NFL 2014 Off-Season Discussion Thread

PUSH

PUSH

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
flynnibus said:
I'm not saying signing the QB is the fix... I'm saying it's easy to put all your efforts into other players when you have a reliable franchise QB you home grew. It's a luxury many teams don't have which has all kinds of impacts...

It's a lot easier to convince people to stay and for reasonable money when people think you are going to WIN. And having a reliable, top QB with a history helps promote that stability and promise.

It's extremely difficult to say 'we're gonna go organic only' because that means waiting 2-4 years AND being successful on where you placed your bets. No coach will survive more than one attempt at that these days.

The pack's roster is an anomaly in the league.. and it's one that is possible due to your last two quarterbacks' success.
Click to expand...
The Packers are doing well because of their draft-and-develop philosophy. Part of the draft-and-develop philosophy is to stick to your draft board and not reach for a player. Take talent over need. Rodgers wasn't needed by the Packers when he was drafted, yet they took him. Eventually it worked wonders. Imagine if they passed him up, and he landed on a different team. Not only would the Packers be without a franchise QB, they would have to face that franchise QB.

Draft-and-develop takes time and commitment. It's not a one-year fix, unless you get lucky. A smart owner/GM would realize this. Unfortunately there are too many teams in a "win now" mode that they lose their patience and fire the coach and/or GM before they actually have time to execute their plan.

Free agency hasn't necessarily proven to turn a team into a winner. Yes, a patch player here and there is okay, as long as it doesn't ruin the cap. You look at teams who try and build a significant part of their roster through free agency, and it just doesn't pan out. The perfect example is the Eagles a few years back. Lots of free agent signings, and not one is still remaining on the team.
 
flynnibus

flynnibus

Premium Member
PUSH said:
The Packers are doing well because of their draft-and-develop philosophy. Part of the draft-and-develop philosophy is to stick to your draft board and not reach for a player. Take talent over need. Rodgers wasn't needed by the Packers when he was drafted, yet they took him. Eventually it worked wonders. Imagine if they passed him up, and he landed on a different team. Not only would the Packers be without a franchise QB, they would have to face that franchise QB.
Click to expand...

When they drafted Rodgers, Favre was already 36, and was entering his 16th year in the league. They had no true prospects behind Favre. Not sure where you get the idea they didn't need Rodgers... they took him explicitly knowing they wanted their next franchise QB. Favre's age practically mandated a succession plan be started.

PUSH said:
Draft-and-develop takes time and commitment. It's not a one-year fix, unless you get lucky. A smart owner/GM would realize this. Unfortunately there are too many teams in a "win now" mode that they lose their patience and fire the coach and/or GM before they actually have time to execute their plan.
Click to expand...

And that's the point I'm making... It's really easy to commit to a 2-4 year plan WHEN YOU ARE HEALTHY AND WINNING. If you are a team that is already out of the groove... surviving a 2-4 year plan of LOSING is something a coach or GM can only really do once. So it's really easy to say 'you should rely on the draft and not FA' when you are only looking to improve a minority of your team and you have WINS which allow you to grow without the pressure of showing short-term progress.

Simply put.. a team with a healthy core has the luxury of breathing room to mature those prospects. A team that lacks the core.. is looking to turnover MUCH MORE of it's team.. and also is facing pressure for results from those prospects sooner... does not have the same luxury and will be the team looking for proven FAs to prop them up.

The model works when you are turning over a small percent of your team all the time.. which is what everyone desires. But if your team is already crap.. you have a much bigger challenge and you basically have one attempt at this as a coach/GM. So those prospects better play out...

If you are a team on the cusp.. like Denver was.. like Seattle was.. you have a finite window of opportunity before the whole game changes. You can't sit back and say 'We need a WR and we are in the superbowl... and we can wait 3 years for the WR to develop'. 3 years from now the entire landscape will be different. So often teams will turn to FA for that 'boost' for a short period. They know they aren't career investments.

With the prices players demand now.. every team is forced to be in constant churn.

