Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Laz
we still did next to nothing in free agency.
If we decided that all those guys weren't good enough then we should have replaced them in free agency. Our backups couldn't beat all those 'sucky' guys out of their starting jobs last year but now we expect them to be better than the guys they couldn't win a job from?
Regardless of how you want to spin it, last year and this year represent conflicting philosophies. Last year was a 'add talent wherever/whenever you can to win game'. This year is 'patiently build for the future and avoid spending big money on old guys'.
flip-flopping between philosophies is not a good idea, it almost always ends in failure.
|
Oh Laz, you poor, short sighted, deluded bastard.
What they did last year was to provide a foundation for the team under a new scheme, coaching staff and front office. They needed to get players in here immediately who could provide a platform from whence to build a new team from. Alex Smith, Mike DeVito and Sean Smith were guys we had to have. Cornerstone type guys.
At this point going forward, it's about team building as it should be - through the draft, getting the guys who fit your system the best, allowing them to grow as a cohesive unit and coalesce into a high level football team. Seattle, the Packers, the Eagles of the mid-Reid era all did this and this is what you are going to see now.
Signing stop gap, over priced, injured guys from the free agency wire is a horrible concept to team building. Look at what happened to the Chiefs during the Vermeil years, especially on the defensive side of the ball, when this was the prime philosophy.
We jettisoned four guys who were mediocre/marginal talents that really didn't fit the scheme we now have in place and they have all been replaced by guys who are, at the very worst, lateral moves.
I give credit to the new Chiefs FO/coaching staff for not taking the "quick fix" route and rather building as a team should be built or overpaying for mediocrity.
A+.