The build

[Oldcolt]

Thru six games I see hope in several areas on this team. First we are set with the most important and hardest piece to get-quarterback. To me the offensive line looks like they have the players to jell into a dominant force (with what we have invested in this line it needs to become dominant in the next 1-2 years and I think they are on the way) given time and health. Marlon Mack, if he can stay healthy, may be the answer at running back. The second half Sunday was the first time in ages our running game looked like a real running game. Tight ends seem to be good enough for us to compete. The defensive line has some talent. I really think its a good start for the line. Need a stud to elevate everyone's game in my opinion. Hopefully our #1 will be that. We have one linebacker that we can run with, need more. One safety is set, the other (Geathers) I love but injuries. And thankfully corner back is supposed to be a good position in the next draft. The challenge for the coaching staff is to not lose the culture amidst all this losing. Judging the early season as a rebuild, not by wins and losses, I'm pretty satisfied. I'm not saying we are going to make it to the promised land (and after all not knowing is what makes rooting so much fun) but if you look at where we are I don't know how you could honestly say we are on the wrong track. I'm trying to enjoy the rebuild. Honestly cannot do it on Sundays, but later in the week it doesn't look so horrible to me.

[DrSpaceman]

I think the two biggest areas of need still are secondary and WR.

[sherck]

In 2019 and beyond:

QB - Luck/Brissett. Set and no changes needed. In an era where there are not enough solid QBs to go around, we have both a solid backup and an good/extra good/elite starter, we are in good shape.

RB - Mack/Hines/Wilkins. Not highly drafted and not flashy but could end up being a pretty good committee if the O-line gels.

TE - Doyle/Ebron. A great #1/#2 punch if both can stay heathly. Good at very different things but reminds me a lot of the Kenny Dilger/Marcus Pollard years at TE. Depth needs to develop below them.

WR - Hilton. Perhaps Cain and Fountain. Ugh, T.Y. and then no one for certain. One of two weakest position groups on the roster. Yeah, I know Rogers is going to be back in 2019 as cheap depth as an RFA but he has had ample opportunity to step up and he has failed to do so time and again. Stop gap for next year but need to move on afterwards. Grant? See ya.

O-Line - Castonzo/Nelson/Kelly/???/Smith/Clark/Haeg/Good. OTs are harder to find than OGs so if Smith can fulfill ROT in 2018 and grow into the role in the future, then that needs to be the position he fills. We can draft a new starting OG in 2019 in the 3rd or 4th round to challenge Clark/Haeg/Good for the spot. The team will have to decide if they are re-signing Good in 2019 but his potential as a starter would lead me to offer him a journeymen contract even if he only ever ends up being depth for us going forward. With a 2019 draft pick, this is a good 8 man group to go into 2019 and beyond with.

D-Line - Hunt/Sheard/Steward/Autry/Turay/Lewis/Ridgeway/Ward/Muhammad. Lots of guys who, at times, have played well. Ward with 3.0 sacks on the year. Muhammad with 10 tackles in 5 games. Turay with 3.0 sacks. Hunt with his monster first couple of games. Autry with a couple of good games. Woods will be 32 and I don't expect him to be re-signed. Sure, we could use a top end stud to put greater pressure on opposing O-lines and make everyone else around them better but there are a lot of nice pieces to the D-Line right now.

LBs- Leonard/Walker/Adams/Franklin. I am very happy with the play of Leonard and Walker as starters and especially Franklin as depth. Adams has had his moments as a 7th round pick as well. A very nice young core of players to build the LBs corps around. Could use another stud but what a find in Leonard?

S - Hooker/Farley. Solid pairing going forward but we need more quality bodies. Perhaps Geathers is one of those but Ballard will have to decide if paying for his trending health is worth re-signing him.

CB - Moore/Hairston/Wilson. Not enough talent there for a core. Need to add a HUGE influx of talent if we are going to play more man coverage.

Postions Groups Upgrades Needed (in priority order):

#1 = Cornerback
#2 = Wide Receiver
#3 = Safety
#4 = Linebacker
#5 = Defensive Line
#6 = Offensive Line
#7 = Running Back
#8 = Tight End
#9 = Quarterback

If we don't touch #7/#8/#9 in 2019, add one quality body to each #4/#5/#6 and flood bodies into groups #1/#2/#3, then I think we will be on the right track.

Walk Worthy,

[omahacolt]

This dline needs more help than I think people realize.

[Maniac]

Sherck,

You list RB at #7 and say we shouldn't touch that position, I definitely disagree. Mack hasn't shown to be able to stay healthy. With him out, the running game is non-existant. You definitely take a flier on a RB somewhere in this next draft, or pick up a vet in free agency.

With a high pick, you have to get a elite pass rusher if you can. They are too rare to find otherwise.

Then after that: CB, WR, LB, Safety, RB. OL, DL

I actually expect Ballard to get more agressive with free agency this offseason, because with a few key free agents and another solid draft, we should be a pretty good team.

[JAFF]

This dline needs more help than I think people realize.

They need a freeney

[FatDT]

They need a freeney

I agree in that they need a #1 pass rusher. We have a bunch of guys that can contribute to a pass rush. The kinds of guys that can win one-on-one matchups and take advantage of blockers being occupied elsewhere. And we have a defensive scheme that gets those types of players open lanes to the passer. But we don't have a blue chip that wins battles regardless of who is blocking or how many.

It doesn't have to be a DE, it could be Ed Oliver playing an Aaron Donald-type role. I also think NT could use an upgrade since Woods is getting older and Stewart seems like a depth player.

[Chromeburn]

They need a freeney

I would say a Simeon Rice or a Bosa. As much as Freeney was a terror on passing downs, he was a huge liability in the run game.

A dominate 3-tech would do wonders for the line. We saw what one could do with Hunt kicking butt out there.

[FatDT]

I would say a Simeon Rice or a Bosa. As much as Freeney was a terror on passing downs, he was a huge liability in the run game.

That was more due to scheme IMO. Teerlinck coached him (all of them really) to shoot upfield. Freeney proved he could play the run during the 2006 playoffs. They adjusted and did great, Freeney included.

[Chromeburn]

That was more due to scheme IMO. Teerlinck coached him (all of them really) to shoot upfield. Freeney proved he could play the run during the 2006 playoffs. They adjusted and did great, Freeney included.

Scheme, player, they didn't do it enough. And there is shooting gaps and then there is creating gaps which they did the latter. Should have done it all the time. Teams would have 3rd and long and run a draw at their gap and get the first so many times.

[VeveJones007]

This dline needs more help than I think people realize.

Some in the organization think Lewis can be a really good 3-technique. If that's the case, then the d-line is looking a lot stronger on paper. We'll see.

[FatDT]

Scheme, player, they didn't do it enough. And there is shooting gaps and then there is creating gaps which they did the latter. Should have done it all the time. Teams would have 3rd and long and run a draw at their gap and get the first so many times.

I don't disagree with you. But when a player proves he can do something, but consistently every player at that position does something else, it's a pretty good indication that it was scheme. I don't know why they kept doing it, other than " We do what we do".

[Maniac]

Scheme, player, they didn't do it enough. And there is shooting gaps and then there is creating gaps which they did the latter. Should have done it all the time. Teams would have 3rd and long and run a draw at their gap and get the first so many times.

Why didn't the defensive coordinator have someone stunt into that area or a LB fill that area?

[Puck]

I would say a Simeon Rice or a Bosa. As much as Freeney was a terror on passing downs, he was a huge liability in the run game.

A dominate 3-tech would do wonders for the line. We saw what one could do with Hunt kicking butt out there.


Dont forget we have Lewis so I think 3 tech is not as important as a pass rusher.

Oline, WR and Cb's are the next 2 must haves.round out the list of must haves

[Chromeburn]

I don't disagree with you. But when a player proves he can do something, but consistently every player at that position does something else, it's a pretty good indication that it was scheme. I don't know why they kept doing it, other than " We do what we do".

Dungy was always preaching spacing integrity, I don't know why they did it. Whatever the reason, it drove me crazy. That's why I enjoy watching this defensive line, much more disciplined in their gap control.

[Chromeburn]

Dont forget we have Lewis so I think 3 tech is not as important as a pass rusher.

Oline, WR and Cb's are the next 2 must haves.round out the list of must haves

I do want to see what Lewis can do, staff is super high on him. A dominate dline does wonders for the guys behind them, just like a dominate oline is the engine of the offense. I wouldn't mind him some help though. There are so many dline in this draft might get one in the second round. I think for me it will come down to the player available and BPA. Bosa vs Oliver, or Oliver vs Ferrel, Ferrel vs Brown. I was going to make a draft post with possible options just cause I'm bored and love to talk draft.

I do think this team will make a second half run though and I suspect we will be looking at a pick around 10.

I don't like the idea of spending a 1st on WR, too many busts, and this is a deep group. I think a 2nd on one will help us just fine, and maybe another later round pick. Greedy Williams of LSU is the top rated corner. He should be a shut down corner. But the cover 2 doesn't really need shut down man corners, you can get decent corners to fill the job in later rounds. The cover-2 does need high picks spent on dline because you only rush with 4 men 90% of the time. As for oline, there should be several good LT's this year.

[Dam8610]

This dline needs more help than I think people realize.

So much more. Fortunately Ballard appears to be a lines guy.

[Chromeburn]

Why didn't the defensive coordinator have someone stunt into that area or a LB fill that area?

In a cover two the LBs are dropping into zones, with the mike dropping into a deep middle zone. So if the RB makes it to the second level on a 3rd and long he should have a lot of open space in front of him. That is why gap control is important, so you don't create those running lanes for a RB.

Freeney and Mathis went so wide in their pass rush they created huge gaps in the line. A stunt would mean Freeney is going inside and the DT is looping outside. The same gaps are being attacked, they are just switching jobs. If the DT moved over to fill the gap the DE's created in their rush, then they would just create a new gap in the middle of the line. Same problem again just in a different place. The cover 2 is predicated on rushing four guys only.

I think MJD is still running on that defense and gaining yards.

[FatDT]

I do want to see what Lewis can do, staff is super high on him. A dominate dline does wonders for the guys behind them, just like a dominate oline is the engine of the offense. I wouldn't mind him some help though. There are so many dline in this draft might get one in the second round. I think for me it will come down to the player available and BPA. Bosa vs Oliver, or Oliver vs Ferrel, Ferrel vs Brown. I was going to make a draft post with possible options just cause I'm bored and love to talk draft.

I do think this team will make a second half run though and I suspect we will be looking at a pick around 10.

I think so too. I think the drops will lessen/stop. TY and Doyle will come back. The OL, if they stay healthy, should keep getting better. I think we'll still pick in the top half of the draft but I'm expecting 5-7 wins.

[omahacolt]

In a cover two the LBs are dropping into zones, with the mike dropping into a deep middle zone. So if the RB makes it to the second level on a 3rd and long he should have a lot of open space in front of him. That is why gap control is important, so you don't create those running lanes for a RB.

Freeney and Mathis went so wide in their pass rush they created huge gaps in the line. A stunt would mean Freeney is going inside and the DT is looping outside. The same gaps are being attacked, they are just switching jobs. If the DT moved over to fill the gap the DE's created in their rush, then they would just create a new gap in the middle of the line. Same problem again just in a different place. The cover 2 is predicated on rushing four guys only.

I think MJD is still running on that defense and gaining yards.

If it is 3rd and long, I tell my all world de to go get the qb. Not worry about the rb on a draw

[Chromeburn]

If it is 3rd and long, I tell my all world de to go get the qb. Not worry about the rb on a draw

What about 2nd and short? They would do the same thing. They didn't worry about the RB at all.

The 3rd and long is an example of a draw working consistently when it shouldn't. Maybe a few times, not almost all the time.

[1965southpaw]

I think so too. I think the drops will lessen/stop. TY and Doyle will come back. The OL, if they stay healthy, should keep getting better. I think we'll still pick in the top half of the draft but I'm expecting 5-7 wins.


TY practiced today for the first time and per Kevin Bowen is likely to play Sunday. Doyle did not and likely not back til after the bye week.

[VeveJones007]

I do want to see what Lewis can do, staff is super high on him. A dominate dline does wonders for the guys behind them, just like a dominate oline is the engine of the offense. I wouldn't mind him some help though. There are so many dline in this draft might get one in the second round. I think for me it will come down to the player available and BPA. Bosa vs Oliver, or Oliver vs Ferrel, Ferrel vs Brown. I was going to make a draft post with possible options just cause I'm bored and love to talk draft.

I do think this team will make a second half run though and I suspect we will be looking at a pick around 10.

I don't like the idea of spending a 1st on WR, too many busts, and this is a deep group. I think a 2nd on one will help us just fine, and maybe another later round pick. Greedy Williams of LSU is the top rated corner. He should be a shut down corner. But the cover 2 doesn't really need shut down man corners, you can get decent corners to fill the job in later rounds. The cover-2 does need high picks spent on dline because you only rush with 4 men 90% of the time. As for oline, there should be several good LT's this year.

Yeah, don't even both with the Bosa/Oliver discussion. That isn't going to happen. There should still be some good DL/EDGE and LTs available though.

[omahacolt]

What about 2nd and short? They would do the same thing. They didn't worry about the RB at all.

The 3rd and long is an example of a draw working consistently when it shouldn't. Maybe a few times, not almost all the time.

Dungy fucked this team out of multiple championships with his shitty scheme.

[Chromeburn]

Dungy fucked this team out of multiple championships with his shitty scheme.

That's a long conversation. I won't disagree. But I think the scheme needs talent in the right places to be successful. I always felt like we were halfway there. Polian put the emphasis on the offense more than the D and I think it might have cost us a couple more SB's.

[JAFF]

Dungy fucked this team out of multiple championships with his shitty scheme.

That is like an a hole, everybody has one.

[YDFL Commish]

They need a freeney

I don't care, if it's, a Freeney. a Watt, an Atkins or a Donald. Omaha is right, we need more pass rush...and I don't care where it comes from.

[YDFL Commish]

Dungy fucked this team out of multiple championships with his shitty scheme.

I don't think that it was the scheme. I believe that it was Dungy trusting that some coaches and players would get it done, when clearly they would not have.

My biggest case in point would be Rawb replacing Gilbert Gardner. Rawb didn't have to be great...hell, I'm not sure that he even had to be good. But, Gardner was so bad, that anything was going to be an improvement.

Yet, Dungy stuck with him as a starter, for what...12 weeks?

[Oldcolt]

I would like to get opinions on how the rebuild is going in your mind. When we hoist that freaking trophy, what players/positions on this team do you think will be on that team that are on this one? I, for one, think the rebuild is going very well. The appear to have done the one thing all of us were screaming for, fix the offensive line so Luck doesn't get killed. Maybe, just maybe, they are learning the art of run blocking to. One half is enough to get me pumped to see more. Mack looks like he may be either the answer or part of the answer. Hilton is the only receiver that will be on that team (hopefully). Our tight ends are fine. I'm not so sure about the defense. The line has some players and we have one linebacker and maybe our starting safeties. When I look at it I think we are in the process of building in the correct way (quarterback and lines first). I've got high hopes.

[omahacolt]

I don't think that it was the scheme. I believe that it was Dungy trusting that some coaches and players would get it done, when clearly they would not have.

My biggest case in point would be Rawb replacing Gilbert Gardner. Rawb didn't have to be great...hell, I'm not sure that he even had to be good. But, Gardner was so bad, that anything was going to be an improvement.

Yet, Dungy stuck with him as a starter, for what...12 weeks?

and constantly using 260 lb dt's. getting smoked in the run game and still doing it over and over and over.

[omahacolt]

I would like to get opinions on how the rebuild is going in your mind. When we hoist that freaking trophy, what players/positions on this team do you think will be on that team that are on this one? I, for one, think the rebuild is going very well. The appear to have done the one thing all of us were screaming for, fix the offensive line so Luck doesn't get killed. Maybe, just maybe, they are learning the art of run blocking to. One half is enough to get me pumped to see more. Mack looks like he may be either the answer or part of the answer. Hilton is the only receiver that will be on that team (hopefully). Our tight ends are fine. I'm not so sure about the defense. The line has some players and we have one linebacker and maybe our starting safeties. When I look at it I think we are in the process of building in the correct way (quarterback and lines first). I've got high hopes.

i think it is going way slower than it has to.

[omahacolt]

That is like an a hole, everybody has one.

what i said was a fact

[Oldcolt]

i think it is going way slower than it has to.

So I'm thinking that by the end of next year we should be a playoff team. I really think we are on track for that. I think we are one more good draft and spending some money on a few free agents away. Do you disagree or do you just think we should have put more into this year instead of going whole hog on the rebuild.

[omahacolt]

So I'm thinking that by the end of next year we should be a playoff team. I really think we are on track for that. I think we are one more good draft and spending some money on a few free agents away. Do you disagree or do you just think we should have put more into this year instead of going whole hog on the rebuild.

I don’t think you have to do one or the other when you have cap space and an elite qb. Signing a cb wouldn’t have hurt the developerment if anyone for example.

But yes, they should be in the playoffs at least next year. Otherwise Ballard should probably be shown the door

[JAFF]

what i said was a fact

No its not

Do you have a HOF jacket? No, just talking about what other people do.

[Oldcolt]

I don’t think you have to do one or the other when you have cap space and an elite qb. Signing a cb wouldn’t have hurt the developerment if anyone for example.

