Quick thoughts on Dolphins-Colts

[FatDT]

Originally Posted by Oldcolt

On that subject does anyone have any idea why they seemed to have stopped doing that? Seems like since Inman got here its really improved

Doyle came back, and all the WRs after Hilton got pushed down the depth chart by Inman. And I'm sure they worked on it in practice.

[Chaka]

Originally Posted by NoLuck4Chuck

This same point was argued about Grigson in his first 2 years.

I guess it's wrong to question a guy until hindsight is 20/20.

Not sure what you mean here. You’ve got to read my post in context. I was making the point, and perhaps not as clearly as I could have, that Omaha was being hypocritical. When I earlier challenged him to set forth how he would have done things differently than Ballard, he refused and said it wasn’t his job and he didn’t have access to the same info that Ballard does. Yet only a few posts later, he’s back to railing against Ballard’s decisions.

He can’t have it both ways - if he’s going to fall back on the “Ballard’s got more info than me so you can’t expect me to have better ideas” defense, then in my mind you have to live with that position and it’s pretty hypocritical to then start questioning Ballard’s decisions a few posts later.

[Chaka]

Originally Posted by omahacolt

Because it is a football message board. I come here to express opinions and read others. I have never pretended to know more than Ballard. Pagano maybe but that isn’t saying much.

Just because Ballard knows more doesn’t mean he is right. The dude will not be 100% on his decisions. No idea why you think everyone should be a cheerleader and suck his nuts like dam does his dad.

You are a funny guy, I’ll give you that. Nobody said that Ballard is infallible, and just because I take a position different than yours doesn’t mean I endorse everything he does. However, I do like his management style, and I’ve been pretty consistent from the beginning about that. That doesn’t mean, as RM1369 and others seems to think, that I advocated that we avoid signing any big name free agents this last offseason. I didn’t. Indeed, as FatDT correctly pointed out, Ballard himself didn’t have this mindset, and he actually tried to sign a few last off season.

Nevertheless, while Ballard’s plan might not have been to completely avoid free agency, his philosophy (or at least how I interpret it) makes it unlikely that we will ever – except in perhaps very rare instances – be seriously in the running for the top free agents. I just think there will almost always be another team willing to pay more than Ballard will. The truth is that most top-end free agents are vastly overpaid for what they produce. Ballard’s value-oriented approach will lead us to signing a lot of mid-level free agents like Ebron, Grant, etc. He’s betting on himself to be able to draft star players and to find diamonds in the rough in free agency.

Right now, all of this means there’s a lot of cap space because there’s nobody to spend it on. But if Ballard’s good at the talent evaluation part of his job, it won’t be long before we’ll be spending lots of money keeping our own players from hitting free agency. Either way, the cap money will be spent – it’s only a question of when and on whom.

[Pez]

Originally Posted by NoLuck4Chuck

This same point was argued about Grigson in his first 2 years.

I guess it's wrong to question a guy until hindsight is 20/20.

I dont really agree 100% with your second point, but it made me think about my thoughts on Grigson. Grigson got a lot of benefit of the doubt in his first two years. The start of the Luck era, he drafted Hilton, Pags stepped aside for a season to beat cancer, and we made the playoffs under Arians.

Even the media thought the Richardson trade was a good idea. It's easy to put blinders on when you make the playoffs three consecutive years, advancing further each year. The 2014 colts had about as much business being in the AFC championship as the 1995 colts did.

The check engine light was on, and a good deal of fans put black tape over it.

The wheels didn't really fall off all the way until the 45-7 deflategate game when it became clear that he'd really decimated the roster. 8-8, 8-8 (luck injury), then 4-12...

[omahacolt]

Originally Posted by Chaka

Not sure what you mean here. You’ve got to read my post in context. I was making the point, and perhaps not as clearly as I could have, that Omaha was being hypocritical. When I earlier challenged him to set forth how he would have done things differently than Ballard, he refused and said it wasn’t his job and he didn’t have access to the same info that Ballard does. Yet only a few posts later, he’s back to railing against Ballard’s decisions.

He can’t have it both ways - if he’s going to fall back on the “Ballard’s got more info than me so you can’t expect me to have better ideas” defense, then in my mind you have to live with that position and it’s pretty hypocritical to then start questioning Ballard’s decisions a few posts later.

Sure I can have it both ways. I can also use hindsight like a motherfucker. And I have no problem being hypocritical

[Chaka]

Originally Posted by omahacolt

Sure I can have it both ways. I can also use hindsight like a motherfucker. And I have no problem being hypocritical

Well at least we agree on something then.

[Luck4Reich]

Originally Posted by Chaka

You are a funny guy, I’ll give you that. Nobody said that Ballard is infallible, and just because I take a position different than yours doesn’t mean I endorse everything he does. However, I do like his management style, and I’ve been pretty consistent from the beginning about that. That doesn’t mean, as RM1369 and others seems to think, that I advocated that we avoid signing any big name free agents this last offseason. I didn’t. Indeed, as FatDT correctly pointed out, Ballard himself didn’t have this mindset, and he actually tried to sign a few last off season.

Nevertheless, while Ballard’s plan might not have been to completely avoid free agency, his philosophy (or at least how I interpret it) makes it unlikely that we will ever – except in perhaps very rare instances – be seriously in the running for the top free agents. I just think there will almost always be another team willing to pay more than Ballard will. The truth is that most top-end free agents are vastly overpaid for what they produce. Ballard’s value-oriented approach will lead us to signing a lot of mid-level free agents like Ebron, Grant, etc. He’s betting on himself to be able to draft star players and to find diamonds in the rough in free agency.

Right now, all of this means there’s a lot of cap space because there’s nobody to spend it on. But if Ballard’s good at the talent evaluation part of his job, it won’t be long before we’ll be spending lots of money keeping our own players from hitting free agency. Either way, the cap money will be spent – it’s only a question of when and on whom.

That's why I like Omaha, he doesn't give a shit like me. He pretty much says what comes to mind and doesn't stress over who doesn't agree.

If we all agreed on everything here it would really suck more sick than Tom Brady and maybe even more than Dam. Stop getting your panties in a bunch because we haven't chose to fall before Ballards feet and claim him as the Amazing GM you do.

[Dam8610]

Originally Posted by NoLuck4Chuck

That's why I like Omaha, he doesn't give a shit like me. He pretty much says what comes to mind and doesn't stress over who doesn't agree.

If we all agreed on everything here it would really suck more sick than Tom Brady and maybe even more than Dam. Stop getting your panties in a bunch because we haven't chose to fall before Ballards feet and claim him as the Amazing GM you do.

Nothing screams insecurity like projecting onto others.

[Luck4Reich]

Originally Posted by Dam8610

Nothing screams insecurity like projecting onto others.

I apologize Dam, my insecurities got the best of me.

[JAFF]

Originally Posted by omahacolt

Sure I can have it both ways. I can also use hindsight like a motherfucker. And I have no problem being hypocritical

Finally I understand. You are a five year old.