Nor was Reggie the only significant part of the Super Bowl teams that came via something other than the draft.
The biggest difference in the Thompson approach to player personnel is his approach to free agency. I've never claimed (or intended to claim, anyway) that he eschewed free agency entirely. One only need point to Pickett and WOodson to see that he does play in the waters. But he does not play with the same attention Ron Wolf did or that others do.
Thompson is a bargain hunter. Fine. I get that. He wants to make sure he doesn't overpay. Fine. I get that. He doesn't want to take the kinds of risks that come with "big" or "semi-big" signings very often (if at all). Fine. I get that, too.
But building through the draft comes with major risks, too. Different kinds of risks. Instead of risking getting someone whose best years are behind him (free agency), you're risking getting someone who never has good years (draft). Instead of risking experienced players whose bodies may be about to break (free agency), you risk inexperienced players who may be injury prone or blow out a knee on the first day of season. Instead of risking mercenary head cases who will dog it after they've got their mega signing bonus, you risk developmental players that don't show any signs of value until their contract year and then sign as free agents with someone else.
Player acquisition and development is a world where you cannot succeed without taking major risks along the way.
If I had 100 million to invest in risky assets, I expect I'd tend to favor a particular investment strategy. But I'd also diversify. I might put a lot of dough in oil/gas/strategic minerals, but I wouldn't put my entire portfolio there. I'd also put a big chunk in companies that will be investing in senior health care. And I'd put chunks in Chinese/South Asian/Southeast Asia.
I'd do it because I know, even though all those have some big risks, they aren't well-correlated risks. I diversify, and I limit my exposure.
I might still lose big. But I've insured myself against some loss.
On the other hand, I could invest 90 percent of my 100 million to start a small school that sells education a new way, the way I think is the way of the future. I can still win big (assuming I'm right); but I've got a lot bigger margin of error. I have to roll a lot of sevens in a row. I have to be not just good, I have to be near on perfect.
I haven't run the numbers -- I'm a fan, after all, not a pro personnel expert -- but my read of Ted's free agency record is closer to the second story than it is to the first.
My concern with him has never been that he considers the draft the most important leg in the player personnel stool. It's that he seems to put 90 percent of his effort into that leg. That he's trying very hard to acquire cabinet-quality oak and teak via the draft, but that he's only going to bid seriously for that oak and teak at garage sales and sheriff's auctions.
It's a legitimate investment approach. But it's about as risky as putting your kid's college funds in penny stocks.
People liked to talk about Favre as a "riverboat gambler" type during his Packer tenure. (Some still do, but who cares about what Viking quarterbacks are. 🙂 ) But compared to Thompson, Favre may be a little old lady playing the slots.
And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.
Romans 12:2 (NKJV)