Quote:
Originally Posted by GTripp0012
The term "building for the future" doesn't imply loading up your team with replacement-level backs with a favorable birthdate.
It implies that you 1)draft/sign, 2)develop, and 3)plan to use younger talent. When you're choosing from a group of massively flawed players, you can choose "none of the above".
This is why I suggest that teams wait for a cut or two before deciding to keep 3 or 4 RBs. If you try to develop non-talent, you're just wasting time and resources.
For the record, I think we could have used our 5th or 6th rounder on a RB, and am confused to exactly why we did not do that.
|
See here's the difference between our thinking. I'd rather have Mason cause we did pick him up/sign him. Our scouts saw something. We developed him for 2 yrs now and he's actually getting better according to the coach's...enough to make them seriously have to think what to do with him. So apparently he's not massively flawed or they would not have had him here 2 yrs and challenged San Diego for his rights this yr. If he was massively flawed I think the coach's would have passed on him and let San Diego see for themselves why we passed.
Replacement level backs. Thats funny. So I guess the Denver Bronco's with last yrs coaching staff (Shanahan) seemed to have the best running game for like the past 10 yrs apparently cause they were good at picking up excellent RB's had a massively huge brain fart and picked up Alridge who clearly has massive flaws. OK. Keep using that arguement cause apparently "it" does not have massive flaw written all over it.