But yes, they should be in the playoffs at least next year. Otherwise Ballard should probably be shown the door

So I agree it would't hurt development as none of these guys will be on the team when it gets to the promise land. But the problem is I don't or didn't see anyone in free agency that would have been here when we get there either. Maybe this years team is a little better if we signed a cb, but do you really care about being a little better this year? Seen thru the lens of a rebuild, it could be seen as a waste of money and resources that could be more wisely spent later.

[Indiana V2]

So I'm thinking that by the end of next year we should be a playoff team. I really think we are on track for that. I think we are one more good draft and spending some money on a few free agents away. Do you disagree or do you just think we should have put more into this year instead of going whole hog on the rebuild.

Ballard hasn't spent big money in free agency yet, what makes you think he will this year? He likely won't, he wants to build through the draft, which is a slow process, and wasting Andrew Luck in his prime during the process.

[Racehorse]

No its not

Do you have a HOF jacket? No, just talking about what other people do.

Dude, I agree with you that omaha can be stubborn, but nobody has to have a HOF jacket in order to have an opinion.

[JAFF]

Dude, I agree with you that omaha can be stubborn, but nobody has to have a HOF jacket in order to have an opinion.

I know that. But he said "fact". Fact is, he's full of _________ (fill in the blank)

He doesn't know what happened in the room, he only got to see the game. If he does have all knowning all seeing powers, I would like to know about where the stock market is going to be in 3 months.

[Chaka]

I don’t think you have to do one or the other when you have cap space and an elite qb. Signing a cb wouldn’t have hurt the developerment if anyone for example.

But yes, they should be in the playoffs at least next year. Otherwise Ballard should probably be shown the door

So much resistance here to Ballard and his strategy, I don’t understand it. The guy’s done a great job since he’s been here, mostly by taking an approach that the majority of the people here seem to disagree with. Many people here (yourself included, if I’m not mistaken) disagreed with his draft picks this year, yet its starting to look like one of the best non-QB drafts in recent memory. And the outcries of pain when he cut Hankins, Simons and traded Anderson were deafening – yet those decisions don’t seem to have harmed the Colts in the least and our defense is playing better than it was with those guys. Keeping Hunt was another ripe source of criticism, and once again it proved to be a great decision. Give the guy credit.

Now, he hasn’t been perfect – the WR corps hasn’t played very well, though again I’m not sure what better options he had. I’m guessing that heading into the season he thought it would be adequate, but sometimes you don’t know that your boat leaks until you put it in the water. I don’t think that signing Grant was a bad decision at the time, even though it hasn’t turned out that well yet. I don’t see that there were a lot of great free agents WRs that he could have signed (maybe Allan Robinson as GBB pointed out, but who else?).

I get your point that our CB corps is bad, and it’s undeniably true. It’s easy to complain about this six games into the season, but if you’re going to do so you should at least explain what specifically you think he should have done instead. Who do you think he should he have signed? And did you say this before the season, or are you just using hindsight that wasn’t available to Ballard? I’m looking at the 2018 free agent list for CBs and it’s relatively uninspiring (Malcolm Butler was the top free agent CB, and now the Titans are complaining about him).

Let’s also not forget what Ballard said before free agency began – that we wanted to build a culture before adding high priced free agents. I think this has been particularly true on the defense.

The complaints about his cap usage are a bit short-sighted in my view as well. The money hasn’t gone anywhere and he hasn’t wasted cap space – what he didn’t use this offseason will be used later. It HAS to be under the rules (or paid to the player’s association). What’s so hard for everyone to understand about this? That’s how the system works. By focusing on establishing his culture this year, he’s simultaneously saved cap space for use over then next few years to further improve the roster – it’s a clear strategy that could and should pay big dividends.

As far as the playoffs are concerned, I think next year is certainly a realistic possibility. I haven’t quite given up on this year yet, though, as we’re thankfully in a weak division and I expect our team to improve gradually over the course of the season. I’ll admit I expected to do better than 1-5, but despite the record I think we’ve seen lots of promising signs on the field and they’ve been much more fun to watch than last year’s squad.

Sorry for the long rant, but I do get frustrated with some of the pessimism here – I think Ballard was a great hire and we’re on a very promising course.

[Oldcolt]

Ballard hasn't spent big money in free agency yet, what makes you think he will this year? He likely won't, he wants to build through the draft, which is a slow process, and wasting Andrew Luck in his prime during the process.

I don't think Ballard has said he will build only thru the draft. It is his primary way and I think we all would agree that your core usually comes thru the draft. I understand how you come down on the side that Ballard will just sit on all this money but I disagree. It makes sense to me to wait until you know what you can address thru the draft before bringing in guys. As far as this being a slow way to build a team, I disagree. I don't think that bringing in 3-4 free agents last year would speed up this rebuild one bit. Can you name one team that was able to build a Super Bowl winner thru free agency. Free agents might make us an average team faster, but the object of this rebuild is Super Bowl wins. I for one am sick of one and done and making the playoff on the shoulders of one player. This is, in my mind, exactly what we should be doing right now. To be clear, I think we should and will spend some money next year.

[VeveJones007]

So I agree it would't hurt development as none of these guys will be on the team when it gets to the promise land. But the problem is I don't or didn't see anyone in free agency that would have been here when we get there either. Maybe this years team is a little better if we signed a cb, but do you really care about being a little better this year? Seen thru the lens of a rebuild, it could be seen as a waste of money and resources that could be more wisely spent later.

Taking this one step further, let's assume Kenny Moore and Quincy Wilson are going to be really good starting corners and key contributors by 2019. If so, would they have gotten there with less playing opportunity in 2018?

We have no idea either way, but it's clear that Ballard is using 2018 as a developmental/evaluation year to figure out the answer to those questions.

[Spike]

Ballard hasn't spent big money in free agency yet, what makes you think he will this year? He likely won't, he wants to build through the draft, which is a slow process, and wasting Andrew Luck in his prime during the process.

This is my biggest problem, Luck won't be here forever. If Ballard shits the bed next year, I'm with Omaha, show the fucker the door.

[JAFF]

This is my biggest problem, Luck won't be here forever. If Ballard shits the bed next year, I'm with Omaha, show the fucker the door.

How easy do you think it was, without knowing if Luck could still play, to entice any free agent to sign in Indy?

The offense works, if people catch the ball. Luck can still throw it. This coming year, people will want to play in Indy

[rcubed]

This is my biggest problem, Luck won't be here forever. If Ballard shits the bed next year, I'm with Omaha, show the fucker the door.
however, with the new rules QBs are playing much longer into their careers and still playing at a high level. Luck is 29 and could play for another decade barring serious injury.

[Oldcolt]

This is my biggest problem, Luck won't be here forever. If Ballard shits the bed next year, I'm with Omaha, show the fucker the door.

I agree that wasting some of Lucks years is a huge problem (not sure Ballard shitting himself is) but given where this team was last year, I don't see any other answer. Lucks loss of years has more to do mismanagement by the prior regime in my opinion.

[Racehorse]

I know that. But he said "fact". Fact is, he's full of _________ (fill in the blank)

He doesn't know what happened in the room, he only got to see the game. If he does have all knowning all seeing powers, I would like to know about where the stock market is going to be in 3 months.

Yes, but a HOF jacket would not fix him being a _____. It also isn't necessary for sharing thoughts on a message board, even if they are just a word or two.

[JAFF]

There wouldnt be any message boards.

[Spike]

I agree that wasting some of Lucks years is a huge problem (not sure Ballard shitting himself is) but given where this team was last year, I don't see any other answer. Lucks loss of years has more to do mismanagement by the prior regime in my opinion.

I agree. But next year will be Ballard's 3rd year and he needs to fix some shit asap. I'm willing to give him a pass this year, but if he doesn't do enough next year, he absolutely needs to be shown the door.

[Spike]

however, with the new rules QBs are playing much longer into their careers and still playing at a high level. Luck is 29 and could play for another decade barring serious injury.

Yep, but these fuckers running the organization need to surround him with more talent sooner rather than later. Next year will be telling on whether Ballard is worth a shit or not.

[Oldcolt]

I agree. But next year will be Ballard's 3rd year and he needs to fix some shit asap. I'm willing to give him a pass this year, but if he doesn't do enough next year, he absolutely needs to be shown the door.

Agreed that next year is key. I'm not in love with Ballard, I just think that right now the rebuild is going about as well as I would have thought (and I am not talking about our record). No matter what happens he won't be shown the door next year. Not by Irsay.

[Chaka]

This is my biggest problem, Luck won't be here forever. If Ballard shits the bed next year, I'm with Omaha, show the fucker the door.

Gimme a break - you're talking about showing Ballard the door? Why, because he's improved virtually every facet of this team while saving tons of cap space for the future? What would you have done differently? Please be specific with player names.

Let me list for you the things he's done off the top of my head in the short time he's been here:

2017 Draft - Using an inherited scouting staff, and on short notice, still picked up three starters (Hooker, Mack, Walker), three backups (Wilson, Hairston, Stewart). Two ugly misses (Basham and Banner), but unlike most he didn't keep them around making the situation worse in the hope of saving face. When all is said and done, most teams will have at least two ugly misses in any given draft. Ballard just acknowledged his sooner than most.

2018 Draft - Nearly every pick has made serious contributions, except Lewis/Cain (injured) and Fountain (practice squad). I doubt any other team had a better batting average. Seven games in and we already have two high level starters (Nelson and Leonard) from this draft.

2018 free agency - Signed Ebron, Autry and Miller to cap friendly deals. Jury still out on Grant. Struck out on Howard, but again damage was small ($1-2 million) and cut bait quickly to minimize damage.

Traded for Jacoby Brissett in exchange for an underperforming WR from the prior regime (Dorsett)

Cut/traded multiple mediocre vets (Hankins/Anderson/Simon) in favor of much cheaper youth that are now outperforming those vets.

Kept several vets who have performed at or above their contracts (Hunt, Woods, Sheard, Desir), while not resigning others who are now disappointments with their new teams (Melvin, Moncrief)

Rebuilt two critical areas (offensive line and linebackers) into a strength, after years (and years) of underperformance.

Utilized team-friendly contract structures which incentivized performance and gave the team the flexibility to move on without consequence if things didn't work out.

Jettisoned Pagano, brought in Reich and new coaching staff. Notable embarrassment when McDaniels reneged on informal agreement, but Ballard accepted blame and rebounded well in getting Reich.

Jettisoned multiple failed draft picks/projects from the prior regime (TJ Green, Dorsett, Bond, George)

Those are the things I can think of off of the top of my head. The bottom line is that most of his moves have improved this team, and those that haven't didn't cause much damage. And you're talking about getting rid of this guy?

[sherck]

I think the major rub on Ballard is the HUGE amount of cap space we are sitting on doing nothing. Many fans wanted more of it spent on free agents.

I get it. I also get what Ballard is trying to do in establishing an identity before dropping a ton of cash on "high level" performers. We have signed 4 guys (2 per year) so far to "starter level" contracts (over $5m a year) and one more at $5m a year (Grant).

Of those four over $5m (Hankins, Sheard, Ebron, Autry), Hankins is the only one who has not worked out so far. Sheard and Ebron are delivering starter level performance and so has Autry when heathy.

I fully expect 2019 to be a bit different assuming that this trend continues for the rest of the season of a rising defense of talent (Leonard, Walker, Turay, Hunt, Hooker) and an offense that re-estabilishes itself as a top ten offense.

Those two things happen by the end of 2018, I fully expect the checkbook to be opened in 2019 with us bidding aggresively on veterans who will fit the culture and another draft class hopefully like 2018.

Anyway, I am glad Ballard is here and I am good with his plan. However, if he sits on $50m of cap space in 2019, my opinion will probably start turning.

Walk Worthy,

[Racehorse]

I think the major rub on Ballard is the HUGE amount of cap space we are sitting on doing nothing. Many fans wanted more of it spent on free agents.

I get it. I also get what Ballard is trying to do in establishing an identity before dropping a ton of cash on "high level" performers. We have signed 4 guys (2 per year) so far to "starter level" contracts (over $5m a year) and one more at $5m a year (Grant).

Of those four over $5m (Hankins, Sheard, Ebron, Autry), Hankins is the only one who has not worked out so far. Sheard and Ebron are delivering starter level performance and so has Autry when heathy.

I fully expect 2019 to be a bit different assuming that this trend continues for the rest of the season of a rising defense of talent (Leonard, Walker, Turay, Hunt, Hooker) and an offense that re-estabilishes itself as a top ten offense.

Those two things happen by the end of 2018, I fully expect the checkbook to be opened in 2019 with us bidding aggresively on veterans who will fit the culture and another draft class hopefully like 2018.

Anyway, I am glad Ballard is here and I am good with his plan. However, if he sits on $50m of cap space in 2019, my opinion will probably start turning.

Walk Worthy,
I think something people are forgetting is that the big splash contracts usually require money up front. Irsay just paid Grigson to go away and then Pagano. Maybe he doesn't have much liquidity left to go after the top guys, but will have more flexibility next off-season.

Also, businesses that throw around money "just because they have it" do not last very long. That is an awful business model.

[Oldcolt]

This offensive line is on its way (hopefully) to being one of the most dominant in the league. It is changing everything about this team. I love the Nelson pick and think, in my mind, he would have been worth the #1 for this team as a guard. Undervalued position my ass. Seeing Luck have a clean pocket two games in a row (not to mention actual holes opening up for the running game) is worth every bit of investment we have in this line. Freaking loving it.

[FatDT]

This offensive line is on its way (hopefully) to being one of the most dominant in the league. It is changing everything about this team. I love the Nelson pick and think, in my mind, he would have been worth the #1 for this team as a guard. Undervalued position my ass. Seeing Luck have a clean pocket two games in a row (not to mention actual holes opening up for the running game) is worth every bit of investment we have in this line. Freaking loving it.

I did not love the pick, but was ok with it. Especially with Chubb off the board already. And when it happened, I wanted Ballard to really commit and get a 2nd lineman early to knock the OL out as a big need. So the Smith pick was a good thing IMO. We have 3 1st rounders and a 2nd rounder as our starters. That is more than enough investment in terms of draft capital. With Castonzo back, it appears to be paying off. Now Ballard just needs to maintain it rather than build it. Watching a 220 yard rushing effort was a real treat.

[Oldcolt]

I did not love the pick, but was ok with it. Especially with Chubb off the board already. And when it happened, I wanted Ballard to really commit and get a 2nd lineman early to knock the OL out as a big need. So the Smith pick was a good thing IMO. We have 3 1st rounders and a 2nd rounder as our starters. That is more than enough investment in terms of draft capital. With Castonzo back, it appears to be paying off. Now Ballard just needs to maintain it rather than build it. Watching a 220 yard rushing effort was a real treat.

I didn't love it at first either. Because I listened to all the so call experts saying that you can't pick a guard at 6 because of it being a 'low value' position. Maybe for some teams, but not for this one. I'm not putting everything on Nelson (Coaching has a huge impact. There was a recent article that stated the Colts start breaking down opponents blitzes on the Thursday 10 days before the game. When we finish a game the coaches have every blitz that the team we are about to face has done in the last 2 years set up on a film ready to be studied) but this offensive line is gelling into something special and I never want to go back to the shit show we have lived with for the last umteen years' Great pick because the line is playing so well. It’s taken forever to get here.

[Chromeburn]

Gimme a break - you're talking about showing Ballard the door? Why, because he's improved virtually every facet of this team while saving tons of cap space for the future? What would you have done differently? Please be specific with player names.

Let me list for you the things he's done off the top of my head in the short time he's been here:

2017 Draft - Using an inherited scouting staff, and on short notice, still picked up three starters (Hooker, Mack, Walker), three backups (Wilson, Hairston, Stewart). Two ugly misses (Basham and Banner), but unlike most he didn't keep them around making the situation worse in the hope of saving face. When all is said and done, most teams will have at least two ugly misses in any given draft. Ballard just acknowledged his sooner than most.

2018 Draft - Nearly every pick has made serious contributions, except Lewis/Cain (injured) and Fountain (practice squad). I doubt any other team had a better batting average. Seven games in and we already have two high level starters (Nelson and Leonard) from this draft.

2018 free agency - Signed Ebron, Autry and Miller to cap friendly deals. Jury still out on Grant. Struck out on Howard, but again damage was small ($1-2 million) and cut bait quickly to minimize damage.

Traded for Jacoby Brissett in exchange for an underperforming WR from the prior regime (Dorsett)

Cut/traded multiple mediocre vets (Hankins/Anderson/Simon) in favor of much cheaper youth that are now outperforming those vets.

Kept several vets who have performed at or above their contracts (Hunt, Woods, Sheard, Desir), while not resigning others who are now disappointments with their new teams (Melvin, Moncrief)

Rebuilt two critical areas (offensive line and linebackers) into a strength, after years (and years) of underperformance.

Utilized team-friendly contract structures which incentivized performance and gave the team the flexibility to move on without consequence if things didn't work out.

Jettisoned Pagano, brought in Reich and new coaching staff. Notable embarrassment when McDaniels reneged on informal agreement, but Ballard accepted blame and rebounded well in getting Reich.

Jettisoned multiple failed draft picks/projects from the prior regime (TJ Green, Dorsett, Bond, George)

Those are the things I can think of off of the top of my head. The bottom line is that most of his moves have improved this team, and those that haven't didn't cause much damage. And you're talking about getting rid of this guy?

