View Single Post
  #85  
Old 01-06-2020, 10:47 PM
rm1369 rm1369 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 1,104
Thanks: 299
Thanked 739 Times in 412 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Luck4Reich View Post
The fan base will not be as patient as you think...

Ballard addressed the glaring problem the right way in the Oline where as Grigson kept throwing band-aids at it. The right QB in the next 1-2 years and I think we all fully understand his worth.
I’m not one to defend Grigson, but I’m not sure that’s a fair assessment. Ballard’s first offseason he did pretty much nothing to address the Oline. That’s coming after the known problems from the Grigson era. As I’ve said, Grigson’s main issue was he was a shitty talent evaluator. But he invested resources into the oline. In 5 drafts Grigson made 18 pics in rounds 1-4 (the range where most guys contribute). 5 of them were used on oline - (1) 1st - Kelly, (1) 2nd - Mewhort, (2) 3rd - Thornton and Clark, and (1) 4th - Holmes. In 3 drafts Ballard has made 17 pics in rounds 1-4. He’s invested 3 pics on the oline - (1) 1st - Nelson, (1) 2nd - Smith, and (1) 4th - Banner. I’m not sure what the “right way” is other than hitting on draft pics.

And before someone takes this as me somehow criticizing Ballard, I’m not. I’m simply trying to dispel this idea that Grigson’s method was somehow wrong. It wasn’t, he simply couldn’t do the most important aspect of the job - evaluate talent.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to rm1369 For This Useful Post:
JAFF (01-06-2020)