If you cant buy top players at all positions, and if offense is defense and defense is offense, then you might as well pay top dollar for whatever proven quality you can find. Since change is so rapid in NFL, there's no such thing as being too deep at any position. This is the argument for paying Garcon and Jackson say 10m apiece. Why let first-rate talent go if it's proven and wants to stay? "Offense" and "defense" loom too large in people's eyes. Just look at it as talent. You're going to let two PROVEN talents, who support QB, have proven their compatibility with QB on the field, go because you need to get people on defense. You don't even know who those people are. You vaguely hope to buy a few and draft a few. But none of these will be PROVEN at the level the existing talent already is. It appears not more than 1-2 top defensive agents will even be available for purchase. If McCloughan's policy of getting the best talent available applies to draft, shouldnt it apply in-house as well? Because not just is the talent proven with the receivers, the compatibility is proven. There are at least two-three check marks already demonstrated by Garcon and Jackson, and there are at least two-three question marks for any defensive players they would buy or draft.
Again, the Skins are an offensive team. Not a defensive team. Don't fight it. Buy whatever talent is available, but keep the talent, the proven talent, you already have in house. That's the best way to look at it, but no one in the media even brings that option up, so sure are they that the skins must improve on defense. But they consider defense by itself when defense is best viewed as a term for a part of a functioning whole.
No comments:
Post a Comment