Quote:
Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501
Well, you know I agree with you that great teams are built through the draft. But it's different when your team ignores those positions in both the draft and free agency for 3 years. Those core positions take 2-3 years to develop. So by the time those guys develop, we're in year 6 of the Pioli era. If we had been filling our roster with some nice potential guys at those positions for 3 years, I'd feel differently.
That's why I'm harping on the Orton over Cassel thing. I know Orton isn't the answer. But when your front office completely ignores the QB position for 3 years (except for one guy who is clearly not the answer), then you have to use free agency to bring in a stopgap. Those stopgaps don't kill your cap, but they at least give you some reasonable chance at winning and it allows you to be more selective about young QBs as well as give them time to develop and grow. Orton is significantly better than Cassel. He allows your team to start running an offense you believe you can run for 5 years (with the hope that in 1-2 years, you have a new QB running that same system). Cassel doesn't do that. And by the way, whereas Cassel makes you complete non-contenders, at least Orton makes you a longshot.
So yeah, downgrading at CB, downgrading at QB, and making less than optimal decisions at coach... those balance out the good moves we made at support positions. We can't call this offseason anything close to success if we don't make any moves, whether free agency or the draft, to address some unbelievably critical core positional needs.
|
You still fail to understand the only thing that matters in this discussion.
The question is, "Would you consider the offseason FA period a success for the Chiefs?".
It doesn't ask how this FA period is affected by any other period or decision of Pioli's that is not a part of this FA period.
In and of itself, this FA period, standing apart from every other issue, is a success.