Well said, I think Ballard has done a ton already to prove he deserves time. Just hitting on draft picks is a huge step in the right direction.

I really am glad we got Reich over McDaniels. A former QB, a great offensive mind, a much better leader for a head coach. McDaniels is such a worm, reneging on his word just shows what his character is like. I was in Denver when he was there, he rubbed ALL the players wrong. All of them. No one liked him, guys didnt want to play for him. I remember talking to one of their players out one night, a DB I think, and he said McDaniels was a dodgy pos who would duck you in hallways rather than talk to you. You can come up with all the great routes and schemes you want, but if your players hate you, you’re not doing much. Gruden is the only other coach I can think of that is so despised by his players.

[rm1369]

Any talk of firing Ballard next year (or whenever) is crazy. I’ve been a critic of some of his moves, but even I see the good in what he has done. And you have to give a GM a chance to implement their plan and their vision.

[Maniac]

Any talk of firing Ballard next year (or whenever) is crazy. I’ve been a critic of some of his moves, but even I see the good in what he has done. And you have to give a GM a chance to implement their plan and their vision.

Anyone calling for Ballard to be fired anytime soon are just ridiculously impatient.

[HoosierinFL]

I don't think Ballard has said he will build only thru the draft. It is his primary way and I think we all would agree that your core usually comes thru the draft. I understand how you come down on the side that Ballard will just sit on all this money but I disagree. It makes sense to me to wait until you know what you can address thru the draft before bringing in guys. As far as this being a slow way to build a team, I disagree. I don't think that bringing in 3-4 free agents last year would speed up this rebuild one bit. Can you name one team that was able to build a Super Bowl winner thru free agency. Free agents might make us an average team faster, but the object of this rebuild is Super Bowl wins. I for one am sick of one and done and making the playoff on the shoulders of one player. This is, in my mind, exactly what we should be doing right now. To be clear, I think we should and will spend some money next year.

That’s exactly what Grigson did: signed a bunch of free agents, made us a playoff team real fast, but a team with a mercenary culture that fizzled into mediocrity after a few years. When the struggles started, there was no team, just some guys ready to jump ship for greener pastures. You need a culture where guys are invested in being a Colt.

[omahacolt]

Anyone calling for Ballard to be fired anytime soon are just ridiculously impatient.

Say we are 6-10 this year and next with a healthy Luck? Would that be acceptable? I don’t think so.

I also don’t think that will happen but we got beat pretty easily by the jets

[Butter]

Say we are 6-10 this year and next with a healthy Luck? Would that be acceptable? I don’t think so.

I also don’t think that will happen but we got beat pretty easily by the jets

I agree on next season, but there are a lot of reasons this team has struggled early this year.

[Spike]

Gimme a break - you're talking about showing Ballard the door? Why, because he's improved virtually every facet of this team while saving tons of cap space for the future? What would you have done differently? Please be specific with player names.

Let me list for you the things he's done off the top of my head in the short time he's been here:

2017 Draft - Using an inherited scouting staff, and on short notice, still picked up three starters (Hooker, Mack, Walker), three backups (Wilson, Hairston, Stewart). Two ugly misses (Basham and Banner), but unlike most he didn't keep them around making the situation worse in the hope of saving face. When all is said and done, most teams will have at least two ugly misses in any given draft. Ballard just acknowledged his sooner than most.

2018 Draft - Nearly every pick has made serious contributions, except Lewis/Cain (injured) and Fountain (practice squad). I doubt any other team had a better batting average. Seven games in and we already have two high level starters (Nelson and Leonard) from this draft.

2018 free agency - Signed Ebron, Autry and Miller to cap friendly deals. Jury still out on Grant. Struck out on Howard, but again damage was small ($1-2 million) and cut bait quickly to minimize damage.

Traded for Jacoby Brissett in exchange for an underperforming WR from the prior regime (Dorsett)

Cut/traded multiple mediocre vets (Hankins/Anderson/Simon) in favor of much cheaper youth that are now outperforming those vets.

Kept several vets who have performed at or above their contracts (Hunt, Woods, Sheard, Desir), while not resigning others who are now disappointments with their new teams (Melvin, Moncrief)

Rebuilt two critical areas (offensive line and linebackers) into a strength, after years (and years) of underperformance.

Utilized team-friendly contract structures which incentivized performance and gave the team the flexibility to move on without consequence if things didn't work out.

Jettisoned Pagano, brought in Reich and new coaching staff. Notable embarrassment when McDaniels reneged on informal agreement, but Ballard accepted blame and rebounded well in getting Reich.

Jettisoned multiple failed draft picks/projects from the prior regime (TJ Green, Dorsett, Bond, George)

Those are the things I can think of off of the top of my head. The bottom line is that most of his moves have improved this team, and those that haven't didn't cause much damage. And you're talking about getting rid of this guy?

Fair enough, great points. I guess I am a little impatient and tired of wasting all of Luck's years. Colts have a lot of cap space and hopefully they use some of that money next year. I do love his draft this year.

[YDFL Commish]

Say we are 6-10 this year and next with a healthy Luck? Would that be acceptable? I don’t think so.

I also don’t think that will happen but we got beat pretty easily by the jets

Not going to happen. This team is still learning how to win. If we beat Oakland and do it without making critical mistakes, then this team may have finally turned the corner, of at least not beating themselves.

[VeveJones007]

Say we are 6-10 this year and next with a healthy Luck? Would that be acceptable? I don’t think so.

I also don’t think that will happen but we got beat pretty easily by the jets

A year and a half isn’t “soon” in the NFL.

[VeveJones007]

Not going to happen. This team is still learning how to win. If we beat Oakland and do it without making critical mistakes, then this team may have finally turned the corner, of at least not beating themselves.

The Colts will win the division next year, so I’m not even playing out a 6-10 2019 scenario.

[Maniac]

Say we are 6-10 this year and next with a healthy Luck? Would that be acceptable? I don’t think so.

I also don’t think that will happen but we got beat pretty easily by the jets

We are in year 2 of a rebuild, the first year of that rebuild where Ballard had his own scouting info to go by on the draft,a competent coaching staff to work with, and new offensive and defensive schemes.

If you didn't expect this year and possibly next to be rebuild years, then you aren't looking at things realistically. They even told you it would be a multi year process.

Ballard had a solid draft this year. It's possible with the weak division that with another solid draft and him ramping up FA spending that we could compete next year.

I'm not ready to axe the guy though because in a clear rebuild year that's exactly what we're seeing.

You've been a Ballard hater though, so it's not surprising that you are reacting how you are.

[omahacolt]

We are in year 2 of a rebuild, the first year of that rebuild where Ballard had his own scouting info to go by on the draft,a competent coaching staff to work with, and new offensive and defensive schemes.

If you didn't expect this year and possibly next to be rebuild years, then you aren't looking at things realistically. They even told you it would be a multi year process.

Ballard had a solid draft this year. It's possible with the weak division that with another solid draft and him ramping up FA spending that we could compete next year.

I'm not ready to axe the guy though because in a clear rebuild year that's exactly what we're seeing.

You've been a Ballard hater though, so it's not surprising that you are reacting how you are.
We have Andrew luck and play in a shitty division. That is the reality. Competing and winning this division should t take long at all.

I don’t hate Ballard. I just disagree with some of the moves. Or non moves. Taking 3 years to be competitive with a great qb is nonsense

[JAFF]

Say we are 6-10 this year and next with a healthy Luck? Would that be acceptable? I don’t think so.

I also don’t think that will happen but we got beat pretty easily by the jets

I think we should all get a grip and wait for the end of this season.

[JAFF]

We have Andrew luck and play in a shitty division. That is the reality. Competing and winning this division should t take long at all.

I don’t hate Ballard. I just disagree with some of the moves. Or non moves. Taking 3 years to be competitive with a great qb is nonsense

He got stuck with Pagano and NO qb last year. Last year needs to chucked out the window.

[Racehorse]

He got stuck with Pagano and NO qb last year. Last year needs to chucked out the window.

I see what you did there.

[JAFF]

I think the major rub on Ballard is the HUGE amount of cap space we are sitting on doing nothing. Many fans wanted more of it spent on free agents.

,

Because fans know so much about money and football. Not aimed at you sherck, but anyone. Was there one guy the Colts could have signed that would have made them instant contenders this season?

AND..... why would they sign with the Colts when NO ONE knew Luck would ever play again? I think that needs to be put into the equation.

[omahacolt]

Because fans know so much about money and football. Not aimed at you sherck, but anyone. Was there one guy the Colts could have signed that would have made them instant contenders this season?

AND..... why would they sign with the Colts when NO ONE knew Luck would ever play again? I think that needs to be put into the equation.

This is a football message board where people express their thoughts and opinions about the colts and football in general. You don’t seem to understand that or like it.

Why are you here? If we shouldn’t question the colts, seems like this would be a very boring place.

[sherck]

Because fans know so much about money and football. Not aimed at you sherck, but anyone. Was there one guy the Colts could have signed that would have made them instant contenders this season?

AND..... why would they sign with the Colts when NO ONE knew Luck would ever play again? I think that needs to be put into the equation.
One guy? That guy's name is:

Von Sammy Nate Trumaine Malcolm Miller Wakins Solder Johnson Butler

Sign THAT guy and we would have been a contender.

Walk Worthy,

[omahacolt]

I think we should all get a grip and wait for the end of this season.

Awesome. Then come back at the end of the year. Seriously why are you here?

[Chaka]

We have Andrew luck and play in a shitty division. That is the reality. Competing and winning this division should t take long at all.

I don’t hate Ballard. I just disagree with some of the moves. Or non moves. Taking 3 years to be competitive with a great qb is nonsense

Beating the teams in our division is nice, but what good is it if we get smoked in the playoffs by NE, KC or PIT? The underlying principle that I think is driving Ballard's decisionmaking is the idea that to be truly great you need a solid foundation of home-grown players.

[sherck]

As more discussion for "The Build:"

State of the Offensive Line

Wow, over the past two weeks, it has been a joy to be shown again what good offensive line play looks like! It has been SO long since the Colts had a line that could run block (not since the days of Edge) as well as it pass blocked (last time in about 2008ish?).

LT = Anthony Castonzo [8th season]
LG = Quinton Nelson [Rookie]
OC = Ryan Kelly [3rd season]
RG = Mark Glowinski [4th season]
RT = Braden Smith [Rookie]

Depth = Le’Raven Clark [3rd season], Denzelle Good [4th Season], Joe Haeg [3rd season]

That is a core of eight guys whom have now shown me that, sometime in the past couple of years, they could be trusted to play at a minimum of NFL Average during games. In today’s NFL environment with its lack of quality offensive linemen, that is a HUGE deal.

Contract Decisions Needed:

2019 = Glowinski (UFA), Good (UFA)
2020 = Castonzo (UFA), Clark (UFA), Haeg (UFA)
2021 = Kelly (UFA)
2022 = Smith (UFA)
2023 = Nelson (UFA) (assuming the 5th year option is exercised)

This is to say that while we have had two great games so far and I hope that will prove out for the rest of the season, the relentless tyrant of time marches on and we cannot rest on whom we have. We basically have to make a decision on one starter each season and then maintain quality depth behind them.

Glowinski will be 27 years old for 2019 and was a 4th round draft pick in 2015. He started 18 games for Seattle over the 2016/2017 seasons before losing his job after week 2 of 2017 and then being cut after week 15 of 2017 and was claimed off waivers the next day by the Colts. He is showing that he has perhaps found a home with us. If he continues to play well, we should be offering him a 4-year starter level contract at the end of the season.

Good? 7th round pick in 2015 who will be 28 years old for 2019. Starter material for us once upon a time but appears to have been supplanted and cannot stay healthy. Offer perhaps a depth 3-year contract and probably see him signed away based on his starting potential. Draft a rookie in 2019 in rounds 3 – 5 to replace him.

Castonzo will be 31 at the start of the 2019 season. Still in his “prime” as an Offensive Lineman but we need to start having a viable backup/succession plan in place because his ability to protect the blindside could start slipping at any minute. First five weeks of this season showed how valuable he is when he was not there. Pay the man.

Clark / Haeg. 3rd and 5th round choices in 2016. Again, have shown starter potential but either not the health or the consistency to be a long-term starter. Offer 3-year depth level contracts and know you will have to replace one or both of them. Draft 1 or 2 O-Linemen in the 5th round or before to do so.

Assuming Kelly, Smith and Nelson continue to look good, sign them when needed.

We have gotten lucky in 2018 with Smith showing that he can be a very viable RT as a rookie and Glowinski showing that he has above average starter capabilities. Those are great finds but also highlight that neither were the season starters at the spot and so the importance of quality depth is so critical.

Long post to say “Draft an O-line man in the early to middle rounds in EVERY draft!”

Walk Worthy,

[rm1369]

One guy? That guy's name is:

Von Sammy Nate Trumaine Malcolm Miller Wakins Solder Johnson Butler

Sign THAT guy and we would have been a contender.

Walk Worthy,

It’s amazing that there was not a single additional player available in free agency that could improve on a 2-5 team. I guess if a player doesn’t make you an instant super bowl contender they provide no value.

[Oldcolt]

Awesome. Then come back at the end of the year. Seriously why are you here?

Apparently to discuss football with you

[omahacolt]

Beating the teams in our division is nice, but what good is it if we get smoked in the playoffs by NE, KC or PIT? The underlying principle that I think is driving Ballard's decisionmaking is the idea that to be truly great you need a solid foundation of home-grown players.

Doesn’t have to be home grown but obviously that is ideal. Since rookie contracts are cheap and the best way to gain talent.

When you have a great qb, 3 drafts and a shit ton of cap space should put you in a position to compete with the best. How could it not be?

[ukcolt]

I wouldn't write off the prospect of us making the playoffs this year. I am not expecting to win big by any stretch of the imagination, but our division is so weak that we could yet sneak into the playoffs. The goal has to be to be a legitimate superbowl contender though, which we all realise is a long way off just yet.

[omahacolt]

Apparently to discuss football with you

Not really. He doesn’t want any thoughts or opinions until the year is over

[Chaka]

I think the major rub on Ballard is the HUGE amount of cap space we are sitting on doing nothing. Many fans wanted more of it spent on free agents.

I get it. I also get what Ballard is trying to do in establishing an identity before dropping a ton of cash on "high level" performers. We have signed 4 guys (2 per year) so far to "starter level" contracts (over $5m a year) and one more at $5m a year (Grant).

Of those four over $5m (Hankins, Sheard, Ebron, Autry), Hankins is the only one who has not worked out so far. Sheard and Ebron are delivering starter level performance and so has Autry when heathy.

I fully expect 2019 to be a bit different assuming that this trend continues for the rest of the season of a rising defense of talent (Leonard, Walker, Turay, Hunt, Hooker) and an offense that re-estabilishes itself as a top ten offense.

Those two things happen by the end of 2018, I fully expect the checkbook to be opened in 2019 with us bidding aggresively on veterans who will fit the culture and another draft class hopefully like 2018.

Anyway, I am glad Ballard is here and I am good with his plan. However, if he sits on $50m of cap space in 2019, my opinion will probably start turning.

Walk Worthy,

I certainly understand the gut-level feeling that Ballard missed an opportunity by not using the Colts available cap space - I mean, he had something like $50 million, why didn't he spend it? - but I don't think this thinking holds up to further scrutiny.

First, and as I’ve mentioned in many prior posts, it’s important to remember that the cap space hasn’t disappeared, so in that sense we haven’t lost any opportunities. The Colts will be free to use this cap space in the future, and will now have a competitive advantage over other teams since we have more that everyone else. So I think much of the fan frustration comes from the fact that people see other teams signing big name free agents, and get impatient want something to happen NOW without thinking long term. It’s fun to sign free agents!

One of great things about Ballard, at least in my view, is his resistance to these types of temptations. Generally speaking, you usually don’t get very far just following the herd – you need to find and exploit inefficiencies in the system (i.e. Moneyball) to get ahead. The inefficiency Ballard seems to have identified is financial discipline/wasting cap space. Here’s a quote he provided back in March at the outset of free agency:

“Financial discipline in this league, you don’t see that like you used to. I think it’s a good thing to have. Because what happens is these guys are re-tooling the roster every two years. You are signing all these free agents and then two years from now, you are seeing them all get cut and then they are back on the street again.”

Grigson seemed to have a more traditional view – aggressively add talent via free agency to maintain your competitiveness. I’m not sure he started this way, but I think he was a victim of his own early success, and bought in to his own press clippings about how great he was after the Luck/Hilton draft. Then, to try to maintain his early image, he got caught in the cycle of adding a bunch of older vets (like Cherilus, Landry, Donald Thomas, Heyward-Bey, Art Jones, Gore, Johnson). The double whammy was that his college talent evaluation was deficient after the Luck/Hilton draft (see. Werner, Dorsett, Green, D'Joun Smith, Trent Richardson trade, etc.). Eventually the whole thing collapsed on him. If Ballard stays true to his vision I don’t think that kind of thing will happen here.

The bottom line is it’s not all that different from fantasy football in the sense that every team has a set amount of money to spend, and the goal is to make the most of it. In this context, almost all good QBs are underpaid given their enormous influence on the outcome of games, so when you have one like Luck you keep them and you’ll automatically have a competitive advantage over most other teams. You can then go about assembling the rest of the team with your remaining cap space. Typically, if you sign a bunch of high end free agents you’ll quickly run out of cap space, just like in fantasy football.

