See the link above.

Stephen Gilmore would probably disagree with that. Regardless, NE finds and brings in talent. I wouldn’t be surprised at any roster move they make. They take plenty of risks on guys. They are not what I’d consider conservative.

I understand, but that’s kinda my point. With a top two QB in place for a long time GB should have had more success. They used an approach very similar to Ballard’s. From the list of top teams you mentioned only Pitt fits your argument IMO. And GB is the next closest. A team that I believe has consistently under achieved while using the ultra conservative approach.

How do you like the athletic? I was thinking of getting a subscription.

Love it and it’s absolutely worth the fee, IMO. Holder’s articles got better because his deadlines are looser than they were at the Indy Star. And they have good scale now with beat writers around the country to have good content regardless of the team or sport.

Franchise tag for WR is $17m for 2019, but sure I guess they can franchise tag him next year. I seriously doubt it happens, but I guess we’ll see.

What I like about it is that funchess being a placeholder vs a long term solution is, to a large degree, up to Funchess. I think the optics surrounding Ballard's decisions send that message pretty clearly.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

Gilmore is one guy. NE almost never wins the off-season. They almost never sign players on Day 1 of free agency. That was my point. GB has struggled because of McCarthy as HC and IIRC, they have had cap issues that have made them cut productive players. More of an apples/oranges thing to me.

Also, you mentioned that you think I would be all over the idea of Collins at the contract WASH gave him. NO, I wouldn't. I wanted to get him, but he is overpaid. We have young guys who we will need to pay in the very near future. Only way I would have accepted those dollars is if most of it were front-loaded to pay out while we have cap room, because when this rookie class is up for contract, we will have fewer cap dollars to spend.

I’m not interested in “winning the offseason” and I’m sure neither is NE. I’m interested in improving the team. My point with New England is they do whatever it takes to get better. So while I agree with you that NE isn’t typically big spenders in the off season, they have and will do it. But either way they definitely take risks. Right now the available players that meet what I perceive as the Colts criteria is very, very small. Young, talented, cheap (or at least willing to sign for very short term), with no character concerns. Great goals certainly, but not a lot of guys like that to choose from. Except in the draft, which is what Ballard wants anyway.

On GB I’ll admit I’m not an expert, but my understanding has been that GB hasn’t been in cap hell and had to cut players because of it. They’ve been “financially responsible”. My memory is that a huge criticism of Thompson has been that he’s sat on cap space instead of fixing known holes. And when his drafted solutions didn’t pan out the holes remained while the money sat in the bank. I have a couple friends that are Packer fans and that is definitely their perception and criticism of him. I realize that doesn’t make it reality though.

As far as the comment about signing Collins, I apologize I actually thought I was responding to Chaka. Although I do think that most who 100% back every Ballard decision would have backed him pulling the trigger on Collins. Simply because it’s the decision he made. That’s reason enough.

I like that Ballard isnt overpaying anyone like these other teams. He is also taking care of our own the right way unlike other teams.

Hopefully that made since, haven't had coffee yet.

You know better than to internet without coffee!