wouldn’t put Taylor there but I like well rounded backs that block and are part of passing game) but what does it say that after 9 years this is the argument we give back? Three bottom 100 players, one of which wasnt scouted or developed by us. Ballard hits on the occasional mid to late round where hitting means you get an average player with a 7th rounder. You need to hit on high draft choices which Ballard does not do

[Colts And Orioles]

I have not seen the list, but I am very curious which 100 players were considered better than Nelson, Taylor, and Buckner.





o


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NFL_Top_100_Players_of_2025

o

[ChaosTheory]

I have not seen the list, but I am very curious which 100 players were considered better than Nelson, Taylor and Buckner.

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.

[Colts And Orioles]

I have not seen the list, but I am very curious which 100 players were considered better than Nelson, Taylor, and Buckner.








o


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NFL_Top_100_Players_of_2025

o
o


ESPN l has their own Top-100 ......

Jonathan Taylor is at #69, up 21 spots from 2024 when he was at #90.

Quentin Nelson is at #61, down 1 spot from 2024 when he was at #60.


*********************************************


69) l Jonathan Taylor

RB | Colts

Age: 26

2024 rank: 90

When Taylor's healthy, he usually has a fantastic season. He is coming off a healthy offseason after a 2024 campaign in which he rushed for 1,431 yards in 14 games. He still possesses the sudden acceleration that makes him so dangerous in the open field, and he had an impressive training camp. ------ Stephen Holder

Signature Stat: l Taylor's 11 rushing TD's last season tied his 2nd-most in a season (18 in 2021, 11 in 2020), and matched his combined total from 2022-2023.

2025 Projection: l 342 carries, 1,578 yards, 11 TD's


*********************************************


61) l Quenton Nelson

G | Colts

Age: 29

2024 rank: 60


Nelson has been key to an offensive line that ranks seventh in rushing yards per game (126.2) since he entered the league in 2018. Notably, he hasn't missed a game since 2021 and has missed only four in his career. That durability figures to continue, given the feedback from his coaches, who say he is as well-prepared for 2025 as he has been for previous seasons. ------ Stephen Holder

Signature Stat: l Nelson has played and started in 51 games in the past three seasons, tied for the most among interior linemen in that span.


*********************************************


2025 NFL Rank: Predicting Top 100 Players for This Season

(ESPN NFL Staff)

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/46043463/nfl-rank-2025-ranking-top-100-players-predictions-stats

o

[Indystu2]

If we think we can go get someone better then we should go get them.


If only Ballard operated with that same philosiphy. How ironic Ballard could die by that sword.

[HoosierinFL]

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.

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

[Dam8610]

Dam, it doesn't matter how you get players but that isn't what I was pointing out. Buckner required almost zero evaluation. He was an established player who was flirting with all pro. That isn't who Ballard gets paid to evaluate. My point was he has evaluated and drafted very few perennial top 100 type impact defensive players over the past 9 years. All pros are hard to find and to draft. Somehow you think that gives Ballard a pass. I just don't get that. It is damn hard to find that GM that can do that but it doesn't mean we should be satisfied with ok. I sure hope new ownership isn't.

Oh and I don't give a shit who you think or don't think should have been all pro.

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.

[Dam8610]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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

[Oldcolt]

Development of young players into impact players (like Latu), continued development of AR and our young players. A team that is coached well enough not to shoot themselves in foot. I don’t even ‘need’ playoffs. I just want to see enough progression that I have something to root for that has what looks like a positive future.

[Dam8610]

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.

Unless the Colts win the division, expecting a playoff win is unreasonable, because then you're expecting the team to go on the road against one of the division winners and beat them in their own stadium. Are you saying if the Colts went 10-7, ended up as, let's say, the 6 seed, and lost a close game on the road, that you'd want the whole front office replaced?


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

I doubt anyone is that unreasonable. That said, if that does somehow happen, that would mean actual good QB play from Daniel Jones, and I would want to know how that came to be.

Development of young players into impact players (like Latu), continued development of AR and our young players. A team that is coached well enough not to shoot themselves in foot. I don’t even ‘need’ playoffs. I just want to see enough progression that I have something to root for that has what looks like a positive future.