So to succeed you need to develop your own players for at least two reasons: (1) rookie contracts are really good deals for teams and leave you with extra cap space to work with elsewhere, and (2) you usually can’t get elite players through free agency because their teams usually sign them before they hit the market, so you have to develop them internally. What’s left in free agency is a bunch of good players who demand to be paid like great players, a few disgruntled players, or formerly good players who are on the downside of their careers. Generally speaking, you don’t get great value with these type of players, which is why I think Ballard has referred to free agency as “fool’s gold.” The salary cap provides enough room to sign several of these players, but lots of teams overdo it thinking it can serve as a substitute for developing their own talent. It isn’t. Ballard views free agency as a supplement to home grown talent, but not a replacement. So he is focused on developing a group of young (and cheap) players, and once this is established will then look at free agency to add to those home grown players to put the Colts over the top. This whole strategy depends, of course, on his skill in drafting good players.

Related to this thinking, spending big on free agency is inconsistent with his plan to establish a team culture first. To me, this approach is more convincing on the defensive side of the ball, where we are primarily relying upon younger players. I think the culture on offense should mostly be already there given the established presence of vets like Luck, Hilton and Castonzo (I can’t speak to how much the culture of offense bleeds to the defense – I guess this would depend upon how much they interact on a daily basis). More from Ballard on this last March:

"We have to get some roster continuity with 10-to-12 players that are going to be Colts for a long time. Then you feel better about dipping into free agency and getting a guy. Not just good players, they need to be able to influence the locker room with their character. A culture needs to be built. A coach can do so much, but the players in that locker room build the culture that you want, with their work ethic, with the standards that they set. We have to get more players like that in our locker room."

So, bottom line, I understand the frustration with Ballard’s lack of spending on free agency to this point, and the desire for the immediate gratification that comes with it. However, I think patience will be rewarded and Ballard’s focus on a long term, sustainable approach will serve us well.

By the way, I did NOT intend this post to be so long, so I apologize.

[Oldcolt]

It’s amazing that there was not a single additional player available in free agency that could improve on a 2-5 team. I guess if a player doesn’t make you an instant super bowl contender they provide no value.

There were players that could improve us. But by how much? And would they be here as part of a Super Bowl team? The object is not to be mediocre vs bad this year. I think the object is to find impact players to build around. I don't care about being 3-4 or even 4-3 this year. If those players could turn us into a 6-1 or 7-0 team (what this build is aiming for) sign me up. I wish someone would tell me who we should have spent money on to put us over the hump.

[FatDT]

Chaka your passion is admirable but no one is reading all that shit. This isn't a 300 level English Comp class. FFS.

[rm1369]

Beating the teams in our division is nice, but what good is it if we get smoked in the playoffs by NE, KC or PIT? The underlying principle that I think is driving Ballard's decisionmaking is the idea that to be truly great you need a solid foundation of home-grown players.

Experience? Does that no longer have value?

The idea that you have to spend 2-3 years drafting before any free agents have value is complete and utter BS. Signing free agents affects two things with the draft:

1) it increases competition for roster and, most importantly, starting spots. Is competition a bad thing now too?

2) it lowers your draft position by making you win more games. But when I have said Ballard has knowingly sacrificed wins this year (soft tank?) by his moves or that his methods were making the rebuild longer I’m certain you are one that has told me that’s not the case.

So other than decreasing competition or decreasing wins (and therefore increasing draft position) why do you think free agents keep you from building through the draft?

[VeveJones007]

As more discussion for "The Build:"

State of the Offensive Line

Wow, over the past two weeks, it has been a joy to be shown again what good offensive line play looks like! It has been SO long since the Colts had a line that could run block (not since the days of Edge) as well as it pass blocked (last time in about 2008ish?).

LT = Anthony Castonzo [8th season]
LG = Quinton Nelson [Rookie]
OC = Ryan Kelly [3rd season]
RG = Mark Glowinski [4th season]
RT = Braden Smith [Rookie]

Depth = Le’Raven Clark [3rd season], Denzelle Good [4th Season], Joe Haeg [3rd season]

That is a core of eight guys whom have now shown me that, sometime in the past couple of years, they could be trusted to play at a minimum of NFL Average during games. In today’s NFL environment with its lack of quality offensive linemen, that is a HUGE deal.

Contract Decisions Needed:

2019 = Glowinski (UFA), Good (UFA)
2020 = Castonzo (UFA), Clark (UFA), Haeg (UFA)
2021 = Kelly (UFA)
2022 = Smith (UFA)
2023 = Nelson (UFA) (assuming the 5th year option is exercised)

This is to say that while we have had two great games so far and I hope that will prove out for the rest of the season, the relentless tyrant of time marches on and we cannot rest on whom we have. We basically have to make a decision on one starter each season and then maintain quality depth behind them.

Glowinski will be 27 years old for 2019 and was a 4th round draft pick in 2015. He started 18 games for Seattle over the 2016/2017 seasons before losing his job after week 2 of 2017 and then being cut after week 15 of 2017 and was claimed off waivers the next day by the Colts. He is showing that he has perhaps found a home with us. If he continues to play well, we should be offering him a 4-year starter level contract at the end of the season.

Good? 7th round pick in 2015 who will be 28 years old for 2019. Starter material for us once upon a time but appears to have been supplanted and cannot stay healthy. Offer perhaps a depth 3-year contract and probably see him signed away based on his starting potential. Draft a rookie in 2019 in rounds 3 – 5 to replace him.

Castonzo will be 31 at the start of the 2019 season. Still in his “prime” as an Offensive Lineman but we need to start having a viable backup/succession plan in place because his ability to protect the blindside could start slipping at any minute. First five weeks of this season showed how valuable he is when he was not there. Pay the man.

Clark / Haeg. 3rd and 5th round choices in 2016. Again, have shown starter potential but either not the health or the consistency to be a long-term starter. Offer 3-year depth level contracts and know you will have to replace one or both of them. Draft 1 or 2 O-Linemen in the 5th round or before to do so.

Assuming Kelly, Smith and Nelson continue to look good, sign them when needed.

We have gotten lucky in 2018 with Smith showing that he can be a very viable RT as a rookie and Glowinski showing that he has above average starter capabilities. Those are great finds but also highlight that neither were the season starters at the spot and so the importance of quality depth is so critical.

Long post to say “Draft an O-line man in the early to middle rounds in EVERY draft!”

Walk Worthy,

If an OT is clearly BPA in the 2019 1st round, I'm absolutely on board with that pick. Of course, I would prefer it to be a great pass rusher, but that's why I qualified it as BPA.

[Chaka]

Chaka your passion is admirable but no one is reading all that shit. This isn't a 300 level English Comp class. FFS.

Then feel free to ignore it, but that's kind of the problem here. I see a lot of the same complaints over and over (Ballard's wasting Luck's best years, Ballard failed to spend on free agency, etc.), and unfortunately the explanation for why he might be doing this can't be laid out in a tweet-long response (or if it can, I'm not a skilled enough writer to do it).

[sherck]

Chaka your passion is admirable but no one is reading all that shit. This isn't a 300 level English Comp class. FFS.
I did.

I guess I am a nobody.....




Sigh...... :)




Walk Worthy,

[VeveJones007]

I wouldn't write off the prospect of us making the playoffs this year. I am not expecting to win big by any stretch of the imagination, but our division is so weak that we could yet sneak into the playoffs. The goal has to be to be a legitimate superbowl contender though, which we all realise is a long way off just yet.

I think they missed their chance with all those close losses the first month of the season. If they had 1-2 more wins at this point, I would like their odds a lot better. It'll probably take 9 wins to take the South. This team isn't good enough to go 8-2 over 10 games.

[Chaka]

Experience? Does that no longer have value?

The idea that you have to spend 2-3 years drafting before any free agents have value is complete and utter BS. Signing free agents affects two things with the draft:

1) it increases competition for roster and, most importantly, starting spots. Is competition a bad thing now too?

2) it lowers your draft position by making you win more games. But when I have said Ballard has knowingly sacrificed wins this year (soft tank?) by his moves or that his methods were making the rebuild longer I’m certain you are one that has told me that’s not the case.

So other than decreasing competition or decreasing wins (and therefore increasing draft position) why do you think free agents keep you from building through the draft?

Nothing prevents using free agency, and I'm certain we will do so, but Ballard's made it clear that he wants to build an internal culture first.

I'll also ask you the same question that I've asked several others on this board in response to their complaints - it's easy enough to complain, but please be a bit more specific: who do you believe that Ballard should have signed from last year's available free agency pool that would have solved the problems you're complaining about?

[rm1369]

Then feel free to ignore it, but that's kind of the problem here. I see a lot of the same complaints over and over (Ballard's wasting Luck's best years, Ballard failed to spend on free agency, etc.), and unfortunately the explanation for why he might be doing this can't be laid out in a tweet-long response (or if it can, I'm not a skilled enough writer to do it).

Its possible to understand the reasons Ballard gives yet still disagree with them. I understand perfectly what Ballard says are the reasons. I also understand many that agreed with his methods didn’t expect to be sitting at 2-5 yet now act like of course this was the plan all along.

[rm1369]

Nothing prevents using free agency, and I'm certain we will do so, but Ballard's made it clear that he wants to build an internal culture first.

I'll also ask you the same question that I've asked several others on this board in response to their complaints - it's easy enough to complain, but please be a bit more specific: who do you believe that Ballard should have signed from last year's available free agency pool that would have solved the problems you're complaining about?

I won’t play the who should he have signed game. It’s a game that’s impossible to win and you know it. The team had the third pick in the draft last year and are currently 2-5. The idea there weren’t players available that could help this team is ridiculous.

I guess I’m just someone that believes it’s hard to build a winning culture through losing. And I believe experience counts. Especially when you also have a very inexperienced coaching staff.

[VeveJones007]

I won’t play the who should he have signed game. It’s a game that’s impossible to win and you know it. The team had the third pick in the draft last year and are currently 2-5. The idea there weren’t players available that could help this team is ridiculous.

I guess I’m just someone that believes it’s hard to build a winning culture through losing. And I believe experience counts. Especially when you also have a very inexperienced coaching staff.

Devil's advocate: aren't a lot of players getting experience this season when they would have been blocked by free agent vets? By last count, Colts had second most snap counts among rookies in the league.

[albany ed]

Personally, I feel this team is leaps and bounds beyond last years' team. I only remember about 6 or 7 plays in the entire season last year to get excited about, but this year, they've been competitive in almost every game. Even the best teams have a game or two where they look bad, so I don't hold that against them. Another successful draft this spring and some key free agent signings and this team will return to the top of the division and in the hunt for the Super Bowl. And, along the way, they'll be fun to watch and that's good enough for me.

[Oldcolt]

Its possible to understand the reasons Ballard gives yet still disagree with them. I understand perfectly what Ballard says are the reasons. I also understand many that agreed with his methods didn’t expect to be sitting at 2-5 yet now act like of course this was the plan all along.

I see your point and I think it is valid. For me the weight of the argument lands on the side of doing what Ballard is doing but it’s not like it’s 100%. It’s close enough that you could absolutely turn out to be correct. As far as our record goes, I was never concerned about it for this year. I wanted improvements, especially along the offensive line. If the line wasn’t gelling with all that Ballard has thrown at it I believe you would have a legitimate bitch. He threw resources at it and he did a damn good job of fixing it. Add to the fact that we actually are getting to the quarterback without blitzes and for the first time almost ever we have a defense that creates turnovers. I’m very pleased at where we are and at in this rebuild

[Maniac]

We have Andrew luck and play in a shitty division. That is the reality. Competing and winning this division should t take long at all.

I don’t hate Ballard. I just disagree with some of the moves. Or non moves. Taking 3 years to be competitive with a great qb is nonsense

Competing just because we are in a shitty division isn't much to brag about. I would rather them build the team to where we can compete for championships for the longer term, not just AFC south divisions.

But no matter what you're competing for, it takes more than a year or two to overhaul a team and build it correctly. They changed defensive and offensive systems. They have to retool the roster not only for talent, but also for fits for that scheme, and that takes time. The fact that in year two people are complaining that it's not quick enough is just ridiculous, and like I mentioned, this was the first year with their own scouting staff and info from that.

You've been pretty critical of Ballard. He's made mistakes here and there, but from the looks of it, he had a very solid draft in his first one with his own staff. I think he'll ramp up things in free agency now that there is a better core on this team.

[FatDT]

Everyone is polarized these days. The truth is, outside of Spike (who is known to go off the emotional deep end before reeling it back in) no one is calling for Ballard to be fired. Everyone wants him to succeed.

What gets obnoxious is the attempts to shout down arguable criticism. Ballard has made some good moves/non-moves, and some bad ones. Some of the moves/non-moves that seemed to be bad are showing signs that perhaps they were actually good. Some of us on either side will be wrong, and if we are grown-ups we will admit it. Ballard's plan will take time, and it is fun to discuss and debate while we wait to see how it goes.

What isn't fun is dealing with arguments like "You're just a hater" or "Go root for another team if you hate the Colts so much" or "There's a reason he's a GM and you're just a guy typing on a computer". These 'arguments' are lazy bullshit.

1 - Criticism is not hate. It is largely born out of a desire to see the team do well, and overcome the same pitfalls that plague them every year.

2 - GMs and other "professionals" make dumbass decisions all the time. The Raiders gave Gruden a 10 year guaranteed contract. Gruden traded Mack away and then complained that pass rushers are hard to find. The Cowboys gave Gruden a 1st for a fake WR1 with bad hands on his way to being a bust. Ryan Grigson was a GM for 5 years. Matt Millen was a GM. The Browns themselves have dozens of examples of professionals that sucked and got fired. The Giants are a mess because of bad decisions by their coaching staff and front office. The Seahawks were almost a dynasty but they got rid of good players and now they suck.

"Appeal to Authority" is literally a logical fallacy and therefore is a bad and dumbass argument every time.

Everyone here is a Colts fan. We can argue. I can call you a dipshit and you can call me a fag and we will be fine because we are all still Colts fans that want to see the team do well. Disagreement is just part of the deal. It's a lot easier to disagree when we are winning and it suddenly seems a lot more serious and emotional when we suck. But it's just a football discussion board. Debate ideas, and if you want name call like children. But trying to silence each other seems like the wrong road to take.

[Oldcolt]

People care so they get pissed. Gotta love that there is a place like this for us to hang out

[HoosierinFL]

I wouldn't write off the prospect of us making the playoffs this year. I am not expecting to win big by any stretch of the imagination, but our division is so weak that we could yet sneak into the playoffs. The goal has to be to be a legitimate superbowl contender though, which we all realise is a long way off just yet.

As of now, I'm expecting us to sneak out a win in this division by going on a winning streak. And then we'll have a healthy team and shock everyone by crunching the Patriots in Foxborough.

[rm1369]

Devil's advocate: aren't a lot of players getting experience this season when they would have been blocked by free agent vets? By last count, Colts had second most snap counts among rookies in the league.

It’s a valid question. My thinking is that guys should get on the field when they earn it. If you are trying to build a winning culture isn’t that a huge part of it? And it’s a huge part of coaching to be able to identify the guys that deserve to be on the field or show them why they aren’t good enough yet.

Either way, rarely can you both give young guys tons of time and win. And that’s where I feel like Chaka and a few others are simply being intellectually dishonest. The goal posts keep getting moved. Ballard sacrificed this season to get all of these young guys time, several clearly before they are ready. And he unnecessarily held other positions open to do it again next year. If you are fine with that, that’s ok. I just disagree. But it would be nice if guys quit denying that’s what happened.

[Oldcolt]

It all depends on what you want out of the season whether you think Ballard sacrificed it. I want Super Bowl wins so to me anything that isn't part of getting us there is a sacrifice. To me, signing players so we can better, maybe be the worst team in the playoffs at best, is something I'm not interested in so to me Ballard sacrificed nothing. Let me also be clear that I would love to be the worst team in the playoffs this year. Difference to me is that if we do it this year it will be with young players who should be getting better, not veterans who are playing the best they ever will.

[VeveJones007]

It’s a valid question. My thinking is that guys should get on the field when they earn it. If you are trying to build a winning culture isn’t that a huge part of it? And it’s a huge part of coaching to be able to identify the guys that deserve to be on the field or show them why they aren’t good enough yet.

Either way, rarely can you both give young guys tons of time and win. And that’s where I feel like Chaka and a few others are simply being intellectually dishonest. The goal posts keep getting moved. Ballard sacrificed this season to get all of these young guys time, several clearly before they are ready. And he unnecessarily held other positions open to do it again next year. If you are fine with that, that’s ok. I just disagree. But it would be nice if guys quit denying that’s what happened.

1) Look up my preseason predictions and my take on what they did in UFA. I have never moved the goal posts on what 2018 is about. Development & Evaluation. The team's record is secondary.
2) I never denied that's what happened, and if you've listened to Ballard, he told you this was his plan since the end of last season.

Your strategy is perfectly fine, but so is Ballard's. It all comes down to execution. It's way too early to know for sure.

[Puck]

It’s a valid question. My thinking is that guys should get on the field when they earn it. If you are trying to build a winning culture isn’t that a huge part of it? And it’s a huge part of coaching to be able to identify the guys that deserve to be on the field or show them why they aren’t good enough yet.

