No. As long as you're firmly in the group who loves that phrase and praises our GM for using it this thread could go on ad infinitum. Thanks, Ted. ad nauseam Of course, I'm the one who goes on and on not the ones who praise Ted Thompson at every turn.
Question it and dislike it...there's an issue. You can be one person against the 20 who are for it and the 1 is going on and on but the 20 aren't.
Yes, draft and develop is ONE method for building a team used by ALL teams. There are multiple approaches. The great teams use all available resources to build a champion. I think back to the great Niners and Cowboys teams who would fight over Deion Sanders. New England got Revis last year...they won it all. Our guy shuns adding difference makers that could help the team go over the top. In fact, just this off-season he offered Revis 9.5mil per reports knowing that was nowhere near enough to get him to come here. He loses out on a difference maker like Revis by offering a pitiful deal to him, per reports, and then proceeds to blow our first two draft picks on DB's because he didn't/couldn't get Revis. If Randall and Rollins flop completely and are never good players in the NFL, it will be a major waste of our top 2 picks and it will have wasted a few more years of Rodgers career playing DB's nowhere near the level of Revis who could actually help us win a championship. There's your draft and develop vs. adding a difference maker approach right there. As bad as Ted Thompson has been drafting defensive players, I don't hold out much hope we've gotten anyone near Revis' ability in Randall or Rollins.
Do the Patriots use draft and develop? Are they crazy in FA? Nope...they balance the two. Look at how many rings they have with Brady. I would say they've maximized him over the years with their BETTER approach than Ted Thompson's who has...one SB appearance. So, draft and develop is not a better approach than what New England uses. Say that Ted Thompson should be doing more and you're some idiot who blathers on and on, meanwhile, teams that use a varied approach and actually win a lot of rings shouldn't be brought up because our approach brings us to division championships as if that's some justification it works so well.
EDIT: Denver was brought up... Denver wins their division almost every year. I read on this forum that Denver failing to win a SB after adding some great FA's last off season is proof that adding FA's doesn't work. What? Didn't Denver win their division just like Packers? Didn't Denver not make the SB just like the Packers? If you're going to crap all over Denver's approach, why aren't you crapping over Ted Thompson's approach, also? Neither approach got their team to a title, right? The Patriots are a smart org...that's always close to winning a title because of Brady. See any similarities with the Packers? Some team adding Revis that is nowhere near ready to compete for a championship is nowhere near what I'm referring to with adding FA's. When you're close due to having a superstar QB you need to do that one thing that elevates you above other teams who might have great QB's. If New England has a great QB and we do also, and they add a superstar defensive player and we don't who did more? Yes, we added Julius PAST HIS PRIME but that is the mentality of a winner... adding that one big thing that is needed. Where is TT's Reggie White or New England's Revis, or the Seahawks Harvin the year they won it? Where? It is ironic that we got as close as we've been to a SB by adding Peppers. Add a true stud to this team and see what happens not some former stud on his last legs.
You all seem to think when I speak to adding difference makers I'm speaking to adding scrub FA's like an Erik Walden, Evan Diettrich Smith etc to plug holes. No. I'm talking about adding players like a Jimmy Graham at a position of need on a team that is close to being a winner. Julius Peppers is the closest Ted Thompson has ever been to doing that but, again, Julius was not the star he's been in the past. We need to get one of those guys. Let Bulaga walk and give that extra money to Revis. Instead, we chose to keep some decent player at a high cost. Revis and Shields at CB? Are you kidding? Instead, we get Bulaga at RT instead of Barclay or Tretter. Bulaga ain't gonna be the difference in us winning a SB or not...Revis very well could be. No aggression from our GM. Just play it safe sign your own don't bring in a guy from the outside who changes the game. Instead, GAMBLE that a 1st or 2nd round pick MIGHT be the answer opposite Shields when you could've locked that thing down tight and all but ensure your D would be strong enough to carry you to a title. Now, when the guy opposite Sam is getting torched you can all hail Ted Thompson and his conservative approach for the 10th straight off season again.
Originally Posted by: uffda udfa