Now this I can get behind. If the team is in the hunt all year, Latu has 12+ sacks and looks like tge disruptive force he was in college, Warren looks like a true TE1 and matchup nightmare, several of the young players make significant contributions, even if they don't make the playoffs, that sounds like a promising future. Since it sounds like they're trying to basically do a reset with AR and give him the Mahomes treatment, all I'm expecting there is health and no reports that he’s slacking off behind the scenes. If he then comes out gangbusters next year, we'll know it worked.

[Oldcolt]

Now this I can get behind. If the team is in the hunt all year, Latu has 12+ sacks and looks like tge disruptive force he was in college, Warren looks like a true TE1 and matchup nightmare, several of the young players make significant contributions, even if they don't make the playoffs, that sounds like a promising future. Since it sounds like they're trying to basically do a reset with AR and give him the Mahomes treatment, all I'm expecting there is health and no reports that he’s slacking off behind the scenes. If he then comes out gangbusters next year, we'll know it worked.

If this happened Ballard/Steichen would have proved I don't know shit and I would gladly crawl into their corner

[Colts And Orioles]

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





I doubt that anyone is that unreasonable.





o


"Unreasonable" and ColtFreals posts are synonymous concepts.

o

[IndyNorm]

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?

For me it's not so much just this year, but IMO it's going to take a few years of sustained success to convince me that Ballard is the man for the job.

I do think a decent year this year at 10+ wins or at the very least the team shows clear signs of improvement should get him a stay of execution.

Something I'd really like to see this team do is not play down to the level of competition and certainly not shit the bed against really bad teams (@Jagoffs and NYG last year).

[Dam8610]

For me it's not so much just this year, but IMO it's going to take a few years of sustained success to convince me that Ballard is the man for the job.

I do think a decent year this year at 10+ wins or at the very least the team shows clear signs of improvement should get him a stay of execution.

Something I'd really like to see this team do is not play down to the level of competition and certainly not shit the bed against really bad teams (@Jagoffs and NYG last year).

At this point, it all comes down to one question: Can they make AR into a franchise QB? And it seems like they've found a way to buy another year of time to answer that question. Ballard has effectively adopted Dorsey's model 2 years late, with his hope being that Janiel Dones can play the part of Alex Smith. For our sakes, I hope it works, because I'm tired of watching bad football and not dominating this shit division.

[rm1369]

For me it's not so much just this year, but IMO it's going to take a few years of sustained success to convince me that Ballard is the man for the job.

I do think a decent year this year at 10+ wins or at the very least the team shows clear signs of improvement should get him a stay of execution.

Something I'd really like to see this team do is not play down to the level of competition and certainly not shit the bed against really bad teams (@Jagoffs and NYG last year).

I agree, I’m less concerned about the single season outcome than seeing something real and sustainable being built. My issues with Ballard have been with his team building philosophy so seeing (and believing) he has changed that philosophy is what it would take for me. It will be hard to convince me at this point that I was wrong in my criticisms of his philosophy because I have so many seasons of mediocrity to reinforce my beliefs. I will say, this is the most complete team I have seen him put together. Right now I believe it’s only because his job depends on it. If they have a good enough season to save his job I still won’t start believing until I see a continuation of the somewhat more aggressive approach.

[Voosh]

I've been down on Ballard for a while, but if the team shows improvement and has a winning record I would be fine with rolling with him another season. I don't think we have an answer at QB right now and wouldn't mind seeing what he could build with a good young QB.

Wouldn't it be nice if Riley Leonard caught fire? I don't know... at this point I just want us to not lose the opener or to the Jags.

[Kray007]

I agree, I’m less concerned about the single season outcome than seeing something real and sustainable being built. My issues with Ballard have been with his team building philosophy so seeing (and believing) he has changed that philosophy is what it would take for me. It will be hard to convince me at this point that I was wrong in my criticisms of his philosophy because I have so many seasons of mediocrity to reinforce my beliefs. I will say, this is the most complete team I have seen him put together. Right now I believe it’s only because his job depends on it. If they have a good enough season to save his job I still won’t start believing until I see a continuation of the somewhat more aggressive approach.

