Why the Indianapolis Colts are in a REALLY bad situation

 

So, you're pissed and you want firings all around? 

Well, that might be a bad idea. Do I say that because I want to keep everyone? No, I say that because there are MANY factors that would screw us if we went on a firing spree like the fans and media want.  

So, you just want to fire the GM, Chris Ballard . . .

• It is a bad idea to fire a GM unless you fire everyone under him on the coaching staffs. A quality GM candidate will demand to be able to pick ALL of his own people. If you make keeping most of the staff a condition for the new GM, most of the top quality ones will not even apply and you'll never even hear about it. So, you are not going to get a top-tier GM.
• It's expensive. You fire Ballard, you continue paying him. Chris Ballard's contract runs through the 2026 season. Does Irsay want to pay the hefty salaries for two GMs?

We only got Ballard because we had Andrew Luck already (I don't care what was said at the time). Luck made the Colts an attractive job. And whatever you think of Ballard, he was literally one of the top handful of young execs, and other teams had tried to hire him before.  

This time, everything about the team would be really unattractive to a high-quality GM candidate. 

All of our vets on defense are expensive, old, and injury-prone. Also, they are very dependent on our scheme.  

We have literally one blue chip young player on defense that is scheme-diverse: And that is Laiatu Latu, who actually might be better as a rush OLB in a different scheme.  

All the rest were drafted specifically for our current type of scheme and would be lesser players in most other schemes.  

Our offense features veteran players who don't fit the type of players that don't fit modern team building philosophy. Quentin Nelson, Jonathan Taylor, Michael Pittman, Alec Pierce, Josh Downs - each of these players could be unattractive for various reasons - the same reasons that caused them not to be drafted before we got to them. A new GM would probably have to cut Nelson, Taylor, and Pittman - but can you do that before finding out if Anthony Richardson is a guy? No, you can't. That delays everything for a year. 

So, you just want to fire the Head Coach, Shane Steichen . . .

• Steichen is the mind behind our offense and was already judged to be the best available coach for a mobile type QB (btw, I'm not sure I agree with that). You fire him, you will delay the evaluation of Richardson. And you HAVE to know what Richardson is, before it comes time to re-sign him.
• It's expensive. You fire Steichen, you continue paying him. His contract runs through the 2026 season. Does Irsay want to pay the hefty salaries for two HCs?
• You don't have a clear evaluation on Anthony Richardson yet, so are you hiring a head coach / offensive mind that specifically fits Richardson? When Richardson might not be the guy? And do you really think that we could attract a blue chip HC prospect when they are going to be stuck with an iffy QB for one or two years? That is a very real issue.

So, you just want to fire the Defensive Coordinator, Gus Bradley . . .

• As noted above, we have a defense full of vets who are scheme dependent, old, and well-paid on recently signed contracts.
• The following guys would be lesser players in most other defensive schemes:  Juju Brents (speed), Jaylon Jones (speed), Nick Cross (skill-set), and Zaire Franklin (coverage, short arms).
• Since any major defensive scheme change would require a turnover of talent, is it really a good idea to change the scheme while you are trying to take advantage of Richardson's rookie deal? Are you going to blow up the defense and have it be terrible for the next two years?
• What if we say we will fire Bradley but move to a similar scheme? Well, that would mean bringing in a guy who runs a similar scheme, which is widely considered outdated. And obligate yourself to this guy for several years? For an also-ran type of candidate?
• What if we just fire Bradley and promote a member of his staff? None of the assistant coaches are considered DC material, and certainly do not have Bradley's skill running this defense.

Nope, I think we are stuck. Based on everything above, and probably a thousand factors that are only known behind closed doors.