KiwiHawk
New member
I look at it this way: Wilson's mobility and innate ability to avoid rushers devalues the necessity of a world-class OL. It goes from a must-have to a nice-to-have.Mick063":1sfhnw8t said:You manage your roster around a salary cap. For that reason, it is impossible to have an all pro at every position.
I would say that having an all pro at Safety, Mike, and Quarterback is sufficient for a winning formula. Then it is a matter of getting just enough competency from the remaining contracts and position groups. Bang for the buck. They don't have to be the best at their position. They just have to be worth their contract. It is about the sum being greater than the parts.
If we didn't have Wilson we would need a better OL, but we have Wilson, so we don't. I'm not particularly happy that it's an all-eggs-in-one-basket approach, but your point about salary cap and managing expenses is quite valid, and Wilson has proven to be very resilient.
So the people who say our OL isn't great are correct, as are the people who say that without Wilson we're a .500 team. But because we have Wilson, both of those arguments are moot.