It’s hard to build a team when your Quarterback is completing less than 50 percent of his passes and has no clue how to run an NFL Offense. This year, Chris Ballard rolled the dice, hoping that Daniel Jones can rediscover the spark that propelled the Giants into the playoffs a couple of years ago. If Jones succeeds, no one will ask questions about Ballard’s team building ability.

[rm1369]

It’s hard to build a team when your Quarterback is completing less than 50 percent of his passes and has no clue how to run an NFL Offense. This year, Chris Ballard rolled the dice, hoping that Daniel Jones can rediscover the spark that propelled the Giants into the playoffs a couple of years ago. If Jones succeeds, no one will ask questions about Ballard’s team building ability.

That’s a cop out. For one, there’s been one season for Ballard that fits that description. And Ballard owns the QB situation on this team. His philosophy has been part of the issue. Two, the team building aspect goes way beyond the QB. If you haven’t seen the holes that he has left at various positions over the years then we just aren’t going to see things the same. If you’ve seen them and excuse them that’s fine, but then the issues extend a lot further than the simplistic excuse you are trying to make for him. I get that he’s teflon for a certain section of the fanbase though.

[Hoopsdoc]

I think yesterday showed us that there is plenty of talent on this roster. We just desperately need a quarterback.

Whether Jones can be that quarterback remains to be seen but he’s off to a good start.

[Kray007]

That’s a cop out. For one, there’s been one season for Ballard that fits that description. And Ballard owns the QB situation on this team. His philosophy has been part of the issue. Two, the team building aspect goes way beyond the QB. If you haven’t seen the holes that he has left at various positions over the years then we just aren’t going to see things the same. If you’ve seen them and excuse them that’s fine, but then the issues extend a lot further than the simplistic excuse you are trying to make for him. I get that he’s teflon for a certain section of the fanbase though.

For the most part, the Colts performance, under Ballard, has been pretty much a reflection of their Quarterback play.

In 2017, Andrew Luck went down, Jacoby Brissett played, and it was 4-12
2018, Luck was back, so were the Colts…10-6
2019, back to Brissett and back to 7-9
In 2020, went for a vet in Rivers and went to the playoffs at 11-5
2021, the Wentz expriment fell apart after week 13, just missed the playoffs at 9-8
2022, Ryan convinced them of the futility of trying to milk an aging vet for whatever glimmer of magic remained in his arm…4-12
2023-2025, the Richardson/Minshew/Flacco experience.

Taken individually, none of those moves at Quarterback were unreasonable. The signing of Wentz and the drafting of Richardson were met with enthusiasm. Rivers worked. The inking of Ryan was probably the worst decision, but Ballard succumbed to the siren song of his Quarterback whisperer’s assurance that there was nothing wrong with the aging veteran that couldn’t be fixed once Reich got him under his wing. Richardson was a gamble on greatness.

[YDFL Commish]

To this point it looks like Ballard made the absolute right call on letting Kelly and Fries walk and riding with Bortolini and Goncalves.

[Colts And Orioles]

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


Daniel Jones is looking good early in the season ...... so does the team overall.

o

[Colts And Orioles]

o


Daniel Jones is looking good early in the season ...... so does the team overall.

o

o


I've been saying for years that Chris Ballard was not just giving us lip-service when he said that he wanted to put together a complete-team when he first took over the job, not just a team that was overly-dependent on an all-world QB such as Peyton Manning or Andrew Luck ...... I believe that he has been doing that prior to this season, which is why the Colts had multiple mediocre seasons (instead of bad seasons.)

Since the retirement of Andrew Luck, the Colts have had one good season (2020), one bad season (2022), and 4 mediocre seasons ...... and I believe that a big part of that is because Ballard was doing what he told us that he was going to try to do, not just putting all of his efforts and resources into looking for that Hall-of-Fame caliber QB.

o

[YDFL Commish]

o


I've been saying for years that Chris Ballard was not just giving us lip-service when he said that he wanted to put together a complete-team when he first took over the job, not just a team that was overly-dependent on an all-world QB such as Peyton Manning or Andrew Luck ...... I believe that he has been doing that prior to this season, which is why the Colts had multiple mediocre seasons (instead of bad seasons.)

Since the retirement of Andrew Luck, the Colts have had one good season (2020), one bad season (2022), and 4 mediocre seasons ...... and I believe that a big part of that is because Ballard was doing what he told us that he was going to try to do, not just putting all of his efforts and resources into looking for that Hall-of-Fame caliber QB.

o

Well, I would say that we have a complete team, and the Ballard nay sayers are due healthy dose of crow!

[Colts And Orioles]

Well, I would say that we have a complete team, and the Ballard nay sayers are due healthy dose of crow !!!





o


And as I said in my post, I don't think that it's just this season ...... those mediocre Colts teams were nearly complete teams, sans a very solid quarterback. If they weren't, they would not have been mediocre, they would have been flat-out bad.

o

[YDFL Commish]

o


And as I said in my post, I don't think that it's just this season ...... those mediocre Colts teams were nearly complete teams, sans a very solid quarterback. If they weren't, they would not have been mediocre, they would have been flat-out bad.

o

Agreed, but the 2022 team was flat out bad, due to Ballard mismanaging the O-Line and Reich's incompetence. I forgot that Bradley had something to do with that as well.

[Racehorse]

o


I've been saying for years that Chris Ballard was not just giving us lip-service when he said that he wanted to put together a complete-team when he first took over the job, not just a team that was overly-dependent on an all-world QB such as Peyton Manning or Andrew Luck ...... I believe that he has been doing that prior to this season, which is why the Colts had multiple mediocre seasons (instead of bad seasons.)

Since the retirement of Andrew Luck, the Colts have had one good season (2020), one bad season (2022), and 4 mediocre seasons ...... and I believe that a big part of that is because Ballard was doing what he told us that he was going to try to do, not just putting all of his efforts and resources into looking for that Hall-of-Fame caliber QB.

o

Everyone misunderstood what he meant, and now they see it. Glad we got to see the results before the pitchfork crew got their wish.

[CletusPyle]

o


I've been saying for years that Chris Ballard was not just giving us lip-service when he said that he wanted to put together a complete-team when he first took over the job, not just a team that was overly-dependent on an all-world QB such as Peyton Manning or Andrew Luck ...... I believe that he has been doing that prior to this season, which is why the Colts had multiple mediocre seasons (instead of bad seasons.)

Since the retirement of Andrew Luck, the Colts have had one good season (2020), one bad season (2022), and 4 mediocre seasons ...... and I believe that a big part of that is because Ballard was doing what he told us that he was going to try to do, not just putting all of his efforts and resources into looking for that Hall-of-Fame caliber QB.

o

I believe that Ballard has always intended on building a solid team and I do not consider myself a Ballard hater, but I also believe there are not many GMs that could have survived the Carson Wentz followed by Matt Ryan debacles without being fired!

[Colts And Orioles]

I believe that Ballard has always intended on building a solid team, and I do not consider myself a Ballard hater, but I also believe there are not many GMs that could have survived the Carson Wentz followed by Matt Ryan debacles without being fired !!!





o


That's because the 2nd and 3rd generations of the Irsay family (Jim and his daughter Carlie) are/were not short-sighted ...... they see the forest for the trees.

And by the way, Carson Wentz is looking pretty darned good with the Vikings this season.

o

[Colts And Orioles]

o


After Another Colts Rout, It’s Time to Acknowledge Them for What They Are: Contenders

(By James Boyd)

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/6692076/2025/10/05/colts-contenders-raiders-daniel-jones-jonathan-taylor/


**********************************


INDIANAPOLIS — Braden Smith remembers how things used to be and the scars those failures have left behind. So often recently, the Indianapolis Colts would start slow and spend the whole season trying to claw their way back into the playoff picture. Most of the time, those campaigns ended in agony, with Indianapolis now four years removed from its last playoff berth.

But this season feels different, Smith said Sunday following Indianapolis’ 40-6 shellacking of the Las Vegas Raiders. More hopeful. More promising. More serious. As the Colts’ starting right tackle stood in a joyous locker room at Lucas Oil Stadium and looked around, he took a deep breath to compose himself before explaining why.

Smith pointed to his team’s humility and lack of ego. Then, his tone shifted a bit.

“We’re tired of just being mediocre,” Smith said. “Everyone’s just putting in the work. It’s the work that it takes every day to kind of push past that.

“To be a contender.”

Excuse me, a what ???

If someone had called the Colts a contender before the start of the 2025 season, they likely would’ve been laughed at. That’s a word that hasn’t been synonymous with this franchise since the days of quarterback Peyton Manning and, for a brief stretch, Andrew Luck. But after a 4-1 start, with Daniel Jones playing at a near-MVP level, running back Jonathan Taylor looking like an early favorite to win NFL Offensive Player of the Year and the new-look defense generating eight turnovers in five weeks, this no longer feels like an anomaly. It feels like the standard.

And being a contender feels like a reality.

According to The Athletic’s Austin Mock’s NFL Projection Model, following Sunday’s beatdown of the Raiders, the Colts now have a 90 percent chance of making the playoffs, a 14 percent chance to earn the No. 1 seed in the AFC and an 8 percent chance to win the Super Bowl. The only AFC team with better odds in those three categories? The Buffalo Bills, led by some guy named Josh Allen.

Of course, there’s still a lot of season left, and Smith couched his “contender” talk by noting that it’s only Week 5. But to his point, how else should this year’s team be described? Save for kicker Spencer Shrader sustaining a knee injury, which Colts coach Shane Steichen said after the game, “doesn’t look good,” there were hardly any lowlights for Indianapolis on Sunday.

The Colts were simply dominant — again.

The Dolphins were no match for them in the season opener. The Titans had nothing for the Colts in Week 3. On Sunday, it was the Raiders’ turn to look outclassed. Those lowly teams have a combined record of 3-12, so now isn’t exactly the time to start planning the parade route through downtown Indianapolis. But a roadmap to the postseason and the team’s first AFC South title since 2014? That seems as real as ever.

Last year, all eight of the Colts’ victories were by one possession. On Sunday, Indianapolis notched its third victory this season by at least 20 points. The Raiders’ six points marked the second time this year Indianapolis kept its opponent to single digits.

Linebacker Zaire Franklin could not care less about the Colts’ strength of schedule. From his perspective, strength is subjective — until someone else feels it.

“That’s what shows up on film,” said Franklin, who tallied one of Indianapolis’ four sacks Sunday. “I think regardless of the level of competition that we play, I think we play to a certain standard. And it’s either you’re gonna get to that standard, or you’re gonna get ran off the field.”

Segun Olubi set the tone early.

With the Colts already leading 7-3 in the second quarter, the linebacker knifed through the Raiders’ protection unit and blocked a punt by Las Vegas’ AJ Cole. Four plays later, Taylor scored on a 3-yard touchdown run that was the start of an offensive avalanche. After going three-and-out to start the game, Indianapolis scored a touchdown on its next six possessions, which is tied for the team’s longest streak since at least 1993, according to Colts PR.

Taylor was held to a season-low 66 yards on 17 carries, but still tallied three rushing touchdowns. Entering this season, Taylor had just two career games with at least three total touchdowns. Through just five weeks this season, he already matched that total.

Not to be overlooked, Jones was nearly flawless on Sunday, completing 20 of his 29 passes for 212 yards and two TDs, both in the second quarter. One play after Steichen dialed up a trick play for tYler Warren, in which the rookie tight end was the passer but wisely threw the ball away when he saw the Raiders snuffed it out, the coach went back to his star — yes, star — quarterback. Jones delivered with an 11-yard touchdown pass to Warren that marked the first receiving TD of his career.

“I didn’t see Tyler’s pass,” Jones said through a grin when asked to grade Warren’s QB skills. “Looked like they covered it up pretty good, but I like the play.”

The Colts’ defense had its highlights as well, as four different players recorded a sack. Defensive end Laiatu Latu also picked off Raiders quarterback Geno Smith in the second quarter, marking Latu’s second interception of the season. Cornerback Mekhi Blackmon intercepted Smith in the third quarter, as the Las Vegas passer finished the game with his second-worst passer rating of the season (63.2.)

But perhaps the best argument for why these aren’t the same old Colts is how the team handled wide receiver AD Mitchell. Following last week’s blunders against the Rams, in which Mitchell’s mistakes cost the team two touchdowns, he was effectively benched until garbage time in the fourth quarter. It didn’t matter that starting receiver Alec Pierce missed his second straight game due to a concussion. Steichen wanted to send a message.

