RiverDog wrote:Not that Britt is anymore deserving than the long list of offensive linemen that our OL felt wasn't worth a 2nd contract, at least it shows that they're concerned enough about the OL fortunes that they're willing to overpay a little to achieve some stability.
NorthHawk wrote:The last couple of years snapped the FO back to reality that they can't keep letting good players leave and rebuild the OL every year and still expect continuity.
It was a bad idea all along.
NorthHawk wrote:The last couple of years snapped the FO back to reality that they can't keep letting good players leave and rebuild the OL every year and still expect continuity.
It was a bad idea all along.
I don't get this, who do you wish they would have re-signed? Everybody on the O-line that they have let go has been viewed as a clear overpay. Who would you have liked them to resign that they let go on the O-line? Carp? Breno? Sweezy? Breno has already been cut. Carp has a 7 mil cap hit. Sweezy hasn't played a down for the Bucs and has been paid 16 mil... IMO the FO is willing to pay players that they feel are worth what they have to pay them, but are not willing to overpay for mediocre players.
mykc14 wrote:I don't get this, who do you wish they would have re-signed? Everybody on the O-line that they have let go has been viewed as a clear overpay. Who would you have liked them to resign that they let go on the O-line? Carp? Breno? Sweezy? Breno has already been cut. Carp has a 7 mil cap hit. Sweezy hasn't played a down for the Bucs and has been paid 16 mil... IMO the FO is willing to pay players that they feel are worth what they have to pay them, but are not willing to overpay for mediocre players.
RiverDog wrote:Besides, it's not exactly fair to justify a decision by going forward in time from the decision point and claiming it was a good decision based on their lack of success with another team. Who knows what their careers been like had they resigned with us.
Britt was going to be a good yardstick to measure their commitment by. He's not a Pro Bowl center and he's not mediocre, either. He's a solid starter. Had they let him walk, then there would have been very little evidence to support their claim a commitment to building a good offensive line.
mykc14 wrote:I wouldn't say that I'm justifying the decision now based on what has happened, I (as were many others) was against re-signing them for the amount of money they received from the get go. What has happened since then just reinforces my original bet that they were overpaid. It could be that both Carp and Sweezy are pro-bowl guards next season, but it wouldn't change the fact that it seemed like a bad idea to overpay for them at the time.
NorthHawk wrote:The real problem with what they did was let players go without any viable replacements in place.
Traded Unger. Result: chaos at Center.
Let Carpenter go. Result: revolving door at LG.
Let Sweezy go. Did not keep Evans. Result: revolving door at RG.
Let Okung go. Result: another revolving door at LT including a former Basketball player who only played a handful of games at TE since high school.
That was a huge gamble during a championship window and with most high risk gambles one looks back at them with regret as the rest of the team was
capable of going to and possibly winning the Super Bowl.
The state of our OL meant the team as a whole was not.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests