Quote:
|
Originally Posted by RedBull
I know what your saying, but still, it's frustrating to see this team reward the same players that were unsuccessful on porous defense.
Why give the same junks on defense "new" contracts? I know what you mean that they didn't stand pat. I understand you. If re-signing your own players is your definition of not standing pat, then I could accept that.
But, it still goes to show that this team was not susceptible to change. And it showed terribly. My definition of standing pat is NOT keeping the same players that made your defense unsuccessful. My definition of standing pat, is a different approach. Like going out and signing new players that are better than the current ones you had, and improving your team from there. We didn't do that in 2004. We kept this team the same, without failing to change direction, and the price was paid.
|
I definately agree with you here as I'v e been making this case for 2 years now, but I believe the "different approach" the team took was hiring Gun.