“I told you guys AD has got to earn it,” the coach said afterward.

Steichen had been noncommittal about Mitchell’s role all week and opted instead to play Ashton Dulin, a core special teamer, over the 2024 second-round pick. Dulin, who went undrafted in 2019, responded by notching two catches for a team-high 55 yards, in addition to doing his usual jobs as a gunner and return man.

“He’s as gritty as they come,” Steichen said. “He’s as tough as they come.”

That’s the mindset Steichen wants his whole team to embody in a conference that, outside of the 4-1 Bills, feels wide open. The Ravens, with an injured Lamar Jackson, are 1-4. Patrick Mahomes and the reigning AFC champion Chiefs look more vulnerable than in years past and are just 2-2 entering Monday night’s game against the Jaguars. And Justin Herbert and the Chargers, who started 3-0 with a resounding victory over the Chiefs in their season opener, are now 3-2 after back-to-back losses to the Giants and Commanders.

Franklin, who fully acknowledged that it’s still early in the season, doesn’t see why the Colts can’t be in the “contender” conversation at the end. That’s what they’re building toward and, for the first time in years, they may finally have the right tools.

“Respectfully, I feel like we gave (the Rams) too much credit,” Franklin said, reflecting on how Indy responded after its first loss of the year. “I think after we played L.A., we realized we’re that team.

“We’re the team that’s a test for everybody else.”

o

[Pez]

Good article, love the end, “We’re the team that’s a test for everybody else.”

I cant imagine there is anyone that really wants to play us.

[Oldcolt]

Saw both Mitchell and AR celebrating with teammates on the sideline and not showing any signs of pouting. Somehow the whole mental attitude of this team seams to have changed. Nice

[Colts And Orioles]

o


The Colts' Most Stunning Redemption Story Is Already Breaking Franchise Records

(By Lee Vowell)

https://horseshoeheroes.com/indianapolis-colts-most-stunning-redemption-story-breaking-franchise-records


***********************************


The Indianapolis Colts were right ...... general manager Chris Ballard and head coach Shane Steichen clearly knew what they were doing this off-season, even when others around the NFL doubted them. After six games, Indy sits atop the AFC South at 5-1.

Obviously, there are several reasons for this. Some of the players fans already knew were great, or likely to be so, have been just that. Running back Jonathan Taylor, for instance, has long been one of the best backs in the league. This year, he has been the best so far.

But very few expected quarterback Daniel Jones to be as terrific as he is. He likely can continue his elite run, as he appears to be a perfect fit in Shane Steichen's system. The quarterback tends not to make careless mistakes, and is the excellent point guard QB Steichen needs.


Daniel Jones Is the Latest Redemption Story for the Indianapolis Colts


Jones, in fact, isn't simply a fantastic redemption story; but he is playing like a Pro Bowl quarterback. He just needed to rid himself of being a part of the awful New York Giants organization, spend some time with the Minnesota Vikings, and join Indy, a team that has a wonderful core of offensive weapons.

The Colts' QB1 is completing 71.7 percent of his passes (third in the NFL), has a quarterback rating of a career-high 104.4 (10th in the league), and has augmented his 8 touchdown throws with 4 rushing touchdowns. He's made the argument of Anthony Richardson ever starting again moot.

But Jones has also done something that not even Peyton Manning could do. Through 6 games, Indianapolis has scored 194 points. That is the most in franchise history. Daniel Jones isn't the only reason Indy is scoring so much, but without him, the team doesn't reach the same level.

Clearly, the quarterback deserves a lot of credit for his play. He doesn't just make smart throws, but he prepares exceedingly well. He is a smart guy on and off the field, and it shows in the way that he runs the offense. That isn't going to change, barring an injury.

But Chris Ballard and Shane Steichen deserve credit, too. They took a chance on Jones being the starting quarterback for the Indianapolis Colts when maybe no other team would have. Those teams have a right to be jealous now. The only drawback for Indy is that next off-season, Jones is going to want to be signed to a huge new contract ...... and he's earned it.

o