PUSH said:
Free agency hasn't necessarily proven to turn a team into a winner. Yes, a patch player here and there is okay, as long as it doesn't ruin the cap. You look at teams who try and build a significant part of their roster through free agency, and it just doesn't pan out. The perfect example is the Eagles a few years back. Lots of free agent signings, and not one is still remaining on the team.
Click to expand...

Yes, at extremes things can go awry. But at the other extreme, you can't just decide 'we are going to be organic only' when you are a loser. No one is given the luxury of waiting 5-10 years to get enough draft picks and successful ones... to build that core (let alone be able to retain them). When you are a loser... you have to balance long term investment and being able to field a team NOW.
 
PUSH

PUSH

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
flynnibus said:
When they drafted Rodgers, Favre was already 36, and was entering his 16th year in the league. They had no true prospects behind Favre. Not sure where you get the idea they didn't need Rodgers... they took him explicitly knowing they wanted their next franchise QB. Favre's age practically mandated a succession plan be started.



And that's the point I'm making... It's really easy to commit to a 2-4 year plan WHEN YOU ARE HEALTHY AND WINNING. If you are a team that is already out of the groove... surviving a 2-4 year plan of LOSING is something a coach or GM can only really do once. So it's really easy to say 'you should rely on the draft and not FA' when you are only looking to improve a minority of your team and you have WINS which allow you to grow without the pressure of showing short-term progress.

Simply put.. a team with a healthy core has the luxury of breathing room to mature those prospects. A team that lacks the core.. is looking to turnover MUCH MORE of it's team.. and also is facing pressure for results from those prospects sooner... does not have the same luxury and will be the team looking for proven FAs to prop them up.

The model works when you are turning over a small percent of your team all the time.. which is what everyone desires. But if your team is already crap.. you have a much bigger challenge and you basically have one attempt at this as a coach/GM. So those prospects better play out...

If you are a team on the cusp.. like Denver was.. like Seattle was.. you have a finite window of opportunity before the whole game changes. You can't sit back and say 'We need a WR and we are in the superbowl... and we can wait 3 years for the WR to develop'. 3 years from now the entire landscape will be different. So often teams will turn to FA for that 'boost' for a short period. They know they aren't career investments.

With the prices players demand now.. every team is forced to be in constant churn.



Yes, at extremes things can go awry. But at the other extreme, you can't just decide 'we are going to be organic only' when you are a loser. No one is given the luxury of waiting 5-10 years to get enough draft picks and successful ones... to build that core (let alone be able to retain them). When you are a loser... you have to balance long term investment and being able to field a team NOW.
Click to expand...
Okay, you go field a team of free agents, and I'll build through the draft.
 
flynnibus

flynnibus

Premium Member
PUSH said:
I did, but that doesn't mean I changed my opinion.
Click to expand...
Except me suggesting to build a team of free agents wasn't what I said at all... :rolleyes:

And recognize your view as seen as a packers fan is a distorted view cushioned by the success of two quarterbacks back to back. Your team has never faced Free Agency without the franchise QB being locked up. You've only had to face 2 losing seasons since unrestricted free agency. There is no comparison to what has worked for the Green Bay Packers in the last 25 years compared to say... the Cleveland browns.. or the raiders.. or the lions or the bills.

Entirely different situations.

Of course every GM in the league would tell you they'd prefer to draft and grow their own... that's a no brainer. But you only have so many draft picks.. and you can't simply go into hibernation for a few years and say "we'll be back in 3 years and then judge us"... they have to field teams every year and are expected to win every year.
 
PUSH

PUSH

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
flynnibus said:
Except me suggesting to build a team of free agents wasn't what I said at all... :rolleyes:

And recognize your view as seen as a packers fan is a distorted view cushioned by the success of two quarterbacks back to back. Your team has never faced Free Agency without the franchise QB being locked up. You've only had to face 2 losing seasons since unrestricted free agency. There is no comparison to what has worked for the Green Bay Packers in the last 25 years compared to say... the Cleveland browns.. or the raiders.. or the lions or the bills.

Entirely different situations.

