[Pitt Gorilla]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

Yeah - I don't know that I specifically recall what my stance was.

But I've never disliked Danna as a a player. And I think he's a good teammate. And he has a place in the league. Hell, for a solid backup DE that's relatively young and has inside/outside flexibility, the money isn't even bad.

I just have a philosophical opposition to these sorts of moves. It's not terribly dissimilar to the Tranquill deal in that I think you should mostly try to avoid paying 'market' for a guy who's pretty fungible. These are the sorts of guys you should be looking to develop.

And if you don't have one developed already, well that means you've created an opportunity for someone you have on hand who may not have gotten that run yet.

When you have truly great players on your roster and you typically pick at the back of rounds, finding more great players is luck. But finding solid players should be something that's pretty doable.

So keep finding your solid players to replace the solid players that hit FA, bank the cap space to retain/acquire BETTER players and make it happen.

The player and even the contract aren't the problem. It's the philosophy of paying market rates to guys you shouldn't NEED to be paying them for.

Agreed. It's not always the player or the contract; sometimes, it's the roster spot. Winning in the NFL requires teams to have streams of young players ready to go. You get to have more of those players if you aren't paying fungible vets "market rate."