Steelers Fever Forums

Steelers Fever Forums (http://forums.steelersfever.com/index.php)
-   NFL Football (http://forums.steelersfever.com/forumdisplay.php?f=9)
-   -   Free Agency should have a stigma attached to it. (http://forums.steelersfever.com/showthread.php?t=95620)

PATS16N0 01-03-2013 02:12 PM

Free Agency should have a stigma attached to it.
 
Should attaining big names in Free Agency come with some sort of stigma?

The New England Patriots are driven by developing their own talent. They drafted Brady, Gronk, Hernandez, Spikes, Mayo, Wilfork, the offensive line, etc. They've taken undrafted free agents that other teams thought were worthless (like Woodhead, Welker, etc) and made them successful.

This is why the Patriots under Kraft and Belichick are so successful, like teams like them.
Year after year after year after year of contending for Superbowls.

Contrast this with the Jets who tried to buy themselves two Superbowl rings, completely sacrificing their future for a present that is now the past. The Jets went to two back to back AFC Championships on the power of free agency. Now they're destroyed, in shambles, with so huge a salary cap problem still anchored to them because of that run that they're only responsible option is to trade Revis and all their names for draft picks and accepting the fact they're finished in the division for a decade.

Teams that dump huge amounts of money into free agency, signing aging, already established stars with blockbuster contracts, try to buy themselves out of irrelevancy but find themselves relegated back to it the moment their stars drop off and they have no future and no cap space.

These teams (Jets, Broncos, etc) are just filler teams to mix the seasons up while the real teams (Patriots, Packers, Steelers, Giants etc) rule the league with consistency.

It's one thing to plug holes with free agency, but selling your team identity for one Superbowl run at the expense of the future is pathetic. About as pathetic as Bronco fans latching on to the Colts legacy like parasites. The nationwide support for Tebow and the Broncos of 2011 was organic. The team had an identity.

Now it's just the `Peyton Manning in orange` team.

Signing big names in free agency should come with a stigma. It should be considered lowly.
It should automatically mean your coach is awful and your organization is bush league and your fan base is desperate and shameless, willing to pay any mercenary to wear their worthless jersey and help them get a meaningless win they should realistically take no pride in.

steelfury02 01-03-2013 02:19 PM

Re: Free Agency should have a stigma attached to it.
 
I hate your team, but I respect the hell out of the Patriot Way - except for that whole taping business:rofl:

in all seriousness - I agree with you - the teams who are consistently, over a long period of time, in it to win it all - do not make free agency their bread and butter. More often than not - the teams that contend get a low to mid-level name and plug a hole. Those guys tend to contribute more towards huge wins than the names, ala Randle El, Cedick Wilson, and Najeh Davenport and your man Woodhead - who really always seems to shock the hell out of me.

How many times have I seen Woodhead in open space, with no one around him - it is mind boggling how he gets "lost" much like Ray Rice does actually, and then makes the D pay.

GMU Steeler 01-03-2013 02:29 PM

Re: Free Agency should have a stigma attached to it.
 
Can't believe I'm going to agree with a Patriots fan. I jest obviously because you do raise some good points here. Anyhow, maybe stigma's not the word or what I'd do but I'll put it to you this way, I do respect the teams that build from within more than teams that go the big name FA route. It's why I actually dislike the local Redskins. They're not as bad as they used to be but man oh man was it annoying watching Snyder just get other teams' big names. Though I shouldn't complain because the stupid contract they gave Adam Archuletta made Ryan Clark expendible for them and Ryan's been a very good free safety for us and Arch's been out of the league for a few years now. Plus I think teams that from the ground up are more fun to watch anyhow. It's more fun to watch players come into the league together and stuff. I'm okay with using FA to plug the occasional hole but I think it's lame to use it as a means of building your team. And I have to admit while I intensely dislike your team, you do build your team the right way and that is admirable*
*Though not enough to make me even think to root for you in a playoff game ever, though I'm sure the feeling is mutual

The_Joker 01-03-2013 02:38 PM

Re: Free Agency should have a stigma attached to it.
 
Unlike the above poster, I like the local Redskins. RG3, Morris, Orakpo, Kerrigan, all these guys are developed stars.

steelfury02 01-03-2013 02:41 PM

Re: Free Agency should have a stigma attached to it.
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Quackjack (Post 1073747)
Unlike the above poster, I like the local Redskins. RG3, Morris, Orakpo, Kerrigan, all these guys are developed stars.

He did mention that they aren't doing the FA thing as much - I agree with you - seems like maybe Snyder is starting to get it just a little - and VOILA - division and home playoff game! Imagine that!

mikegrimey 01-03-2013 05:48 PM

Re: Free Agency should have a stigma attached to it.
 
I agree w the spirit of this post but find the shots at the broncos (amplified by praise for the Tebow days) goofy, trying to get Peyton Manning in FA is perfectly reasonable, they were atrocious at the position, and got the best FA QB to be on the market in forever probably (Montana possibly?) without the manning signing do u fink the broncos would be legit Super Bowl contenders? This year, next year or the ear after that?

Cherinko 01-03-2013 05:56 PM

Re: Free Agency should have a stigma attached to it.
 
It looks like you're really worried about Denver..

SteelersCanada 01-03-2013 06:02 PM

Re: Free Agency should have a stigma attached to it.
 
Sweet Jesus, am I about to agree with a Patriots fan?

You're right, though. The Eagles are going to be in the bottom of the league for a while, too, after they tried to buy a Lombardi and went 8-8. Other teams need to realize that this isn't baseball and you can't buy championships like the Yankees have been so successful in doing.

harrison'samonster 01-03-2013 06:13 PM

Re: Free Agency should have a stigma attached to it.
 
I also agree with the spirit of the post like Mikegrimey. I love it that the Steelers are always building from within, it's something to be proud of. However, if a team has to go out and sign a big FA, it's what has to be done. Denver this year is a perfect example. They have a really good team and they were only lacking at one position.

VaDave 01-03-2013 07:02 PM

Re: Free Agency should have a stigma attached to it.
 
There is nothing inherently wrong with picking up a Free Agent. We've hit of few really good ones over the years that didn't break the bank, like the Bus, James Farrior, Jeff Hartings to name a few. What is wrong with FA is $100 Million for loads like Albert Haynesworth.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:15 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Shoutbox provided by vBShout v6.2.1 (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging v3.0.8 (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd. Runs best on HiVelocity Hosting.
Navbar with Avatar by Motorradforum