Quote:
Originally Posted by JPH83
But as others have said, his job isn't to listen to us blowhards it's to make good decisions. I think your point is a fair one to illustrate the fact other GMs could well have made the same move. It doesn't mean it was a good one.
I thought the Jones switch to DE would work, but I'm an idiot. Perhaps it's fair to assume it was always Plan B, and that Ingram was asking for too much in those negotiations before settling for less at the Steelers. Perhaps Veach thought it preferable to get someone in early to gel with colleagues. Perhaps he not unreasonably expected Saunders and Wharton to step up. All reasonable, logical reasons for the Reed signing.
All I'm saying is it doesn't look like it'll work and it's reasonable to hold Veach accountable for his whiffs as well as his hits. Don't disagree with your conclusion, I guess i just dislike the zealots (not saying you're one) as much as the bed-wetters.
|
Great post and I see where you are coming from. Veach definitely is not above criticism for where he has failed. I am mainly highlighting how he has put talent on the Dline, they just haven't lived up to the billing. I do think Reed would look better if he was paired on the inside with Jones. I question why a Top 3 DT is playing DE. That is on coaching. Perhaps he looks harder at an Ingram or Houston if we don't have Jones at DE and the coaches didn't believe this would work. I am still not bothered by the Reed signing for the reasons stated earlier, plus he was signed to a one year deal. He plays well, we potentially resign him. He plays poorly and he walks at the end of the year and we lose nothing. Had we signed him to a Clark type contract then we could torch and pitchfork Veach.