Of course every GM in the league would tell you they'd prefer to draft and grow their own... that's a no brainer. But you only have so many draft picks.. and you can't simply go into hibernation for a few years and say "we'll be back in 3 years and then judge us"... they have to field teams every year and are expected to win every year.
Click to expand...
I'm not denying that it's easier to win with a franchise QB. I'm saying that whether you have a franchise QB or not, free agency is not the way to build a team. Generally, free agents are overpriced and/or old. You need to identify your core players and sign them to long-term deals. If you don't view them as core players, or if you can't sign them to the price you want, you have to be willing to let another team overpay for them.

The difference between the Packers and other teams is the Packers have a more patient GM. The Packers scouts are very good at evaluating talent. I can't say the same for the other teams you listed. Does that change the fact that draft-and-develop is not the way to go? No.

In order to get that franchise QB that you need to have long-term success, you have to draft him. Hence my view of the draft-and-develop strategy. When you get that QB, what good is it going to be if you have ruined your salary cap by signing high-priced free agents? Eventually you have to cut those players because you can't afford them. Often times they have guaranteed money left on their contracts that must be paid and still counts against the cap.
 
flynnibus

flynnibus

Premium Member
PUSH said:
I'm not denying that it's easier to win with a franchise QB. I'm saying that whether you have a franchise QB or not, free agency is not the way to build a team
Click to expand...

No one really builds a team via Free Agency - they fill a team with FA. The point your ideal over looks is... the guys need to field a team EVERY YEAR and are expected to win ever year.

To have a team full of 'home growns' you need 4-6 years of continuous successful draft picks. That's 4-6 years you need to keep your job... even before your strategy plays out. It's just math.. you only have so many picks and players take time to develop. And if any of those guys didn't pan out (as most picks don't..) you're that much further behind. So if you are starting from the ground floor, or almost nothing... it's nearly impossible unless you hit the luck jackpot. That's why so many teams struggle with what sounds like the obvious.

Contrast that with a team that already has a successful core.. and the strain is significantly less because you have less to build and you have less pressure if you have decent wins. Imagine being tasks to maintain a turnover of 10 guys.. vs being tasked to maintain the turnover of 40 guys.

It really takes an amazing alignment of things to happen to build a franchise from scratch that consistently performs... and why you see the teams that struggle now, continue to struggle. Even teams with the closest turnarounds... like the Lions.. still fall significantly short. No one gets jackpots with every pick. Your players are not going to last forever waiting for the 'next guy' to develop. There is always a rolling window the GMs have to plan for.. looking ahead from their current team to try to align the pieces.. and looking at the long term stability of the team.

The game the GMs have to play is amazing honestly. In the current salary situations and having to manage all those moving pieces... oh and then figure in the injuries. It's gotta be like playing chess on the wing of an airplane :)
 
PUSH

PUSH

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
flynnibus said:
No one really builds a team via Free Agency - they fill a team with FA. The point your ideal over looks is... the guys need to field a team EVERY YEAR and are expected to win ever year.

To have a team full of 'home growns' you need 4-6 years of continuous successful draft picks. That's 4-6 years you need to keep your job... even before your strategy plays out. It's just math.. you only have so many picks and players take time to develop. And if any of those guys didn't pan out (as most picks don't..) you're that much further behind. So if you are starting from the ground floor, or almost nothing... it's nearly impossible unless you hit the luck jackpot. That's why so many teams struggle with what sounds like the obvious.

Contrast that with a team that already has a successful core.. and the strain is significantly less because you have less to build and you have less pressure if you have decent wins. Imagine being tasks to maintain a turnover of 10 guys.. vs being tasked to maintain the turnover of 40 guys.

It really takes an amazing alignment of things to happen to build a franchise from scratch that consistently performs... and why you see the teams that struggle now, continue to struggle. Even teams with the closest turnarounds... like the Lions.. still fall significantly short. No one gets jackpots with every pick. Your players are not going to last forever waiting for the 'next guy' to develop. There is always a rolling window the GMs have to plan for.. looking ahead from their current team to try to align the pieces.. and looking at the long term stability of the team.

The game the GMs have to play is amazing honestly. In the current salary situations and having to manage all those moving pieces... oh and then figure in the injuries. It's gotta be like playing chess on the wing of an airplane :)
Click to expand...
By building a team via free agency, I don't mean the majority of the players are free agents - that's not financially possible.

