TwistedHusky
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2013
- Messages
- 6,903
- Reaction score
- 1,082
Two of the greatest FA signings or trades for players (not picks) in this team history were Michael Bennet and Cliff Avril. It was a stroke of luck that assuredly led us to those SBs. The most important was Lynch.
I suppose that kind of success with non-draft player acquisition led them to believe they were good at it, but this team makes terrible decisions in FA.
Almost every other FA decision by this team in the past 3 years have ranged from meh to disaster.
Most of you are familiar with my heated diatribes against Harvin. I had a palpable hatred for that guy from Day 1, because I saw him as a clear threat to keeping Tate - who I considered key to winning another SB.
Sure enough, Harvin contributed nothing but chewing up money on the salary cap. He did, however, lead several players to decide that they wanted big contracts too.
Missing Tate very likely led to the loss of the SB last year. One more offensive threat probably makes it harder to come back with all our defense guys injured. Because we could have been scoring to reopen the gap once they started to close it again.
Well we also signed Cary Williams to a big contract, who is like a tall Kelly Jennings. He will cover (sometimes) but he ends up trailing often and he never plays the ball in the air. Maybe you could argue that guy from the Browns is OK, but even that one is somewhat a wash. He isn't an improvement over who we lost, for sure.
The bigger question is, have any FA signings or trades for players worked out with any significant success? A few guys became backup FBs but for the most part our decisions in non-drafted player moves (not counting UDFAs) have been a mix of bad and blah.
That Harvin deal was as close to the death knell as anything the moment we lost Tate. Then the CJ signing only hurt us worse. I think this team needs to realize that signing big money players doesn't work for us because we tend to do more damage to the team with the failures than if we just keep our good players.
I suppose that kind of success with non-draft player acquisition led them to believe they were good at it, but this team makes terrible decisions in FA.
Almost every other FA decision by this team in the past 3 years have ranged from meh to disaster.
Most of you are familiar with my heated diatribes against Harvin. I had a palpable hatred for that guy from Day 1, because I saw him as a clear threat to keeping Tate - who I considered key to winning another SB.
Sure enough, Harvin contributed nothing but chewing up money on the salary cap. He did, however, lead several players to decide that they wanted big contracts too.
Missing Tate very likely led to the loss of the SB last year. One more offensive threat probably makes it harder to come back with all our defense guys injured. Because we could have been scoring to reopen the gap once they started to close it again.
Well we also signed Cary Williams to a big contract, who is like a tall Kelly Jennings. He will cover (sometimes) but he ends up trailing often and he never plays the ball in the air. Maybe you could argue that guy from the Browns is OK, but even that one is somewhat a wash. He isn't an improvement over who we lost, for sure.
The bigger question is, have any FA signings or trades for players worked out with any significant success? A few guys became backup FBs but for the most part our decisions in non-drafted player moves (not counting UDFAs) have been a mix of bad and blah.
That Harvin deal was as close to the death knell as anything the moment we lost Tate. Then the CJ signing only hurt us worse. I think this team needs to realize that signing big money players doesn't work for us because we tend to do more damage to the team with the failures than if we just keep our good players.