Either way, rarely can you both give young guys tons of time and win. And that’s where I feel like Chaka and a few others are simply being intellectually dishonest. The goal posts keep getting moved. Ballard sacrificed this season to get all of these young guys time, several clearly before they are ready. And he unnecessarily held other positions open to do it again next year. If you are fine with that, that’s ok. I just disagree. But it would be nice if guys quit denying that’s what happened.


Why draft them if your not going to give them a chance? Might as well trade all your picks for FA's

[FatDT]

Why draft them if your not going to give them a chance? Might as well trade all your picks for FA's

Why keep any player not on a rookie contract? Just trade away all good players over 25 for draft picks and bring in young players every year. Cap space forever, building culture forever.

Wait that sounds almost as dumb as your post, nevermind.

[Chaka]

Its possible to understand the reasons Ballard gives yet still disagree with them. I understand perfectly what Ballard says are the reasons. I also understand many that agreed with his methods didn’t expect to be sitting at 2-5 yet now act like of course this was the plan all along.

No question you are right - you are perfectly entitled to disagree with the approach, and I think you have defended your position well. I don't really get the last sentence of your post, if it was directed at me. I've never conceded that the "plan all along" was to be 2-5 or anything close to it. My expectation was (and remains) that while we might sacrifice some minor short term potential improvement by not signing a bunch of free agents, the long term benefits are well worth it and the Colts should nevertheless be competitive in all of the games they played. I think this has largely been true.

I am disappointed by the 2-5 current record, but the record doesn't tell the whole story and I haven't given up hope for this year. I assume you’ve seen the same games as me – do you think we’re watching a 2-5 team? (and please don’t quote Parcells on me). I think they’re better than that, and potentially a LOT better than that, but I’m not going to lose any sleep over it because I think we’re on the right track even if our record isn’t that great at the moment.

[Chaka]

I won’t play the who should he have signed game. It’s a game that’s impossible to win and you know it. The team had the third pick in the draft last year and are currently 2-5. The idea there weren’t players available that could help this team is ridiculous.

I guess I’m just someone that believes it’s hard to build a winning culture through losing. And I believe experience counts. Especially when you also have a very inexperienced coaching staff.

I disagree, and I’m not trying to trap you into some sort of logic game. I simply think its incomplete to simply complain without offering a solution - empty complaints are just expressions of frustration, easy to make but not very convincing from an analysis standpoint.

To answer your comment, there are ALWAYS players who are available that could have helped almost any team, but the trick is finding them. You’re more likely to make a mistake, and free agency mistakes can be extremely costly (yet another reason to focus on developing your own players). Ballard’s track record on his free agency signings has been pretty good – not a lot of splashy free agents signed, but a high percentage of them have been significant contributors.

As far as "experience" if concerned, what kind of experience are you referring to? That's a buzz word that doesn't have a lot of meaning without context. Not all experience is the same, and some of it is quite bad. Are you talking about the kind of "experience" that Le'Veon Bell or Terrell Pryor bring? What about Matt Slauson or Denico Autry experience?

[Pez]

As of now, I'm expecting us to sneak out a win in this division by going on a winning streak. And then we'll have a healthy team and shock everyone by crunching the Patriots in Foxborough.

This is the kind of stuff I go through every Sunday at 12:30 pm. That's just the kind of fan i would like to be. If sports fans were logical we would all be Rams fans.

Do I really think we will win the division, well, no, but it's not as if it's completely impossible.

[Chaka]

It’s a valid question. My thinking is that guys should get on the field when they earn it. If you are trying to build a winning culture isn’t that a huge part of it? And it’s a huge part of coaching to be able to identify the guys that deserve to be on the field or show them why they aren’t good enough yet.

Either way, rarely can you both give young guys tons of time and win. And that’s where I feel like Chaka and a few others are simply being intellectually dishonest. The goal posts keep getting moved. Ballard sacrificed this season to get all of these young guys time, several clearly before they are ready. And he unnecessarily held other positions open to do it again next year. If you are fine with that, that’s ok. I just disagree. But it would be nice if guys quit denying that’s what happened.

Either way, rarely can you both give young guys tons of time and win. And that’s where I feel like Chaka and a few others are simply being intellectually dishonest. The goal posts keep getting moved. Ballard sacrificed this season to get all of these young guys time, several clearly before they are ready. And he unnecessarily held other positions open to do it again next year. If you are fine with that, that’s ok. I just disagree. But it would be nice if guys quit denying that’s what happened.

Because I don't agree with you I'm intellectually dishonest? That's silly - I always try to explain my position in terms of actual information. Please point out my prior posts where you think I'm not being forthright or "moving the goalposts" on you. My position has always been that a healthy Luck gives us a chance to win almost any game - perhaps our chances could be slightly improved by signing a bunch of free agents, but I'll trade a few extra mistakes in exchange for the long term benefits that I think following Ballard's plan will bring.

And by the way, what players is Ballard playing "clearly before they are ready"? It appears to me that the areas of greatest concern are those that are manned largely by players that have been in the league for several years: CB and WR. Most of the rookies have performed admirably, and a review of the stats reveals that our defense is actually far better statistically than it was with all of the old guard you argued so strongly that we should have kept (Hankins, etc.). Despite our 2-5 record, we've actually scored more points (189) than we've given up (185).

Simply put, while your comments often reflect commonly held sentiments about the Colts, they aren't supported by the facts. Now THAT is intellectually dishonest, and that's why I've been pressing you to provide me with real-world information that we can all analyze in support of your position.

[JAFF]

Competing just because we are in a shitty division isn't much to brag about. I would rather them build the team to where we can compete for championships for the longer term, not just AFC south divisions.

.

We weren't close to competing last year in a shitty division. Now we are becoming less shitty. And the team has some excitement. Last years colts were more predictable than a year old calendar.

Now I about pooped my pants when Luck was leading the way on the double reverse, but it was cool when he check up and realized, HOLY FUCK what am I DOING???????

I like watching this team win or lose this year. It's fun, they put it all out there. Last year was god awful

[JAFF]

This is a football message board where people express their thoughts and opinions about the colts and football in general. You don’t seem to understand that or like it.

Why are you here? If we shouldn’t question the colts, seems like this would be a very boring place.

So put away logic, reason and facts. Ok, I can roll with that.

[JAFF]

One guy? That guy's name is:

Von Sammy Nate Trumaine Malcolm Miller Wakins Solder Johnson Butler

Sign THAT guy and we would have been a contender.

Walk Worthy,

Yeah, Nate Solder has turned the Giants around. Well, he's turned Eli, around as in LOOK OUT ELI!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[rm1369]

Because I don't agree with you I'm intellectually dishonest? That's silly - I always try to explain my position in terms of actual information. Please point out my prior posts where you think I'm not being forthright or "moving the goalposts" on you. My position has always been that a healthy Luck gives us a chance to win almost any game - perhaps our chances could be slightly improved by signing a bunch of free agents, but I'll trade a few extra mistakes in exchange for the long term benefits that I think following Ballard's plan will bring.

And by the way, what players is Ballard playing "clearly before they are ready"? It appears to me that the areas of greatest concern are those that are manned largely by players that have been in the league for several years: CB and WR. Most of the rookies have performed admirably, and a review of the stats reveals that our defense is actually far better statistically than it was with all of the old guard you argued so strongly that we should have kept (Hankins, etc.). Despite our 2-5 record, we've actually scored more points (189) than we've given up (185).

Simply put, while your comments often reflect commonly held sentiments about the Colts, they aren't supported by the facts. Now THAT is intellectually dishonest, and that's why I've been pressing you to provide me with real-world information that we can all analyze in support of your position.

Chaka, I’ll apologize for the intellectual dishonesty comment. I did go back and reread some of your posts and while your comments lead me to believe you expected better than 2-5 at this point you haven’t specifically stated such. My memory apparently let me down again and I do apologize.

As to the rest I’ll comment shortly when I get a chance, but I did want to get the apology posted.

[Puck]

Why keep any player not on a rookie contract? Just trade away all good players over 25 for draft picks and bring in young players every year. Cap space forever, building culture forever.

Wait that sounds almost as dumb as your post, nevermind.

I was referring to what RM posted about not developing players

[omahacolt]

So put away logic, reason and facts. Ok, I can roll with that.

What the fuck is so illogical with wanting the colts to field the best team possible? Or not liking losses to the Texans and jets? The fact is we are 2-5 and you want to act like that is some fucking accomplishment.

Don’t sit on the fucking fence and ridicule people for having opinions.

[JAFF]

Awesome. Then come back at the end of the year. Seriously why are you here?

To annoy you. You really fucked up sometime in the last year for me to show up and bother you. This is Karma. I should just change my name to Karma. I'm here because you want to rule a message board and discourage anyone who disagrees with you force them to join you on your tiny love me island.

What? Too much truth? DOH!

Here's the thing. That was last year, this is NOW.

I like Ballard. He took the leap. The leap of faith that Luck would return and be, well, LUCK. What, I've got to keep Pagano? Ok, that won't stop me.

Now he's got two drafts and the talent looks really good. And the guys he keeps finding to plug into the gaps that have kept forming. He wanted his dream, he had a chance here and JUMPED into the abyss that was the Colts QB shit storm. I don't know what goes on in Jim Irsay's brain (who does), but he stuck Ballard with a terrible head coach and he took it on. Last year was so bad, even I could tell you what play was coming and I don't know squat about coaching.

That was then, this is NOW!

Yeah, the Colts have lost more games than they have won. But they didn't take it right between the eyes, they made every team bust their ass to beat them.

I don't give a damn about last year. There is a new coach and he's going to roll the dice and throw caution to the wind. WHY NOT? What's the worst that can happen? They lose. They have been doing that. Now they will learn how to win. And you don't do that by playing safe.

[JAFF]

What the fuck is so illogical with wanting the colts to field the best team possible? Or not liking losses to the Texans and jets? The fact is we are 2-5 and you want to act like that is some fucking accomplishment.

Don’t sit on the fucking fence and ridicule people for having opinions.

You can have an opinion. I am not forced to accept it. It's a right insured by the Constitution of the United States.

Oh, and I'm not sitting on a fence. I agree with Ballard's methods

[Chaka]

Chaka, I’ll apologize for the intellectual dishonesty comment. I did go back and reread some of your posts and while your comments lead me to believe you expected better than 2-5 at this point you haven’t specifically stated such. My memory apparently let me down again and I do apologize.

As to the rest I’ll comment shortly when I get a chance, but I did want to get the apology posted.

Very cool of you to say, but unnecessary as I took no real offense at your comments even if my response sounded like I did (getting across the right tone in writing is always difficult – I guess that’s what emojis are for, but I can’t bring myself to use them).

I can save you the trouble of looking through my old posts – whether I said it or not, I did expect the Colts to be better than 2-5 by now. But I don’t think I’ve said anything since then that’s inconsistent with that. I am disappointed by the record, and I think we’re better than that. I never felt this year had to be a rebuilding year where we just had to accept the fact we’d have a losing record, particularly since we have the best QB in the division. Parcell’s famous statement that “you are what your record says you are” sounds nice coming from him, but it’s not true – particularly over a period of seven games. There is a world of difference between the Colts and the Bills, even though they have the same W-L record at this point. Just look at the game last Sunday.

That said, I’m looking forward to your response to my comments.

[1965southpaw]

We weren't close to competing last year in a shitty division. Now we are becoming less shitty. And the team has some excitement. Last years colts were more predictable than a year old calendar.

Now I about pooped my pants when Luck was leading the way on the double reverse, but it was cool when he check up and realized, HOLY FUCK what am I DOING???????

I like watching this team win or lose this year. It's fun, they put it all out there. Last year was god awful

Frank was Mic'd up for the Buffalo game and on the Colts site on Facebook they posted excerpts from the game. If you have a chance, look it up....it's very cool....includes his chit chat w/Jim Kelly before the start of the game.....Anyway, on the Play you mention above, when Andrew comes off the field he says to Frank..."I wanted to punch it in" and Frank says, "If you'd have tried I would have body slammed you. You made the right decision". It was cute....the two of them seem to have a nice chemistry.

[omahacolt]

To annoy you. You really fucked up sometime in the last year for me to show up and bother you. This is Karma. I should just change my name to Karma. I'm here because you want to rule a message board and discourage anyone who disagrees with you force them to join you on your tiny love me island.

What? Too much truth? DOH!

Here's the thing. That was last year, this is NOW.

I like Ballard. He took the leap. The leap of faith that Luck would return and be, well, LUCK. What, I've got to keep Pagano? Ok, that won't stop me.

Now he's got two drafts and the talent looks really good. And the guys he keeps finding to plug into the gaps that have kept forming. He wanted his dream, he had a chance here and JUMPED into the abyss that was the Colts QB shit storm. I don't know what goes on in Jim Irsay's brain (who does), but he stuck Ballard with a terrible head coach and he took it on. Last year was so bad, even I could tell you what play was coming and I don't know squat about coaching.

That was then, this is NOW!

Yeah, the Colts have lost more games than they have won. But they didn't take it right between the eyes, they made every team bust their ass to beat them.

I don't give a damn about last year. There is a new coach and he's going to roll the dice and throw caution to the wind. WHY NOT? What's the worst that can happen? They lose. They have been doing that. Now they will learn how to win. And you don't do that by playing safe.

You are here because of me? If you are trying to catch some dick, you might want to try dam out. Probably have better luck.

Regardless, the point is, most of us aren’t going to wait until the season is over to have opinions. Get used to it or fuck off. Make better posts

[JAFF]

You are here because of me? If you are trying to catch some dick, you might want to try dam out. Probably have better luck.

Regardless, the point is, most of us aren’t going to wait until the season is over to have opinions. Get used to it or fuck off. Make better posts

You get a grip. Looking for dick? From you? Why would I think you have one?

[smitty46953]

Motel 6 left light on for both of you … :rolleyes:

[JAFF]

Frank was Mic'd up for the Buffalo game and on the Colts site on Facebook they posted excerpts from the game. If you have a chance, look it up....it's very cool....includes his chit chat w/Jim Kelly before the start of the game.....Anyway, on the Play you mention above, when Andrew comes off the field he says to Frank..."I wanted to punch it in" and Frank says, "If you'd have tried I would have body slammed you. You made the right decision". It was cute....the two of them seem to have a nice chemistry.

Frank dealt with Jim Kelly and Peyton Manning. I don't think he's shy about anything

[JAFF]

Motel 6 left light on for both of you … :rolleyes:

Heartbreak hotel for him, I've got my own country mansion

[Racehorse]

I sure missed a lot today, lol.

As for my expectations for this year, I was hoping to win 10 games or more, but that is not likely going to happen. Does that make me disappointed in the team? No, because they are once again fun to watch. They are headed in the right direction, for a change. No more stupid formations on fourth down. Decent linebackers.
An occasional running game. Time for Luck in the pocket. Etc.

[omahacolt]

Motel 6 left light on for both of you … :rolleyes:

Was that their slogan? I always thought it was someone else.

[Chromeburn]

I sure missed a lot today, lol.

As for my expectations for this year, I was hoping to win 10 games or more, but that is not likely going to happen. Does that make me disappointed in the team? No, because they are once again fun to watch. They are headed in the right direction, for a change. No more stupid formations on fourth down. Decent linebackers.
An occasional running game. Time for Luck in the pocket. Etc.

Damn, ten games racehorse? You doubled my prediction. I think we are going in the right direction. Just need to start bringing things together. I like watching the young guys develop. I want a great team, not just a playoff team, but a team that can punk those cheats in Boston. I’ll sit though a couple bad seasons if I think we are going to get there.

[Butter]

Was that their slogan? I always thought it was someone else.

It is indeed.
https://youtu.be/-fZBo12LkpQ

[Chaka]

Well said, I think Ballard has done a ton already to prove he deserves time. Just hitting on draft picks is a huge step in the right direction.

I really am glad we got Reich over McDaniels. A former QB, a great offensive mind, a much better leader for a head coach. McDaniels is such a worm, reneging on his word just shows what his character is like. I was in Denver when he was there, he rubbed ALL the players wrong. All of them. No one liked him, guys didnt want to play for him. I remember talking to one of their players out one night, a DB I think, and he said McDaniels was a dodgy pos who would duck you in hallways rather than talk to you. You can come up with all the great routes and schemes you want, but if your players hate you, you’re not doing much. Gruden is the only other coach I can think of that is so despised by his players.

Interesting info. Setting aside the whole Colts-Patriots rivalry thing, you really have to wonder about a guy who would prefer to stay in a coordinator position instead of taking a head coaching position. Even if (as rumored) he's now being paid a head coach's salary as a coordinator, doesn't he have any desire to take on the challenge of being a head coach? It's not like he's waiting for a better opportunity - by screwing over the Colts he's forever damaged his trust with any other teams. He might be a smart guy and a good coordinator, but he's not a leader and I don't think he would make a good head coach.

[rm1369]

And by the way, what players is Ballard playing "clearly before they are ready"? It appears to me that the areas of greatest concern are those that are manned largely by players that have been in the league for several years: CB and WR. Most of the rookies have performed admirably, .........

You list CB as an obvious issue and I agree. However I don’t agree that it’s manned by vets. 67% of the snaps taken so far have been by 2nd year players. The two current snap leaders are 2nd year players. Desir is 3rd as a 5th year player. He meets the “been in the league several years” description you used. He accounts for 29% of the teams CB snaps. Milton accounts for the remaining 4%. He’s a 3 year vet. I’d say CB is a pretty young, inexperienced position and one that could have been upgraded.

