Quote:
Originally Posted by #56fanatic
I am not saying he can't play. My point is we fielded the oldest defense in the NFL last year and we need some younger, quicker, more physical players. what kind of deal do you think he is going to want? do we really want to give this guy the money he wants when we need a lot of different areas upgraded. We drafted a guy last year(Rocky) who should be given a shot at playing, and if Fletcher is brought in to compete or add depth, fine. but at what cost? I just dont see the need to bring in a guy, on the down slope of his career for a year or two, then have to cut him and eat more cap money. We dont have the draft picks, i know that. but why not trade down, get a couple more picks and look at drafting a guy that could compete as well as he could. We gave up picks to move up to get Rocky, are we going to let him rott on the bench? He should be expected to start. to say someone isn't football smart because I dont believe in bringing guys in that are obviously on the downside of their career is crazy. Haven't we gone down that road enough of bringing in people towards the end of their career? There have to be other options out there more attractive than a 32 year old LB.
|
Well first off Rocky is an OLB and despite what many seem to think MLB and OLB are not just interchangeable. Especially in GW's system. In this system the MLB is the QB of the defense. He has to know what everyone is supposed to do so he can adjust when he diagrams what the other team is doing. For some reason I highly doubt anyone at Redskins park is willing to go into the next season with a guy who showed he can play the position average(Marshall) and a second year player who couldn't even crack the lineup at his natural position until mop up time. Rocky is not the answer.
As for trading down I agree it would be great to trade down and pick up several quality players but there are some problems with that too. First and foremost people make the statement 'trade down and pick up some more picks' just like they make the 'hire a GM statement'. Like it is some magical formula where you can go to the GM store or the Tradedown store and magically everything is fine. Well I have news for those people, trading takes two teams and if no one is willing to offer anything of value it won't happen. It is NOT a sound strategy to PLAN ON TRADING. You plan and prepare on NOT TRADING DOWN and if an opportuniy arises then you re-evaluate. The same for a GM. Just because we have a GM doesn't mean everything is fine. He would need to be a GOOD GM. There are plenty of teams who have traded down and ended up with scrap pieces because they traded away a shot at a difference maker and ended up with decent roll players. And there are plenty teams that never win championships with GMs.
That being said, you go into free agency looking to fix as many holes as possible so you dont have to rely on drafting to field 22 decent starters. Then the draft is used for depth. If we can bring a guy who knows the systems and can play why would his age be a problem? No one is expecting the guy to come in be the MLB for the next 8 years. We are talking about getting a good player to play for us while we build depth at the same position and others also.
I totally fail to see why his age is even a consideration other than for health reasons.