Although I didn't vote in the poll, since I'm a Patriots fan, I would've voted "older". Pioli, when in New England, was skilled at finding older players who were either underutilized by their teams (Mike Vrabel) or supposedly "washed up" (Rodney Harrison, Junior Seau) and got some mileage out of them. Not to mention finding supposed "problem children" looking for a career revitalization (Corey Dillon, Randy Moss).

Whenever Belichick makes a move, I ask myself the simple question, "Is the guy he wants to put out there better than another option?" Yeah, a guy like Seau might be 89 years old and slow as a tortoise, but he still might be better than the young clueless guy who shows nothing in practices and training camp.

Ayup. In 2000 the Pats signed, as free agents, Joe Andruzzi, Bobby Hamilton, and Otis Smith. In 2001 they added Je'Rod Cherry, Mike Compton, Damon Huard, Larry Izzo, David Patten, Roman Phifer, Anthony Pleasant, Antowain Smith, Chris Sullivan, Mike Vrabel, and Ken Walter. They all contributed towards the first Super Bowl win.

Sometimes, with a young team, you gotta throw a lot of sh*t at the wall and see what sticks. So don't fret too much if a pick-up doesn't work out: the key is that they be CHEAP pick-ups, who won't ruin your cap for seasons to come. Save the big money for the big names (like the Pats did with Rosevelt Colvin and Adalius Thomas) and hope to hit on a cheap older guy or underutilized backup.

And don't fret too much if Pioli signs guys you haven't heard much about. For example, the Pats just signed LB Paris Lenon. He's 31, and he played for the crap-ass Lions. I'm sure they didn't break the bank for the guy. But he led his team in tackles, so I won't be surprised if and when New Englanders go from "Who the #$^& is he?" to "Omigod I love this guy!". Those are the kind of pick-ups Belichick and Pioli made together and hopefully the kind Pioli will make for you guys: the Wes Welkers of the world, who are just waiting for an opportunity.

He's working for ESPN for a reason

The reviews are not good. But they are local.

I loved the way Herm wanted to build a team. It sounds great to build a young team like, similar to the way the Colts were built, and win 10+ games a season for the next decade and squeeze in a Lombardi or two.

It clearly wasn't working... at least yet.... would it have worked? Who's to say? I don't think so. I think that what many, including myself, lost sight of is that you need older guys to show the younger guys the way.

Eventually, five years from now, I would like to see the Chiefs with their own culture, and see them drafting and developing their own players. So that, like the Colts, the Chiefs can field 22 starters who are all homegrown. I guess 21, assuming that Cassel pans out.

If the Chiefs are signing stop gaps five years from now, then Pioli is failing.

Take five hundred and eighty-six point two:
Vets....not.....permanent.
Vets....no....get.....big....contract.
Can't....build....entire.....team.....in....two.....seasons.

And CUT! That's a wrap.

I agree with the Mike Webster point about Grunhard because they play the same position. And let's face it, Derrick Johnson is not a young guy anymore. He has been in the league for 4 years.

So, what young guy is Thomas or Engram going to teach??? This whole teaching and leadership thing is entirely overrated for player development unless the player is an understudy like Cottam was with Tony Gonzalez last year.

Please say something like Zach Thomas and Bobby Engram are going to teach Tyson Jackson how to play the game... That may sound good to some people who have never played football or like to read newspapers. But in reality that doesn't happen.

If it doesn't happen in reality then why do you have guys like Tim Grunhardt saying it does? Why do you have young guys like Meachem in New Orleans saying that he went to David Patton and basically lived with him in the offseason to learn how to play, and watch film, and how to prepare? The fact is, it does happen, but only if you have players that are willing to take advantage of it.

If Derrick Johnson doesn't want to learn from Vrabel and Thomas, then you're right those guys will have given a year or maybe two of service and left. But generally you have at least a few motivated guys on the team that want to learn. And when you're a young guy on a team that has not won very much the fact is, you don't know what it takes week in and week out to prepare to actually win on a consistent basis. Thomas, Vrabel, and Engram all come from places where they won a lot more than they lost. They have been in play off games, Super bowls, etc and won. We don't have anyone on this team that can show these guys what kind of effort it takes to get there, and what kind of attitude you need to have as a team to become a champion.

So the fact is, you can't win with a completely young roster because those guys don't know what it takes to win, and then when they lose over and over and over again, losing becomes a fact of life. It's why some franchises can't get over the losing hump, because they never changed the culture. That culture gets changed by players who know how to win, and what it takes to get there. Young guys don't know how to get there unless the vet leaders take them along. That sir, is a fact.

I know, I cry myself to sleep every night, we barely gave Herm's 23 year plan a chance. God, Where we could have been in just 20 more years.

Post of the month!!
Posted via Mobile Device

I think if you are going to infuse your team with Veteran players, they need to be of the leadership by example caliper. I think this is what Pioli, and Haley are trying to do. Bring in players that lead by example. Were still young folks.

I've reached the inevitable conclusion that you are a real dumbass.

Wait a minute, does this mean Huard's coming back?
:cuss: Damnit Scott!

Bar' steps up and in to the Gauntlet! :clap: Welcome to Hell my friend. ;)

ROFL

You obviously don't read to well. I said that a player can learn from a vet that plays the same position.

The examples that you've given with Grunhard and Meachem are with players that play the same position.

My point is that you guys act like Bobby Engram is going to be a leader for Tyson Jackson. Not going to happen.

And as far as the culture... You are buying more into the company line than I am. You obviously believe all the hype of bring the vet in to lead and change players attitude. I don't buy into all that crap. These guys are pros. They should have plenty of motivation. And Zach and Engram aren't even the best at their position on the team. And how is Vrabel leading by not showing up??? He doesn't want to be here. He would much rather play for a team that can compete to win now.

And why not sign a vet that's a little younger??? Why do they all have to be so freakin old. Why are many of you so in love with old players? There have been other veteran free agents available that are productive and are 30 and under.

The real reason is that these guys are cheap and fans still like them. They can still play some what productively and get by with them and hope they draft to replace them. And that plan may work out fine..... 3 or 4 years from now.... and maybe it won't...

I'd rather take a chance on a player like Matt Jones than waste time with Bobby Engram. I know he's a risk, but at least he's got some upside. What upside do we have with Engram?

And I would rather have kept Pat Thomas than sign Zach Thomas for the same reason. Pat is young and has upside. He obviously needs to improve, but he also obviously has more of a future than Zach.