You also mentioned WR. It’s another position that could have been upgraded, but it appears as if Ballard is holding it open for a draft pick. Grant on a 1 yr contract was the solution along with a bunch of young guys and the holdover Rogers.

LB is manned by a potential star in Leonard, an old journeyman in Goode, and several unspectacular young players. It was also an upgradeable position.



...a review of the stats reveals that our defense is actually far better statistically than it was with all of the old guard you argued so strongly that we should have kept (Hankins, etc.). Despite our 2-5 record, we've actually scored more points (189) than we've given up (185).

A review of the standings reveals the team is 2-5. The same record as last year. This is after getting its franchise QB back, improving its coaching, improving the O-line, improving the defense (apparently quite a bit), and improving the roster as a whole. My argument hasn’t been that Ballard hasn’t added talent, it’s that he was assembling a roster that wouldn’t win as much as it should. Too much forced youth, too much reliance on 1st and 2nd year players, too many holes left unfilled. Everything supposedly better, but same record - I’d say the facts back up my argument pretty well.

[Racehorse]

A review of the standings reveals the team is 2-5. The same record as last year. .

Look at the games last year:
Rams 46 Colts 9
Arizona 16 Colts 13
Colts 31The Freaking Browns Browns 28
Seattle 46 Colts 18
Colts 26 The Freaking Awful 49ers 23
Titans 36 Colts 22
Jax 27 Colts 0

You really think the team is not better this year?!?!?! We squeaked by the two worst teams in the league and got blown out by the others. This year, we have been competitive in every game. The corner has been turned, despite the record. They may not have learned how to win, but they sure have forgotten how to quit!

[rm1369]

Look at the games last year:
Rams 46 Colts 9
Arizona 16 Colts 13
Colts 31The Freaking Browns Browns 28
Seattle 46 Colts 18
Colts 26 The Freaking Awful 49ers 23
Titans 36 Colts 22
Jax 27 Colts 0

You really think the team is not better this year?!?!?! We squeaked by the two worst teams in the league and got blown out by the others. This year, we have been competitive in every game. The corner has been turned, despite the record. They may not have learned how to win, but they sure have forgotten how to quit!

Do I think the team is better? Absolutely. I’d much prefer this team and roster. Just the addition of Luck makes this year significantly better. Same for the subtraction of Pagano. That’s not at all the point though. Chaka says the facts don’t support my position. My position has been that Ballard knowingly punted on this season by releasing producing vets, not making more additions in free agency, and relying on so many young players. If everything is so much better, why hasn’t the team won as much as you or Chaka expected? Could it maybe be my point is valid? The roster was set with only the future in mind and not with competing this year. If you are ok with that great! I disagree with that approach and don’t believe it was necessary to build a future team. That doesn’t at all mean I hate everything Ballard or any change or that I want last years team back.

Let me add that if Luck had played last year (as he is this year) the record would have been better. If they had this years coaching staff last year, the record would have been better. Those two changes alone should be better than a 2-5 record. So what the hell am I missing? You say you were hoping for 10 wins. The season is going largely as I expected considering the issues I saw. Maybe, just maybe I was right about the roster? Whether or not this is the right path for the long term success of the team is admittedly a different question. But the discussion Chaka and I are having is about whether or not I have a leg to stand on about the roster building. I say the facts support me much better than it does those of you expecting a better record. That does not mean I want last years team back or that I hate everything Ballard has done.

[FatDT]

Saying Ballard "punted" on the season makes it sound like tanking. I don't think he's tanking. I think he is prioritizing building culture and getting the young guys experience, and accepting whatever comes in terms of wins. That much seems pretty obvious.

[rm1369]

Saying Ballard "punted" on the season makes it sound like tanking. I don't think he's tanking. I think he is prioritizing building culture and getting the young guys experience, and accepting whatever comes in terms of wins. That much seems pretty obvious.

I understand what you are saying. Let me clarify - I don’t think Ballard is specifically trying to loose, so I wouldn’t call in tanking. However, I believe he knows the team could be much better than it is this season and he was willing to sacrifice a competitive season for evaluation and, yes, to a lesser degree better draft position / capital. I don’t have some moral issue with that. I understand the thought process and I’ve said before that his job is to have a plan and follow it through. I respect that. My main disagreement has to do with the presence of Luck. Other than that I might agree with him. But where the average career is something like 3-4 years and your main asset (Luck) is one hit away from being your biggest liability (dead contract) I have a hard time taking the 3-4 year long view that Ballard is. And I don’t believe it is required for this team to become a contender.

[Chaka]

You list CB as an obvious issue and I agree. However I don’t agree that it’s manned by vets. 67% of the snaps taken so far have been by 2nd year players. The two current snap leaders are 2nd year players. Desir is 3rd as a 5th year player. He meets the “been in the league several years” description you used. He accounts for 29% of the teams CB snaps. Milton accounts for the remaining 4%. He’s a 3 year vet. I’d say CB is a pretty young, inexperienced position and one that could have been upgraded.

You also mentioned WR. It’s another position that could have been upgraded, but it appears as if Ballard is holding it open for a draft pick. Grant on a 1 yr contract was the solution along with a bunch of young guys and the holdover Rogers.

LB is manned by a potential star in Leonard, an old journeyman in Goode, and several unspectacular young players. It was also an upgradeable position.


A review of the standings reveals the team is 2-5. The same record as last year. This is after getting its franchise QB back, improving its coaching, improving the O-line, improving the defense (apparently quite a bit), and improving the roster as a whole. My argument hasn’t been that Ballard hasn’t added talent, it’s that he was assembling a roster that wouldn’t win as much as it should. Too much forced youth, too much reliance on 1st and 2nd year players, too many holes left unfilled. Everything supposedly better, but same record - I’d say the facts back up my argument pretty well.

Your point about CBs is fair – they are younger than I was thinking. Still no rookies though, and I don’t think it was unreasonable to expect last year’s high second rounder (Wilson) to step up and claim one of the CB positions. I also recall reading that Ballard explored resigning Melvin but was given a crazy price tag (something like 5 years / $50 million), and as I mentioned in another post, the 2018 free agent CB pool hasn’t proven to be very good at this early point. So perhaps this is one area where Ballard was content to take his lumps in the hopes that some of the young players like Wilson and Moore would emerge. This would be consistent with his strategy and does not equate to “sacrificing the season” – as I’ve said many times before, having Luck gives us a chance to win any game and a legitimate chance to win the division. The decision to focus on youth probably means that we won’t play quite as well as we would have with a bunch of free agent vets in the short term, but is a much better long term strategy.

On the WR issue, I'll just say that WR was way down the list of priorities this last offseason. While Grant's contract was for one year, I've always viewed it as sort of a "show me" contract where he could earn a second Colts contract if he played well, so I personally don't think Ballard was holding a place for a rookie. And let's not forget that Ballard did draft a couple of WRs.

Not sure why you bring up LBs. Leonard is a star and Walker has been great as well. If you got your wish and we addressed this issue in free agency, are you concerned at all that we perhaps wouldn't have ever drafted Leonard?

Lastly, your point about the team’s record is completely off base. The numbers absolutely do NOT back up your point – Racehorse’s post illustrated this perfectly. We were outscored 222 to 119 in the first seven games last year! We were thoroughly smoked by the better teams we played, and were only able to eke out victories against two of the worst teams in the league. The gap between our team and the better teams in the league has shrunken dramatically since last year, as evidenced by our performance in the games this year – we nearly beat the SB champs in their own stadium! By virtually any measurable statistic, we have improved by leaps and bounds over last year. And by the way, the improvement is on both offense and defense, so it’s certainly not all attributable to Luck. If your eyes don’t tell you this, and all you can see is our 2-5 record, then you need better glasses.

As to this last point, I should also mention that if you acknowledge that the talent level on the team has greatly increased, but your criticism is that the record doesn’t reflect this, then perhaps your beef is with Reich rather than Ballard. That would be another discussion, and another one where I would disagree with you, but it has no place in a discussion about Ballard’s performance.

[rm1369]

Your point about CBs is fair – they are younger than I was thinking. Still no rookies though, and I don’t think it was unreasonable to expect last year’s high second rounder (Wilson) to step up and claim one of the CB positions. I also recall reading that Ballard explored resigning Melvin but was given a crazy price tag (something like 5 years / $50 million), and as I mentioned in another post, the 2018 free agent CB pool hasn’t proven to be very good at this early point.

I don’t remember ever complaining about letting Melvin walk, only how young and thin Ballard left the position.

So perhaps this is one area where Ballard was content to take his lumps in the hopes that some of the young players like Wilson and Moore would emerge. This would be consistent with his strategy and does not equate to “sacrificing the season” ........

I agree with the first point - Ballard decided to take his lumps. I also agree it’s consistent with his strategy, but it’s one I disagree with. Does it equate to “sacrificing the season”? That one decision? No. That philosophy spread across the roster? Yes, to me it does.

.......- as I’ve said many times before, having Luck gives us a chance to win any game and a legitimate chance to win the division.

Agreed. And it’s why having the same record as last year illustrates my point. The single biggest factor in the Colts winning football games last year did not play. Do you think if Luck played last year the Colts finish 4-12? I sure as hell don’t. Do you think they would have finished 4-12 last year if they had this coaching staff instead of Pagano’s? I sure as hell don’t. So why the hell do you and Race keep harping on the fact the team looks better than last year? They fucking should!! They have a franchise QB playing instead of one acquired 6 days before his first start and they have a competent coaching staff. If you made no other changes than those two they would have won several more games IMO and if nothing else looked like a competent football team. Do you disagree?


decision to focus on youth probably means that we won’t play quite as well as we would have with a bunch of free agent vets in the short term.......

Finally, we agree on my first point. Ballard’s consistent strategy for building the team is the primary reason the Colts are 2-5. Yes they look better. Yes they perform better in many ways. But they have had a hard time winning. That’s a pretty damn accurate description of what happens with a youth movement in any sport I’m aware of. And it’s been the complaint I’ve had since I noticed it that you and several others have told my I’m wrong about. You admit you expected a better record. Race admits he expected a better record. Yet you both consistently tell me how I’m wrong and the facts don’t back me up. Then point to last years identical record and say, but we look better so therefore you are wrong. No, this is exactly what I expected. The team should look better. Just bring back Luck, switch the coaching staff, and make no other changes and the team would look significantly better. Stats would be better. That’s what good to great QB play and competent coaching will do. It’s why they are such huge factors in team success.

......but it is a much better long term strategy.

See now we disagree again. I absolutely agree that just signing old aging vets isn’t the solution, but let’s not pretend there is no middle ground. Adding several appropriately aged vets does not keep you from building a core. Players earning their spots, competing and learning from some vets doesn’t keep them from developing. Quite the contrary. In my view it’s one of the best ways to establishing a winning culture. Ballard has preached competition but his method and your description of his process seem to indicate it isn’t completely real. He doesn’t want a better player taking reps from Moore or Hairston. That’s not competition or a winning culture in my book.

On the WR issue, I'll just say that WR was way down the list of priorities this last offseason. While Grant's contract was for one year, I've always viewed it as sort of a "show me" contract where he could earn a second Colts contract if he played well, so I personally don't think Ballard was holding a place for a rookie. And let's not forget that Ballard did draft a couple of WRs.

I disagree that WR wasn’t a priority. It’s certainly wasn’t #1 and I’ll concede there were a lot of holes to fill, but WR2 was a glaring hole on the roster. I disagree on the contract simply because it was for one year with no team option. I said it when it was signed - I’d have rather paid more for this year (considering the cap space) to buy a team option for a second year. If Grant would have broken out after playing with Luck, how do you gauge his value for that 2nd contract? He would want to get paid equal to his performance. I don’t see Ballard over paying him for one good year, do you? So the chances of Grant being on the next year were slim. Either he sucks and is therefore replaced or he is so good the team doesn’t resign him. There is very little middle ground available where he performs at a level he doesn’t need replaced but doesn’t want a bigger contract than Ballard will pay after one year. That’s why I see him as a place holder.

Yes, he drafted some guys late. Again, Grant is a place holder for Cain or a draft pick next year.


Not sure why you bring up LBs. Leonard is a star and Walker has been great as well. If you got your wish and we addressed this issue in free agency, are you concerned at all that we perhaps wouldn't have ever drafted Leonard?

I’ll disagree that Walker has been great. I’ll admit he’s certainly not the biggest issue though.

Am I worried that we would have passed on Leonard if we had signed LB help in free agency? No, not at all. Nor am I really worried that he would have been stuck behind a vet. I expect Ballard to find and draft talented players - I do not specifically advocate drafting for need. I also expect the coaching staff to identify talent, develop players, and get them on the field. That seems like standard team operations to me.

Lastly, your point about the team’s record is completely off base. The numbers absolutely do NOT back up your point – Racehorse’s post illustrated this perfectly. We were outscored 222 to 119 in the first seven games last year! We were thoroughly smoked by the better teams we played, and were only able to eke out victories against two of the worst teams in the league. The gap between our team and the better teams in the league has shrunken dramatically since last year, as evidenced by our performance in the games this year – we nearly beat the SB champs in their own stadium! By virtually any measurable statistic, we have improved by leaps and bounds over last year. And by the way, the improvement is on both offense and defense, so it’s certainly not all attributable to Luck. If your eyes don’t tell you this, and all you can see is our 2-5 record, then you need better glasses.

I’ll state again - by virtue of adding a franchise QB and a competent coaching staff the team damn well should look better! And I agree they do. And they are certainly more fun to watch. As I said, the results we see are typical of a young team. To some degree you’ve admitted that and admitted they haven’t won as much as you thought they would. That’s pretty much my point.

As to this last point, I should also mention that if you acknowledge that the talent level on the team has greatly increased, but your criticism is that the record doesn’t reflect this, then perhaps your beef is with Reich rather than Ballard. That would be another discussion, and another one where I would disagree with you, but it has no place in a discussion about Ballard’s performance.

No, Ballard put the roster together and I’m mostly seeing what I expected to from the roster construction. I’m happy and surprised in the outcome of certain areas (like Leonard), but the overall outcome is what I expected. You were the one expecting more wins and happy with the roster makeup. Sounds like you are the one that should have an issue with Reich.

[VeveJones007]

A review of the standings reveals the team is 2-5. The same record as last year. This is after getting its franchise QB back, improving its coaching, improving the O-line, improving the defense (apparently quite a bit), and improving the roster as a whole. My argument hasn’t been that Ballard hasn’t added talent, it’s that he was assembling a roster that wouldn’t win as much as it should. Too much forced youth, too much reliance on 1st and 2nd year players, too many holes left unfilled. Everything supposedly better, but same record - I’d say the facts back up my argument pretty well

Through 7 games, here is the point differential for the Colts:

2017: -103
2018: +4

I don't necessarily disagree with your overall point, but your focus on the team being 2-5 on October 24, 2018 is not only an invalid metric, it misses the bigger picture of what's going on with this franchise.

[rcubed]

Through 7 games, here is the point differential for the Colts:

2017: -103
2018: +4

I don't necessarily disagree with your overall point, but your focus on the team being 2-5 on October 24, 2018 is not only an invalid metric, it misses the bigger picture of what's going on with this franchise.
wow.

[rm1369]

Through 7 games, here is the point differential for the Colts:

2017: -103
2018: +4

I don't necessarily disagree with your overall point, but your focus on the team being 2-5 on October 24, 2018 is not only an invalid metric, it misses the bigger picture of what's going on with this franchise.

I’m not focused on the 2-5 record. I’ve not shit talked the team or been a troll in game threads. I have never called for Ballard’s firing. And I have never said he isn’t going to get the team back to contending status. I’ve simply said his approach is slower than it needs to be and this season is a casualty of it. I’ve been told I was wrong since before the season started by people who now admit they expected a better record, but still want to tell me how wrong I am. Even though this is largely what I expected.

[VeveJones007]

I’m not focused on the 2-5 record. I’ve not shit talked the team or been a troll in game threads. I have never called for Ballard’s firing. And I have never said he isn’t going to get the team back to contending status. I’ve simply said his approach is slower than it needs to be and this season is a casualty of it. I’ve been told I was wrong since before the season started by people who now admit they expected a better record, but still want to tell me how wrong I am. Even though this is largely what I expected.

But you've used the team's 2-5 record as both justification and validation for your argument. The 2-5 record so far in 2018 is immaterial to the broader objective of getting this organization another Lombardi ASAP.

As I said before, I don't completely disagree with your take that the rebuild could be done faster; just don't throw out meaningless stats, act like they're significant, and not expect me to call you out on it. It detracts from other valid points in your argument.

[rm1369]

But you've used the team's 2-5 record as both justification and validation for your argument. The 2-5 record so far in 2018 is immaterial to the broader objective of getting this organization another Lombardi ASAP.

As I said before, I don't completely disagree with your take that the rebuild could be done faster; just don't throw out meaningless stats, act like they're significant, and not expect me to call you out on it. It detracts from other valid points in your argument.

