Being aggressive in free agency and trades wins.

[Panther'sBigD]

12 hours ago, pantherj said:

And when Gettleman decided to spend a fortune it was for Matt Kalil.

Watching Andrew Whitworth play in another Super Bowl, after passing on him because of his age/price, and going with Matt Kalil. Ugh. 

[Mr. Scot]

One thing that should be understood: There's not a single NFL coach or GM whose actual goal is to win one Super Bowl and then be mediocre from that point on. They'd have to be pretty stupid to think like that.

Fans might like the idea, but for someone in an actual NFL role it'd be the height of ignorance.

[micnificent28]

4 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

One thing that should be understood: There's not a single NFL coach or GM whose actual goal is to win one Super Bowl and then be mediocre from that point on. They'd have to be pretty stupid to think like that.

Fans might like the idea, but for someone in an actual NFL role it'd be the height of ignorance.

What's to stop them from repeating the process once all is said and done. These contracts are up.... start buying up big name guys all over again who are younger and in similar situations as before? It could work similarly if you identify talent the way the rams have. 

Few of their targets have been busts..Leonard Floyd being the closest but even he has been productive.

[SCO96]

10 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

One thing that should be understood: There's not a single NFL coach or GM whose actual goal is to win one Super Bowl and then be mediocre from that point on. They'd have to be pretty stupid to think like that.

Fans might like the idea, but for someone in an actual NFL role it'd be the height of ignorance.

While I agree with you Mr. Scot for the most part, there is one guy/GM who would love for his team to remain mediocre for the long term if the organization could win a Super Bowl.

Jerry Jones turns 80 in October. He realizes that most of his life is behind him. If he thought going all in for a season (or two) could get the Dallas Cowboys one more SB resulting in  "sustained mediocrity" for the next 5-10 years, I think he'd do it in a heartbeat. He wants nothing more in life than to hoist that Lombardi trophy one last time. The Cowboys have been mediocre for the past 25 years so it wouldn't significantly alter things in Dallas. It's jsut the ways things have been since Jerry has been the de facto GM with the Cowboys.

Edited January 31, 2022 by SCO96

[Mr. Scot]

1 minute ago, micnificent28 said:

What's to stop them from repeating the process once all is said and done. These contracts are up.... start buying up big name guys all over again who are younger and in similar situations as before? It could work similarly if you identify talent the way the rams have. 

Few of their targets have been busts..Leonard Floyd being the closest but even he has been productive.

I'm not talking about a specific team.

I'm talking about the fans who say they don't care if we're terrible from here to eternity as long as we just win one ring.

It's a really stupid mindset.

[Mr. Scot]

1 minute ago, SCO96 said:

While I agree with you Mr. Scot for the most part, there is one guy/GM who would love for his team to remain mediocre for the long term if the organization could win a Super Bowl.

Jerry Jones turns 80 in October. He realizes that most of his life is behind him. If he thought going all in for a season (or two) could get the Dallas Cowboys one more SB resulting in  "sustained mediocrity" for the next 5-10 years, I think he'd do it in a heartbeat. He wants nothing more in life than to hoist that Lombardi trophy one last time.

Possible, though either way it can generally be said that following an example set by Jerry Jones is likely to be a bad idea.

[CPcavedweller]

13 hours ago, GoobyPls said:

The Bucs and now Rams are proving that whole “only built through the draft , superstar teams don’t win” narrative wrong.

 

All those years we wasted with a prime Cam, we were the cheapest team free agency. We never went after big names, we never we traded for anybody outside of Olsen. Bargain bin Gettleman set this franchise back lord knows how long.

The Bucs now have lost Tom Brady. They have 24 free agents to sign and $13 million in Cap Space to do it. 

They are beyond screwed at this point. They went all in on Brady to create profit margins that justify the down years sure to follow his retirement.

The Rams, I don't know how they continue to do this. Eventually it will catch up to them in some way whether it's a poor free agent class, lack of draft capital, lack of salary cap space, etc. 

Look at the Bengals. Six wins in two years followed by a Super Bowl run. Joe Burrow and McPhee are very reminiscent of Tom Brady and Vinitari circa 2000-2001 to me. They drafted well, developed their talent, and they have a roster built to last without making any high profile free agency additions or trades.

Which do you think is more sustainable? Rhule needs to give roster control to Fitterer and focus on developing talent on the roster. Let front office guys front office, let coaches coach. 

[top dawg]

The fact is, when the Rams win it all, neither their FO or their fans are going to be crying about salary cap or lack of picks. They're not going to give a sh¡t. It's a cost of doing business. 

It seems like some of you don't realize that all that sh¡t is cyclical. The draft and free agency comes every year. Masterful FO's and coaches know how to effectively negotiate the curves and turns of the team building journey, that essentially happens every season, to stay competitive particularly for the long term. 

I keep telling y'all that there's more than one way to build a championship team. Sometimes you have to think outside the box, but you always should be considering all the puzzle pieces that you have and adapting in order to make it all work. 

There will always be more draft picks and free agents, as windows close and open. 

 

Edited January 31, 2022 by top dawg

[SCO96]

3 minutes ago, top dawg said:

The fact is, when the Rams win it all, neither their FO or their fans are going to be crying about salary cap or lack of picks. They're not going to give a sh¡t. It's a cost of doing business. 

