Originally Posted by TRR

Until Keitzman produces stats of what other NFL teams have done (offensively and defensively) in the same time span, then I really could care less.

How many Pro Bowl D players have the Cardinals drafted, etc....

And when did the "Pro Bowl" become the definition of a quality football player?

Originally Posted by keg in kc

I think that's right. The league has matured and doesn't treat free agency like it did in the mid- to late-90s. Successful teams draft stars that they retain and only make occasional forays into free agency for 'name' players. Generally those moves are made as a luxury rather than a need. On the flip side, teams like us are left trying to correct repeated draft mistakes by gambling on older and/or injured players. Consistent success in the NFL today is clearly dependent upon a strong core of drafted players and, beyond that, I don't think it takes a rocket scientist to connect our draft results to our on-the-field results.

Originally Posted by Taco John

That's a new one... A dog who wants to have his nose rubbed into it... Nay. Demands.

Originally Posted by TRR

Well, IMO, the Patriots would have never won the Super Bowl without Corey Dillon last season, so as I said before. I think it averages out.

It depends on the individual.

Originally Posted by TRR

Until Keitzman produces stats of what other NFL teams have done (offensively and defensively) in the same time span, then I really could care less.

How many Pro Bowl D players have the Cardinals drafted, etc....

And when did the "Pro Bowl" become the definition of a quality football player?

Originally Posted by SideWinder

So how did they do it without Dillon twice before.

Even if your assumption were true, it is still a team that has drafted a core group of talent, and used FA to tweak the roster.

Originally Posted by TRR

Well, IMO, the Patriots would have never won the Super Bowl without Corey Dillon last season, so as I said before. I think it averages out.

It depends on the individual.

Originally Posted by keg in kc

Successful teams draft stars that they retain and only make occasional forays into free agency for 'name' players.

Originally Posted by whoman69

You want to compare us to one of the worst franchises in the league? In order for us to win the SB, we need to compare favorably to the best teams in the league. I did a post awhile back comparing us to the Steelers. They kicked our asses, not even close. No search function or I'd find it for you.

Originally Posted by keg in kc

Besides pointing out that he was not a free agent and they won two Superbowls before his arrival, I'd reiterate this point:

Originally Posted by TRR

FA/Trade...Same thing. And I wasn't talking about the past 2 Super Bowls. Every season is different.

Originally Posted by Vlad Logicslav

Gee then Carl was a colossal failure from the very beginning except for DT. Look at his first 7years (pre-free agency), other than DT there were no other instant starters and in fact almost none of them went on to become starters.

89 Derrick Thomas (only starter his full first year)
90 Percy Snow (never a starter)
91 Harvey Williams (never a starter)
92 Dale Carter (not an instant starter)
93 No first round draft pick
94 Greg Hill (never really a starter)
95 Trezelle Jenkins (never really even played)

Originally Posted by rufusmaqe

If Carl Peterson's drafts are so BAD, why bother making stuff up that's not true?

Originally Posted by rufusmaqe

If Carl Peterson's drafts are so BAD, why bother making stuff up that's not true?

Harvey Williams started for 2 full years after leaving KC and rushed for back-to-back 1000-yard seasons.

Greg Hill was a starter for 2 different teams but broke both legs.

Originally Posted by rufusmaqe

Kevin Keitzman is indicative of PRECISELY why Carl Peterson is still here.

If KC had anything resembling REAL MEDIA instead of these morons, maybe they could have affected some real change.