How is the record not valid? If the team was 5-2 I’d clearly be wrong, right? The whole point is young teams have a hard time consistently winning. They do things like hold on 3rd and 26 giving up an automatic first down. They make mental errors to extend drives or drop easy catches on 3rd and 4 in OT. That kind of thing is true for any sport I follow. I don’t bring up 2-5 to say the team sucks or say no progress has been made. It’s relevant because it’s the exact result of my point - the team is better is most ways, but it hasn’t translated to wins. How else do you explain what you, Race, and Chaka are telling me? That almost all stats say this is a significantly better team, yet the record still says they are one of the worst teams in the league. I don’t believe they are one of the worst teams in the league. That’s why I disagree with the chosen path.

[Racehorse]

Do I think the team is better? Absolutely. I’d much prefer this team and roster. Just the addition of Luck makes this year significantly better. Same for the subtraction of Pagano. That’s not at all the point though. Chaka says the facts don’t support my position. My position has been that Ballard knowingly punted on this season by releasing producing vets, not making more additions in free agency, and relying on so many young players. If everything is so much better, why hasn’t the team won as much as you or Chaka expected?
Maybe because we have lost close games in a sport that has the well-named phrase "any given Sunday" as its selling point. Also, two of those five losses were against the participants in the last SB.

[Racehorse]

How is the record not valid? If the team was 5-2 I’d clearly be wrong, right? The whole point is young teams have a hard time consistently winning. They do things like hold on 3rd and 26 giving up an automatic first down. They make mental errors to extend drives or drop easy catches on 3rd and 4 in OT. That kind of thing is true for any sport I follow. I don’t bring up 2-5 to say the team sucks or say no progress has been made. It’s relevant because it’s the exact result of my point - the team is better is most ways, but it hasn’t translated to wins. How else do you explain what you, Race, and Chaka are telling me? That almost all stats say this is a significantly better team, yet the record still says they are one of the worst teams in the league. I don’t believe they are one of the worst teams in the league. That’s why I disagree with the chosen path.
That is one way to look at it. The other is that bringing in vets is a short term approach. It usually does not translate to long term success.

[omahacolt]

That is one way to look at it. The other is that bringing in vets is a short term approach. It usually does not translate to long term success.

Good teams use guys like Mike Adams all the time as filler for a few years. I like it

[Racehorse]

Good teams use guys like Mike Adams all the time as filler for a few years. I like it

I like fillers, when they work out. They don't stay long, though, which was my point.

[Colt Classic]

That is one way to look at it. The other is that bringing in vets is a short term approach. It usually does not translate to long term success.

Of all the WR's on the roster, how many beyond T.Y. figure to be long-term fixtures here? It's the one position that even Ballard has pointed to as saying that it will be addressed. Those who are currently there will have to make room for future upgrades. So all of this supposed developing the younger talent likely excludes those who are seeing time this season.

As far as who else could've been brought in to stabilize the position, how about John Brown? He may be a bit too similar to T.Y. but another speed burner who has been in the league and seems to be able to catch the ball AND signed with the Ravens for just one year @ 6 mil doesn't seem like he would've disturbed the delicate science being used to create the desired culture around these parts. Maybe Grant doesn't want to sign here if Brown also signs here, but such an "if" doesn't matter now and it was just a "for instance" anyway. Point is, it's silly to talk about gaining experience and culture and reps and...when a position relevant to all of that rosy future talk is going to have at least one, likely two new players this time next year. So instead of hoping to get another veteran who may not be as likely to run through a defender on a rub route, you develop a player who could very well be cut without a second thought next season. It just seems a bit too weighted toward "maybe these guys will turn into something, but more likely we'll be sitting pretty again on draft day" for a team in such a crappy division.

[rm1369]

That is one way to look at it. The other is that bringing in vets is a short term approach. It usually does not translate to long term success.

I would disagree with you. I believe teams use short term vets all the time, although I guess it depends on your definition of short term.

I think many are scarred by Grigson’s reign. I’ve said before, and I know most will disagree, there was no problem with Grigson’s strategy, but there were major issues with his execution. Even with mostly mediocre acquisitions in free agency the team made a quick turnaround and was in an AFC title game. The main issue was Grigson sucked at drafting and no young talent was taking over starting spots.

If Ballard drafts as poorly as Grigson he will fail. There is not a team building strategy in existence that doesn’t require good drafting to sustain success.

[Oldcolt]

I agree that teams use short term veterans all the time. And I think the Colts should and will use them. We just disagree about using them when you are in full rebuild. I like what Ballard is doing and I like the results so far. It is pretty obvious we are building a foundation thru both lines So far so good. Portends good for us Freaks

[Racehorse]

I would disagree with you. I believe teams use short term vets all the time, although I guess it depends on your definition of short term.

I think many are scarred by Grigson’s reign. I’ve said before, and I know most will disagree, there was no problem with Grigson’s strategy, but there were major issues with his execution. Even with mostly mediocre acquisitions in free agency the team made a quick turnaround and was in an AFC title game. The main issue was Grigson sucked at drafting and no young talent was taking over starting spots.

If Ballard drafts as poorly as Grigson he will fail. There is not a team building strategy in existence that doesn’t require good drafting to sustain success.
I agree with much of what you wrote. I was referring to rebuilding teams and not established ones. Teams like GB and NE can put in fillers to play, but Washington and Oakland get burnt using that approach.

[Chaka]

I don’t remember ever complaining about letting Melvin walk, only how young and thin Ballard left the position.

.

Ok, now I get your point – so all of the good stuff the Colts have accomplished this year is due to Luck’s return and the change in coaching staff. All the bad stuff – really just the 2-5 record – is due to Ballard’s misguided plan to use younger players in place of the Hankins, Simons and Andersons of the world. Do I have it about right?

The problem with this theory is that, again, it isn’t supported by the facts. The Colts improvement isn’t limited to the offense – as I’ve posted previously, statistically this group of young defenders is outperforming last year’s squad by a large margin in almost every category (actually it is in EVERY category I’ve looked at, but I’ll say “almost every category” because I can’t say I’ve looked at all of them). I suppose this was just as you predicted too, right? That’s why your railed against Ballard’s decisions to get rid of Hankins and the others?

And you really have mischaracterized my points regarding how the team has “looked”. This isn’t a subjective eyeball assessment like you treat it – it’s apparent from the hard numbers, whether you look a points scored, points given up, sacks, turnovers - whatever. Those are undeniable, but you ignore this stuff in favor of vague ideas that we could have signed “someone” who could have improved the team.

Of course we could have signed players who, in retrospect, would have helped out. But then I could be like you and simply respond by saying “we could have signed some bad players who would have made our defense worse and could have destroyed the culture Ballard is trying to create”. Then we can both stare at each other and say nothing, because both statements are true, so long as we keep it vague. That’s why if you’re going to make this type of argument, you should back it up with examples of the players you’re referring to. Look at the CB free agent list for 2018 and tell me who you think the Colts should have signed. You'll see that the list is much more treacherous than you might realize.

And what makes you so certain the Colts would have drafted Leonard had they picked up a few free agent LBs? Isn’t it possible at least that they would have turned their draft focus somewhere else – perhaps CB for example?

I’ve "admitted" they haven’t won as much as I thought they would, no question, but so what? The point is that they’ve improved dramatically from last season – both on offense and defense – and its validated Ballard's approach. The 2017 Colts never held a team to 5 points, not even the Browns, who were the worst team in the league last year (they scored 28 off of Hankins and the D). I’m guessing that if the 2018 Colts had accomplished their improvements by way of a bringing in a bunch of Mike Adams-like free agents, you’d now be trumpeting the masterful success of that plan. But because it was accomplished in a way that was different than you preferred, you have to explain it away by saying its all Luck and the coaching change. But it's simply not true, no matter how much you want it to be. Give credit where credit is due.

[omahacolt]

Statistically comparing last years team to this years team isn’t fair. Chuck pagano was arguably the worst coach in the history of the nfl.

[YDFL Commish]

At the end of the day, I can't think of one player that Ballard let go, that would have made a difference in the win column.

This team isn't losing due to a lack of talent. They lose because youth makes mistakes, and believe it or not Reich still hasn't shed the team of the stench of Pagano.

What I mean by that is, not every player has totally lost the bad habits of the past, that Pagano kissed them on the cheek for.

[omahacolt]

At the end of the day, I can't think of one player that Ballard let go, that would have made a difference in the win column.

This team isn't losing due to a lack of talent. They lose because youth makes mistakes, and believe it or not Reich still hasn't shed the team of the stench of Pagano.

What I mean by that is, not every player has totally lost the bad habits of the past, that Pagano kissed them on the cheek for.

I disagree that this team doesn’t lack talent. I think this team absolutely lacks talent.

[FatDT]

I disagree that this team doesn’t lack talent. I think this team absolutely lacks talent.

Don't think that's what he's saying. Every team lacks talent somewhere. He's saying lack of talent isn't the main reason they've lost games. Meaning the team has enough talent to win and it's been in-game mistakes that have been the problem. Now you can argue that point either direction.

[Chaka]

Statistically comparing last years team to this years team isn’t fair. Chuck pagano was arguably the worst coach in the history of the nfl.

With all due respect to Dam and his position, I do believe coaches are important so I think you raise a fair point. Not sure how much Pagano dictated the defense last year as we had a coordinator (Monachino) but, before you say it, I'm not saying Monachino was anything special either.

Regardless, I'll agree that stats shouldn't be the entire picture, and can certainly be influenced by a coach's decision making. But stats are nevertheless concrete information that can help anchor opinions in reality. It's certainly fair and smart to supplement that info from other sources. Generally speaking, I personally prefer objective data to eyeball assessments, unless the person providing the eyeball assessments has a proven track record, or those their assessments are described in some way can be verified (for example, the running series of articles on Stampede Blue which analyze a player's performance through a series of videos isolating the player's role over several plays). Sometimes I even ask you for your thoughts on a particular Colts player, because over time I've read lots of your posts on the site and I think your comments are pretty insightful.

With regard to the issue at hand, I guess I'd point out in response that none of the people who left the team are currently being coached by Pagano, and none are tearing up the league right now (Anderson's done reasonably well I guess). So I'm not convinced that their performance last year was out of character for them, and I still think the stats they generated last year are a reasonably good indicator of their skill level.

[Dam8610]

With all due respect to Dam and his position, I do believe coaches are important...

Actually knowing my position would be helpful here, because it does not disagree with your statement. My position is and always has been that the importance of coaching lies in player development, and that the impact of coaching on gameday is negligible. Reich and his staff are an excellent example of this. In my opinion, and the opinion of most here, they've done a great job, yet the team is 2-5. It also has several young players that appear to be budding stars, and several surprise good players like Hunt and Ebron who are castoffs from other teams. The coaching staff has done very well at player development, and yet because the team doesn't have the talent level of some teams (and has had more than their fair share of injuries), if you were to look at the record as the sole point of evaluation, you'd say Reich and his staff are doing poorly. This has been, is, and will continue to be my point on the matter. Coaches won't actually make the difference on gameday. Evidence continues to mount supporting this point.

[Maniac]

Actually knowing my position would be helpful here, because it does not disagree with your statement. My position is and always has been that the importance of coaching lies in player development, and that the impact of coaching on gameday is negligible. Reich and his staff are an excellent example of this. In my opinion, and the opinion of most here, they've done a great job, yet the team is 2-5. It also has several young players that appear to be budding stars, and several surprise good players like Hunt and Ebron who are castoffs from other teams. The coaching staff has done very well at player development, and yet because the team doesn't have the talent level of some teams (and has had more than their fair share of injuries), if you were to look at the record as the sole point of evaluation, you'd say Reich and his staff are doing poorly. This has been, is, and will continue to be my point on the matter. Coaches won't actually make the difference on gameday. Evidence continues to mount supporting this point.

You are skewing your perception of the "evidence" to make it fit your argument. You even admitted that this team has had more than it's fair share of injuries. If our injury situation wasn't as ridiculous as it has been, we would probably be at 4 wins at the very least right now. Coaching absolutely matters on game day. You need talented players and you need coaches who can scheme and call plays to put those players in the best possible position to use their talent. Pagano's dumb ass had no idea how to do that.

[rm1369]

Chaka, I see no reason to continue this conversation. The point to me seems pretty fucking simple - inexperienced teams have a hard to winning consistently. You’ve said they probably haven’t won as much so far because of their youth, but can’t get it through your head that’s that’s my primary point. I simply don’t see a reason to be so young and / or thin at certain spots to start the season. There is nothing in your mind that could allow the team to be 4-3 or 5-2 at this point and still have Leonard, Nelson and a slew of young players with upside. To you as soon as you bring in another vet at LB (doesn’t matter which of the 3 positions) Leonard disappears from the team. You are happy with 110% of Ballard’s moves and I’m happy with probably 85% of them. Somehow that means I give him no credit for anything.

I’ve told you I won’t play the “tell me who” game. I know exactly how that goes. If Ballard hadn’t signed Ebron and I now identified him as a target you’d have 15 reasons we couldn’t have signed him, he wouldn’t help, and / or he would just hold back Swoope’s development. If I had identified Mitchel as a player that could help this team (I wouldn’t have) before he was signed would you have agreed? Fuck no you wouldn’t have! But here he is helping the team win. So no, I won’t play that BS game with you. I’ve already kept Leonard from being drafted. I sure as hell don’t want to get TY cut by improving a shitty WR core.

I’ve said I like the team. I like the progress. I like Ballard. I expect him to get the team back to contender status. I like the coaching staff. I like the majority of the individual players. I simply don’t agree with the depth of the youth movement. I believe (as you have said) that it has cost us games this year. You see the fact they were in a lot of close games as progress. I don’t disagree. But I also see it as proof they could be sitting at 4-3 or 5-2 with small improvements in some areas. Like WRs that can catch. I see the fucking progress, I’m in no way trying to minimize it. Yes I expected progress with the return of a franchise QB and a competent coaching staff. That doesn’t mean I don’t also see the progress in other areas. I’ve said I do. Because I see and expected progress is the reason I only agree with 85% of Ballard’s moves. If I thought everything sucked and had to be burnt down I would, like you, agree with Ballard 100%.

That’s it. I’m done with this conversation. I don’t troll and I don’t criticize every Ballard move. I simply state my opinion. It’s stated. You disagree. Time to move the hell on.

[Chaka]

Actually knowing my position would be helpful here, because it does not disagree with your statement. My position is and always has been that the importance of coaching lies in player development, and that the impact of coaching on gameday is negligible. Reich and his staff are an excellent example of this. In my opinion, and the opinion of most here, they've done a great job, yet the team is 2-5. It also has several young players that appear to be budding stars, and several surprise good players like Hunt and Ebron who are castoffs from other teams. The coaching staff has done very well at player development, and yet because the team doesn't have the talent level of some teams (and has had more than their fair share of injuries), if you were to look at the record as the sole point of evaluation, you'd say Reich and his staff are doing poorly. This has been, is, and will continue to be my point on the matter. Coaches won't actually make the difference on gameday. Evidence continues to mount supporting this point.

Sorry, no offense intended, I meant it to be more of a joke given how much debate that issue has generated here. Not trying to beat that dead horse any further.

[Dam8610]

You are skewing your perception of the "evidence" to make it fit your argument. You even admitted that this team has had more than it's fair share of injuries. If our injury situation wasn't as ridiculous as it has been, we would probably be at 4 wins at the very least right now. Coaching absolutely matters on game day. You need talented players and you need coaches who can scheme and call plays to put those players in the best possible position to use their talent. Pagano's dumb ass had no idea how to do that.

Good players can overcome bad scheme. Bad players can overcome good scheme. The latter happens far more often. The job of coaches is to get their players to maximize their talent. Scheme can help with that, but ultimately the coach can't go out and catch the ball or make the tackle. The player has to do that. That's why the impact of coaching is negligible on gameday.

[Dam8610]

Sorry, no offense intended, I meant it to be more of a joke given how much debate that issue has generated here. Not trying to beat that dead horse any further.

No offense taken, it was more of an opportunity to clarify than anything.

[VeveJones007]

Good teams use guys like Mike Adams all the time as filler for a few years. I like it

This is where you argument falls short. Say it with me, "there was no combination of moves Ballard could have made in 2018 UFA that would have made the Colts a Super Bowl contender this season." You're arguing for a more competitive team in 2018 with no chance of winning a title. Keep your eye on the prize.

This team's window starts to open in 2019. Maybe Ballard makes a few key additions in UFA next offseason. I'll be disappointed if he doesn't, but we can't judge him on 2018.

[Puck]

Good players can overcome bad scheme. Bad players can overcome good scheme. The latter happens far more often. The job of coaches is to get their players to maximize their talent. Scheme can help with that, but ultimately the coach can't go out and catch the ball or make the tackle. The player has to do that. That's why the impact of coaching is negligible on gameday.



But they shouldnt have too... that is why we have a new coach

[JAFF]

Good players can overcome bad scheme. Bad players can overcome good scheme. The latter happens far more often. The job of coaches is to get their players to maximize their talent. Scheme can help with that, but ultimately the coach can't go out and catch the ball or make the tackle. The player has to do that. That's why the impact of coaching is negligible on gameday.

Good coaching shows up on game day because you "coach them up", educate them, teach them, drill them... to be ready for game day.

You know why Howard Mudd kept getting jobs? He could take a guy like Jeff Saturday, a smart hard working guy, and turn him into an all pro. Peyton Manning was not a great athlete. But he may have been one of the smartest. He had a lot of help from Tom Moore. Moore gave him the concepts, he went out and completed them.