It seems like some of you don't realize that all that sh¡t is cyclical. The draft and free agency comes every year. Masterful FO's and coaches know how to effectively negotiate the curves and turns of the team building journey, that essentially happens every season, to stay competitive particularly for the long term. 

I keep telling y'all that there's more than one way to build a championship team. Sometimes you have to think outside the box, but you always should be considering all the puzzle pieces that you have and adapting in order to make it all work. 

There will always be more draft picks and free agents, as windows close and open. 

 

No problem with anything you said here. I'm glad I'm not the only one who realizes that there is more than one way to build competitive teams in the NFL. However, I took notice to one word/phrase you used in paragraph 2..."Masterful FO's and Coaches". That's the key. The guys in power have to know what they are doing. We don't currently have that in Carolina.

[top dawg]

1 minute ago, SCO96 said:

No problem with anything you said here. I'm glad I'm not the only one who realizes that there is more than one way to build competitive teams in the NFL. However, I took notice to one word/phrase you used in paragraph 2..."Masterful FO's and Coaches". That's the key. The guys in power have to know what they are doing. We don't currently have that in Carolina.

I don't think so either, but I hope we're both wrong. I really do hope Rhule gets the last laugh, but that appears highly delusional. I'm still hoping for the best though.

[Tr3ach]

2 hours ago, SetfreexX said:

Will it matter, they were in the same boat a few years ago after paying Goff, they navigated that, and re-assembled a team that is about to make it's 2nd SB appearance in what 3 seasons (2018) and they're doing it with a different QB at that in his first year with the team, see TB as the most recent, and even Manning in DEN of just placing a top 10 caliber QB on a ready made roster. 

Rodgers, and Russell are likely the next candidates to pull this type of move, and while Watson may try / be available, I doubt they send him to a ready made destination, even if he can waive a no trade, they can just opt to set him out. So the question then becomes who's more patient, him, or HOU. 

If you win the super bowl then I guess you could make the argument that it doesnt matter.  If you are one of the other 31 teams that tries to win it and fails then yes, I would say it 100% matters.

[Sgt Schultz]

2 minutes ago, top dawg said:

I don't think so either, but I hope we're both wrong. I really do hope Rhule gets the last laugh, but that appears highly delusional. I'm still hoping for the best though.

Hey, hope is about all we have right now.  Unfortunately, this poster most likely sums it up:

There is no one answer, but we tried annually chasing FA's to fill the "couple of players" we were away.  We never seemed to get the right couple of players, we did spend a lot of money, and then the number in "couple" grew due to injuries, lost FAs, and age. 

New England has been a fixture in the playoffs most of the last 20 years and won 6 titles in the process.  They were not great at drafting and not terribly aggressive with FAs (the occasional Randy Moss aside).  Yet, they always seemed to find role players that created greater results than the sum of the parts.

It comes down to reading and reacting, and also have a realistic assessment of that the team needs and how far away it is.  We may need an entire OL (save for Moton, and maybe BC and/or Brown who we have no real idea about because they were not put into a position to assess), a QB, and a few other random pieces.  Too many to go on a spending spree to fill the gaps.

I feel like the Three Stooges scene when Moe states they are in trouble.  Larry chimes in that it will take brains to get them out of whatever situation they were in.  Moe's response rings true....."That's why I said we are in trouble."

[PNW_PantherMan]

39 minutes ago, top dawg said:

The fact is, when the Rams win it all, neither their FO or their fans are going to be crying about salary cap or lack of picks. They're not going to give a sh¡t. It's a cost of doing business. 

Yeah and if they don't, that's not going to be the case at all.

[Waldo]

1 hour ago, SCO96 said:

Good point Waldo.

I read an article earlier this month on some site about the Ram's philosophy of drafting. They've been good for the past several years and tend to have late round draft choices. They don't believe there are 31 legit 1st round draft choices in every draft. They may only have first round grades on 18-20 players. The LA front office has no problems dealing what the consider to be a 2nd round pick (or a 3rd round pick) for a proven player who can contribute right away.

If you nail the FA and trade acquisitions then you have a window to compete for a title. On the flip side, you have shrewdly watch the salary cap. When you trade for proven starters, they're going to cost more than rookies (most of the time at least). If you trade for a guy on his 1st contract you have be ready to extend him as part of the deal if you view him as a long term piece of the puzzle. Guys like Beckham and Stafford are already on big deals. You may want to get those guys after most of the guaranteed money has been paid out and the cap hits are not as large if you let have to cut them.

The problem with the Rams philosophy is that you can create a situation where 8-10 players take up 75% of the cap and you still have over 40 spots to fill on the roster. If you've traded away too many high picks it'll be hard to build quality depth on the roster (or make more trades). You may end up having to rely on late round draft choices, undrafted free agents, and players willing to take reduced pay to stay in the league to complete the 53 man team.

Absolutely, I also think that because of the lack of rookie contracts you get after multiple years of trading 1st that the window is smaller than hitting on cheaper 1st. Will they move the guys who price out, get comp picks for them? Can they keep up the juggling act without pissing off guys? Certainly doesn't look easy but it sure is possible if you are in that position. Plus LA is a huge draw, CLT is nice but that's a positive we can't provide to free agents. 

I just don't see it being a good option for us now.