Thread: Ballard
View Single Post
  #17  
Old 11-06-2025, 09:55 PM
rm1369 rm1369 is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 1,257
Thanks: 344
Thanked 947 Times in 517 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Colts And Orioles View Post
o


The Colts would still be 7-2 and atop that AFC South, with or without Sauce. Daniel Jones was acquired under Jim's watch, and that has been the most significant change in the Colts this season. Like yourself, I won't come down on Ballard if Sauce plays badly or breaks his ankle 5 plays into his Colts career, but the addition of Jones was made while Jim was still the owner.

o
I’m not arguing that it occurred because Jim passed. I’m saying Ballard is finally operating differently. I believe the pressure and the belief this was Ballard’s last shot is what has changed his approach. We heard that he was on the hot seat constantly throughout the offseason. It’s not just the Sauce trade, prior to that they made the change a DC and signed Ward and Bynum. Go back to Bradley and throw out some collection of undrafted FAs and a couple 7th round picks and this team is not 7-2 IMO. Simply add Jones to last years team and I don’t think they see 7-2. Yes Jones himself was mostly a continuation of Ballards QB philosophy, but he’s also the first one that has been supported by Ballard with the completion of the rest of the roster. And that’s not hindsight, several of us have said this was the most complete roster Ballard has assembled. Coincidentally it happens to be the best team. Jones is a huge part of that, but pretending everything is the same and Ballard just finally has a QB is BS. I don’t care why it occurred, but it’s pretty damn obvious a change has occurred. My fear was that if they had a good season and his job was saved he’d revert back to his previous philosophy of “next year”. The Sauce trade relieves a lot of that concern for me because he’s already done enough to save his job this year (baring a complete collapse) and he still was aggressive in improving the roster now.
Reply With Quote