For draft-and-develop, you need patience, as I've said multiple times. Patience may require a few losing seasons. But that's better than destroying your salary cap, as that takes a longer time to recover. Because once you ruin your salary cap, you have to cut-and-gut (as the Cowboys will have to do in the very near future) and then build through the draft. I know fans and owners don't want to hear this, but it's true.

In order for draft-and-develop to work, you have to be committed to it. Too often teams give up too quickly in the desperation to win a Super Bowl. Just a couple examples off the top of my head: Jarrett Boykin and DuJuan Harris. Both of these players were cut by the Jaguars because the team did not have the patience or commitment to develop them. In the end, they lost two solid players who were quickly taken by another team.

In order for draft-and-develop to work, you need a GM and scouts who has more hits than misses in the draft. Obviously some teams are better at this than others.

Another reason why free agency is not the way to go, is compensatory draft picks. These are picks a team is compensated for the net loss of talent every year. For example, if a team loses Player A to free agency and does not sign anyone in free agency to replace him, they are compensated a pick ranging from Round 3 to Round 7, based on the value of the player. The league has a top-secret formula for this. Nonetheless, if you sign a comparable player to Player A, you likely won't get a draft pick in return. I know 3rd round to 7th round value doesn't seem like a lot, but what if that player turns out to be your next starting lineman, or your next starting safety?

I'm not against a free agent here and there as long as the value is right, but signing several is not an efficient way to form a team.

Referring to your comments about starting a team from scratch... There are no real teams that are going to need to add 40 players to a team. Most teams don't have a problem with meeting roster requirements with the players they have in place from the season prior, the drafted rookies, and the undrafted rookies.
 
flynnibus

flynnibus

Premium Member
PUSH said:
Referring to your comments about starting a team from scratch... There are no real teams that are going to need to add 40 players to a team. Most teams don't have a problem with meeting roster requirements with the players they have in place from the season prior, the drafted rookies, and the undrafted rookies.
Click to expand...

No team will ever have a problem finding someone willing to work on the 53 man roster. But when you are bottom of the barrel... and looking to rebuild.. over 3-5 years how many people are you going to turnover? More like 40 :) That was the point of the reference.

if you are solid already.. your turnover is low. Making developing easier. If you are weak, you are looking at a much higher turnover, making developing taking that much longer to do because of the limited # of draft picks you get and the time it takes to develop people. Undrafted players are only a small fraction.

The league is going to change again with the new CBA in place.. as we get these rookies off their contracts in the next two years it will be the start of the new dynamic.

I do believe we will see more and more FAs on the market and that will drive their prices down. The current CBA makes it so enticing to take risks with draft picks and cut the experienced, but expensive players. The days of paying crazy money for first rounders to have them sit on the bench and just eat crazy cap space are done.
 
flynnibus

flynnibus

Premium Member
The Talib deal is kind of crazy... huge money. I mean I know they had used up Champ.. but wow.

And probably going to have the best opportunity to sign D Ware too? Frightening...
 
flynnibus

flynnibus

Premium Member
And what is Bill B's plan for the Patriots? They appear to be heading to another season starting with an inexperienced, or mashed up receiver core. Their defense was not the same when Talib wasn't on the field.. (reevis maybe???)

Pulling the season out that the Patriots did last year was a work of art.. but 'stabalizing' doesn't seem to be the theme of 2014 offseason for them!
 
PUSH

PUSH

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
flynnibus said:
And what is Bill B's plan for the Patriots? They appear to be heading to another season starting with an inexperienced, or mashed up receiver core. Their defense was not the same when Talib wasn't on the field.. (reevis maybe???)

Pulling the season out that the Patriots did last year was a work of art.. but 'stabalizing' doesn't seem to be the theme of 2014 offseason for them!
Click to expand...
My guess is they are going to try and get some players through the draft. This draft is considered to be very deep, meaning you can get impact players in the later rounds. I'm sure Belichick has a plan in place; he's one of the best coaches in NFL history.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom