richardson q&a

I think that opposing offenses don't try as hard when they have big leads. The '11 defense is worse than the '10 defense, but it's annoying to see people act like the '10 wasn't bad as well. It was.

 

critical thing to know IMO is that Meeks wouldn't have made things rosy. He didn't even do an above average job with the secondary, a unit he handpicked and had few injuries with.

 

Thelt,you're a moron. The best year the Steel Curtain had was '76. Bradshaw went down in week 4. They finished the season averaging giving up 3.1 points per game, pitched 5 shutouts( including 3 in a row), had 8 pro bowlers out of 11 starters, 4 hall of famers and went all the way to the AFC championship only to lose to the second best team of the 70s the Raiders. Please don't talk out your ass you're slipping into Purrsy territory.

Collin has a point. As pathetic as our offense was last year teams didn't have to put forth as much effort to beat us.

The reality is that our offense is much closer to being elite than our defense is. IMO we should trend toward offense and hope to compete with the elite offenses. If you have a 2000 ravens, 2000s Bucs, steel curtain type defense maybe you can compete nowadays with a mediocre offense, but those are getting fewer and further between.

JR is right about one thing, the high end FAs are rarely worth it.

 

That's not true at all. In fact, the elite free agents are the ones most worth pursuing. It's overpaying the third tier non-elite free agents that kills you.

 

If you look at the elite teams there are very few elite FAs. Green Bay-Woodson, NO-Brees, NE-none(Moss was there but didn't win a SB), Pitt-none, the Colts-none, am I leaving anyone out?

Conversely; Redskins, Bears, Eagles, Cowboys all signed multiple elite FAs recently, how many playoffs? Super Bowls?

Call me crazy but I see a trend. Yes, maybe 1 elite FA helps you win a title but the fact is spending big money on big names nets you nothing. The elite teams draft well and pick up good second tier players.

 

This.

 

You pretty much made the case against your own argument. The '10 champion had Woodson, the '09 champion had Brees, the '08 and '05 champion had James Farrior, the '07 champion had Plaxico, the '04 champion had Corey Dillon, etc. Indy is the only recent winner who didn't have a big name free agent signing, although it's true that most champions develop most of their roster through the draft.

Haynesworth crapped out, but Peppers, Asomugha, and Leonard Davis have been good players for their respective teams.

You don't seem to understand the concept of "fact," especially since the evidence argues against your conclusion. Only one recent Super Bowl champion didn't bring in a big name free agent. Moreover, anyone with a brain should be able to realize that it's stupid to stick by absolutes like "you shouldn't spend on big name free agents" or "you should spend on big name free agents." The important thing is to spend money wisely, whether the player is signed or home grown.

 

So, explain to me how my argument is wrong when basically I said the elite teams have few to no elite FAs and the wanna bes have multiple elite FAs. Maybe I wasn't being clear.

And again the wanna be tier has very little playoff success and 0 rings. BTW the Pats won 2 SB without Dillon, I wouldn't say Farrior was elite, Plax I'll concede. M ost of them are good players but it has done little to spend money on multiple elite FAs per team.

I agree with your assessment that money should be spent wisely. The fact is we aren't drafting well on the whole. The elite teams, while drafting at a lower spot, are reloading their talent and not overpaying to keep talent like we have( DW, Johnson).

You can win a title either way. I agree there are no absolutes, but for us right now, we're not close enough to the brink of being an upper tier team to warrant big FA spending IMO.

 

Because #1) you're wrong about the "wanna bes" having multiple elite free agents. The worse a team's roster is the more free agents they will have, but you're acting like elite free agents grow on trees. And #2), you're minimizing the impact of truly elite free agents on those Super Bowl champions. Those guys have been hugely important to their team's eventual success.

I understand that, since casual fans will look at the Pittsburgh defense and fixate on the guys like Harrison and Woodley who rush the passer, but Farrior is the backbone. That said, we are expanding the definition of "elite" perhaps too far. Woodson, Brees, & Peppers are definitely up there. Most of the others are pretty debatable.

It's not like you can save the money for future seasons. Plus, they are spending that money anyway by grossly overpaying players already on the roster. By being bigger players in free agency this team could have been a playoff team this season, and be positioned for a better run in the future. I'm not saying they should have gotten Asomugha, but Josh Wilson & Brandon Mebane would have been young pieces who can help the team win now while still being in their prime when the team is ready to compete.

 

i think this is true. and, i think the players currently on the team don't mind if you overpay a really good player who comes in and works hard and makes an impact. and they probably even want management to make these kinda moves. but, you pay an average (or worse, below average) guy a ton of money then i'm sure it doesn't sit well with the guys already on the team.

you miss in the draft (some) and players/fans can accept that as part of the process. but you miss in FA it just pisses everyone off ... JR included.