Ryan Leaf was a better athlete than Manning. I saw them play in Indy in the preseason. Leaf could throw the ball out of the dome. But he couldn't be coached.

Great players, have ability and they can take coaching. It's a marriage. Great athletes can be schemed. Their ability to change and defeat the scheme is what makes them great. But that takes coaching.

Using your logic, I should be an NFL coach and in the HOF

[Maniac]

Good players can overcome bad scheme. Bad players can overcome good scheme. The latter happens far more often. The job of coaches is to get their players to maximize their talent. Scheme can help with that, but ultimately the coach can't go out and catch the ball or make the tackle. The player has to do that. That's why the impact of coaching is negligible on gameday.

The idea is for the players not to have to overcome the stupidity of their coaching staff, which, like Puck said, is why we have a new coach. Coaches shouldn't put them in bad situations and say "Well, you should be able to overcome me being a moron." They should put them in the best situations possible, and all of that matters on game day.

[Racehorse]

Chaka, I see no reason to continue this conversation. The point to me seems pretty fucking simple - inexperienced teams have a hard to winning consistently. You’ve said they probably haven’t won as much so far because of their youth, but can’t get it through your head that’s that’s my primary point. I simply don’t see a reason to be so young and / or thin at certain spots to start the season. There is nothing in your mind that could allow the team to be 4-3 or 5-2 at this point and still have Leonard, Nelson and a slew of young players with upside. To you as soon as you bring in another vet at LB (doesn’t matter which of the 3 positions) Leonard disappears from the team. You are happy with 110% of Ballard’s moves and I’m happy with probably 85% of them. Somehow that means I give him no credit for anything.

I’ve told you I won’t play the “tell me who” game. I know exactly how that goes. If Ballard hadn’t signed Ebron and I now identified him as a target you’d have 15 reasons we couldn’t have signed him, he wouldn’t help, and / or he would just hold back Swoope’s development. If I had identified Mitchel as a player that could help this team (I wouldn’t have) before he was signed would you have agreed? Fuck no you wouldn’t have! But here he is helping the team win. So no, I won’t play that BS game with you. I’ve already kept Leonard from being drafted. I sure as hell don’t want to get TY cut by improving a shitty WR core.

I’ve said I like the team. I like the progress. I like Ballard. I expect him to get the team back to contender status. I like the coaching staff. I like the majority of the individual players. I simply don’t agree with the depth of the youth movement. I believe (as you have said) that it has cost us games this year. You see the fact they were in a lot of close games as progress. I don’t disagree. But I also see it as proof they could be sitting at 4-3 or 5-2 with small improvements in some areas. Like WRs that can catch. I see the fucking progress, I’m in no way trying to minimize it. Yes I expected progress with the return of a franchise QB and a competent coaching staff. That doesn’t mean I don’t also see the progress in other areas. I’ve said I do. Because I see and expected progress is the reason I only agree with 85% of Ballard’s moves. If I thought everything sucked and had to be burnt down I would, like you, agree with Ballard 100%.

That’s it. I’m done with this conversation. I don’t troll and I don’t criticize every Ballard move. I simply state my opinion. It’s stated. You disagree. Time to move the hell on.

Short version: I get the last word because I say so.

[Racehorse]

Good players can overcome bad scheme. Bad players can overcome good scheme. The latter happens far more often. The job of coaches is to get their players to maximize their talent. Scheme can help with that, but ultimately the coach can't go out and catch the ball or make the tackle. The player has to do that. That's why the impact of coaching is negligible on gameday.

We really need a “Ha ha” button when we need to laugh at moronic ideas.

[rm1369]

Short version: I get the last word because I say so.

Fuck off. Chaka can respond and say whatever the hell he wants. How the fuck am I stopping him from responding? I’m simply not continuing arguing about it. Seems pretty clear we don’t agree.

Not surprised you are the one stirring the pot though.

[Racehorse]

Fuck off. Chaka can respond and say whatever the hell he wants. How the fuck am I stopping him from responding? I’m simply not continuing arguing about it. Seems pretty clear we don’t agree.

Not surprised you are the one stirring the pot though.

Maybe you should seek help. Your anger about a stupid message board is not healthy.

On the football side, I think you have a different idea about how to build a team than Ballard does. I get it. Not all GMs are identical in how they do it. Now I don’t think you’re a troll, but I do disagree with your criticisms. As a HS coach, I see the value in taking a step back to build a culture because I had to do it. It sacrifices a season, but pays off dividends in the future. Maybe you agree on that, but just can’t explain it in a way that we can agree. Maybe you don’t. Hard to tell on here.

[omahacolt]

This is where you argument falls short. Say it with me, "there was no combination of moves Ballard could have made in 2018 UFA that would have made the Colts a Super Bowl contender this season." You're arguing for a more competitive team in 2018 with no chance of winning a title. Keep your eye on the prize.

This team's window starts to open in 2019. Maybe Ballard makes a few key additions in UFA next offseason. I'll be disappointed if he doesn't, but we can't judge him on 2018.

Free agents can sign multi year deals. So no. My argument stands tall

[rm1369]

Maybe you should seek help. Your anger about a stupid message board is not healthy.

On the football side, I think you have a different idea about how to build a team than Ballard does. I get it. Not all GMs are identical in how they do it. Now I don’t think you’re a troll, but I do disagree with your criticisms. As a HS coach, I see the value in taking a step back to build a culture because I had to do it. It sacrifices a season, but pays off dividends in the future. Maybe you agree on that, but just can’t explain it in a way that we can agree. Maybe you don’t. Hard to tell on here.

Who said I’m angry?

I understand the importance of culture. I’m aware of companies that have had to start from scratch to effect the necessary change. But while I would never suggest the Pagano lead Colts had a great team culture, I’m not aware of it being that degree of toxic either.

Interestingly I just went back and read the first 20 pages of the off-season free agency thread. I saw plenty of big wishes on who the team would sign. And I saw arguments on the value of certain players. Want to know what I didn’t see? Anyone suggesting that Ballard couldn’t bring in free agents because they would stunt the growth of the young players. Or anyone suggesting the team needed to “take a step back” to rebuild the culture of the team. I find that interesting considering how obvious both of those things seem to many now. So obvious that any suggestion otherwise is now considered not only wrong, but apparently so wrong as to basically be ridiculous. I wonder what the reception of those opinions would have been BEFORE Ballard preached them? I have a feeling they would have sounded as out there as I apparently sound now.

[Dam8610]

But they shouldnt have too... that is why we have a new coach

Every team has bad scheme occasionally. Good players can still make good plays in those situations.

[Butter]

Every team has bad scheme occasionally. Good players can still make good plays in those situations.
https://i.imgflip.com/s63j0.jpg

[Chaka]

Chaka, I see no reason to continue this conversation. The point to me seems pretty fucking simple - inexperienced teams have a hard to winning consistently. You’ve said they probably haven’t won as much so far because of their youth, but can’t get it through your head that’s that’s my primary point. I simply don’t see a reason to be so young and / or thin at certain spots to start the season. There is nothing in your mind that could allow the team to be 4-3 or 5-2 at this point and still have Leonard, Nelson and a slew of young players with upside. To you as soon as you bring in another vet at LB (doesn’t matter which of the 3 positions) Leonard disappears from the team. You are happy with 110% of Ballard’s moves and I’m happy with probably 85% of them. Somehow that means I give him no credit for anything.

I’ve told you I won’t play the “tell me who” game. I know exactly how that goes. If Ballard hadn’t signed Ebron and I now identified him as a target you’d have 15 reasons we couldn’t have signed him, he wouldn’t help, and / or he would just hold back Swoope’s development. If I had identified Mitchel as a player that could help this team (I wouldn’t have) before he was signed would you have agreed? Fuck no you wouldn’t have! But here he is helping the team win. So no, I won’t play that BS game with you. I’ve already kept Leonard from being drafted. I sure as hell don’t want to get TY cut by improving a shitty WR core.

I’ve said I like the team. I like the progress. I like Ballard. I expect him to get the team back to contender status. I like the coaching staff. I like the majority of the individual players. I simply don’t agree with the depth of the youth movement. I believe (as you have said) that it has cost us games this year. You see the fact they were in a lot of close games as progress. I don’t disagree. But I also see it as proof they could be sitting at 4-3 or 5-2 with small improvements in some areas. Like WRs that can catch. I see the fucking progress, I’m in no way trying to minimize it. Yes I expected progress with the return of a franchise QB and a competent coaching staff. That doesn’t mean I don’t also see the progress in other areas. I’ve said I do. Because I see and expected progress is the reason I only agree with 85% of Ballard’s moves. If I thought everything sucked and had to be burnt down I would, like you, agree with Ballard 100%.

That’s it. I’m done with this conversation. I don’t troll and I don’t criticize every Ballard move. I simply state my opinion. It’s stated. You disagree. Time to move the hell on.

Fair enough. You're a smart guy and I respect your opinion, but ultimately you're correct that we just disagree. It's been fun discussing it with you, nevertheless.

[Racehorse]

Who said I’m angry?

I understand the importance of culture. I’m aware of companies that have had to start from scratch to effect the necessary change. But while I would never suggest the Pagano lead Colts had a great team culture, I’m not aware of it being that degree of toxic either.

Interestingly I just went back and read the first 20 pages of the off-season free agency thread. I saw plenty of big wishes on who the team would sign. And I saw arguments on the value of certain players. Want to know what I didn’t see? Anyone suggesting that Ballard couldn’t bring in free agents because they would stunt the growth of the young players. Or anyone suggesting the team needed to “take a step back” to rebuild the culture of the team. I find that interesting considering how obvious both of those things seem to many now. So obvious that any suggestion otherwise is now considered not only wrong, but apparently so wrong as to basically be ridiculous. I wonder what the reception of those opinions would have been BEFORE Ballard preached them? I have a feeling they would have sounded as out there as I apparently sound now.

Looks like we agree more than it appeared. However, I see it as crying over spilt milk. You can't get it back, so try to make the best of what is instead of what could have been. To me, that is where the debate is. I get it that many here wanted to win more games this year, because so did I. However, I also see the value in taking a step back out of the ditch in order to be able to move forward. That is where my thoughts come from. It really is an apples and oranges thing.

[rm1369]

Looks like we agree more than it appeared. However, I see it as crying over spilt milk. You can't get it back, so try to make the best of what is instead of what could have been. To me, that is where the debate is. I get it that many here wanted to win more games this year, because so did I. However, I also see the value in taking a step back out of the ditch in order to be able to move forward. That is where my thoughts come from. It really is an apples and oranges thing.

I don’t see that I’m crying about it. I recognize that the Colts hired Ballard to rebuild and it’s going to be done his way, not mine. And I’ve specifically said he has to be given time to build his version of the team. I simply state my opinion and try to explain / defend it. And I try to do it in the appropriate threads. I’m not interjecting my opinion in other threads like the Mitchel thread. I wasn’t in the game thread complaining about Ballard not improving the WR core after drops. Not even the 3 & 4 drop by Johnson in OT with Houston. Nor did I crow in the game thread about the Hairston hold on 2nd & 26 against the Eagles - another clear example of my point about experience effecting the outcome of games. I stated my opinion here because it’s relevant to the rebuilding topic. To me that’s not crying. And it doesn’t mean I’m not happy with the team or that I don’t see a bright future.

[VeveJones007]

Free agents can sign multi year deals. So no. My argument stands tall

But you acknowledge that the 2018 season was not going to result in a title either way?

[Racehorse]

I don’t see that I’m crying about it. I recognize that the Colts hired Ballard to rebuild and it’s going to be done his way, not mine. And I’ve specifically said he has to be given time to build his version of the team. I simply state my opinion and try to explain / defend it. And I try to do it in the appropriate threads. I’m not interjecting my opinion in other threads like the Mitchel thread. I wasn’t in the game thread complaining about Ballard not improving the WR core after drops. Not even the 3 & 4 drop by Johnson in OT with Houston. Nor did I crow in the game thread about the Hairston hold on 2nd & 26 against the Eagles - another clear example of my point about experience effecting the outcome of games. I stated my opinion here because it’s relevant to the rebuilding topic. To me that’s not crying. And it doesn’t mean I’m not happy with the team or that I don’t see a bright future.

It was an expression, not meaning literally crying. Maybe I could have said it was water under the bridge, but I didn’t see you as a sensitive fellow, nor as a troll.

[omahacolt]

But you acknowledge that the 2018 season was not going to result in a title either way?

Of course.

[VeveJones007]

Of course.

Then we agree. Hopefully we see Ballard make a push in 2019 UFA. If he makes good moves, then nothing will have been lost in 2018.

[Butter]

Then we agree. Hopefully we see Ballard make a push in 2019 UFA. If he makes good moves, then nothing will have been lost in 2018.

I do not know the numbers, but it seems like he is going to have to maintain the Cap floor,

[Chaka]

Praise from former offensive lineman Damien Woody concerning the Colts' team building:

https://twitter.com/damienwoody/status/1061964433298255872

Love the way the @Colts are building their roster...inside out! Might not be sexy but that’s how u win football games

[VeveJones007]

Just want to jump back to something concerning a 2019 UFA push--on a recent podcast, Holder said something to the effect of "Ballard has noticed that the team is maybe a step ahead of where he has anticipated, so he's starting to evaluate how much of a push to take in 2019 UFA."

[VeveJones007]

Wanted to post a draft position update as it relates to "the build." Colts and Jets are moving in opposite directions, but right now the Colts have the following top 50 picks:

#12
#37 (via NYJ)
#44

Obviously, the Colts are likely to move down from #12 and #44 in the remaining weeks of the season, but I think we're still looking at a strong possibility of three top 50 picks. After the defensive performances the last few weeks, you have to think Ballard is going to invest heavily in the defense.

[Colts And Orioles]

Thru six games I see hope in several areas on this team. First we are set with the most important and hardest piece to get-quarterback. To me the offensive line looks like they have the players to jell into a dominant force (with what we have invested in this line it needs to become dominant in the next 1-2 years and I think they are on the way) given time and health. Marlon Mack, if he can stay healthy, may be the answer at running back. The second half Sunday was the first time in ages our running game looked like a real running game. Tight ends seem to be good enough for us to compete. The defensive line has some talent. I really think its a good start for the line. Need a stud to elevate everyone's game in my opinion. Hopefully our #1 will be that. We have one linebacker that we can run with, need more. One safety is set, the other (Geathers) I love but injuries. And thankfully corner back is supposed to be a good position in the next draft. The challenge for the coaching staff is to not lose the culture amidst all this losing. Judging the early season as a rebuild, not by wins and losses, I'm pretty satisfied. I'm not saying we are going to make it to the promised land (and after all not knowing is what makes rooting so much fun) but if you look at where we are I don't know how you could honestly say we are on the wrong track. I'm trying to enjoy the rebuild. Honestly cannot do it on Sundays, but later in the week it doesn't look so horrible to me.




o


ALMOST 3 MONTHS LATER ........



This Time, Colts are Winning and Building Simultaneously

(By Gregg Doyel)

https://www.indystar.com/story/sports/columnists/gregg-doyel/2019/01/07/win-lose-colts-built-last-beyond-2018-nfl-playoffs-chiefs/2496591002/

o

[Colts And Orioles]

o



This Time, Colts are Winning and Building Simultaneously

(By Gregg Doyel)

https://www.indystar.com/story/sports/columnists/gregg-doyel/2019/01/07/win-lose-colts-built-last-beyond-2018-nfl-playoffs-chiefs/2496591002/

o
o


Regarding the same subject ........


Colts' Incredible Turnaround Happened Fast, but was No Quick Fix

(By Mike Wells)

http://www.espn.com/blog/indianapolis-colts/post/_/id/24159/colts-incredible-turnaround-happened-fast-but-was-no-quick-fix

o

[Colts And Orioles]

Thru six games, I see hope in several areas on this team.

First, we are set with the most important and hardest piece to get ........ the quarterback.

To me, the offensive line looks like they have the players to jell into a dominant force (with what we have invested in this line, it needs to become dominant in the next 1-2 years, and I think they are on the way) given time and health.

Marlon Mack, if he can stay healthy, may be the answer at running back. The second half of Sunday's game was the first time in ages in which our running game looked like a real running game.

The tight ends seem to be good enough for us to compete.

The defensive line has some talent. I really think that it's a good start for the line. We need a stud to elevate everyone's game in my opinion. Hopefully, our #1 draft pick in 2019 will be that.

We have one linebacker that we can run with, need more. One safety is set ........ the other (Geathers) I love, but sustains a good deal of injuries. And thankfully, the cornerback is supposed to be a good position in the next draft.

The challenge for the coaching staff is to not lose the culture amidst all of this losing. Judging the early season as a rebuild (not by wins and losses), I'm pretty satisfied. I'm not saying that we are going to make it to the promised land (and after all, not knowing is what makes rooting so much fun), but if you look at where we are, I don't know how you could honestly say we are on the wrong track. I'm trying to enjoy the rebuild. Frankly, I cannot be this objective on Sundays ........ but later in the week, it doesn't look so horrible to me.




o


When you started this thread the Colts were 1-5 overall, and immediately coming off of a disastrous loss to the Jets.

The team then proceeded to win 10 out of their next 11 games, before falling to the Chiefs in the Divisional round of the playoffs.


This was a thoroughly objective take at a time when many Colts fans were feeling like breaking their TV sets in frustration ........ good call, good thread, and here's to hoping that the "build" continues in 2019 and beyond.

o