We must not have wanted Grant.

Building from up front is a time tested way to build a team long term. A great line makes average corners look good same goes for the O side. I see the reasoning in insuring the lines are rock solid before all else. Wallace helps keep pressure with out much drop off..the other guys don't get a break...I think that has helped us late in games.

Has Grant & Co been playing over their heads? If so, was it due to the boys up front or coaching?....Not to be ragging them, just speculating possiblities for the lowballs. I suspect the FO believes so.

 

It takes some of both. Howard lacks speed, but played smart at least this year.

Titans 2001. Great Defensive line. Bad corners after Rolle went down. Team was 28th in pass D.

 

Of course it takes both. The trick is the proportions and priorities in spending at this point in the game.
We have an excellent front 7 and half our secondary is quite good. There are a couple holes to be filled. I'm having difficulty with the argument that the perceived greatest needs are the ones we need to address first.

 

I'd set myself short of calling Manning good. He's had a handful of good games, and I'm hopeful (of course, one could say that Brad Hoover's a starting feature back after a couple good games too). Enough to start him unquestioned for a while. But he's not Minter.

Anyway, to say that the proportions have been equal, which it should be, isn't true. You didn't say it, but bringing up priorities suggests that either we're not where we want to be, at all, and seem to have lost those priorities, or our priorities border on neglect.

 

Well, the *semi-positive* note is that Howard and Cousin weren't 'good' either. Howard was maybe 'kinda good'.

 

Kinda? You have anything to do with him getting that truckload of cash from Miami? I'd say average.

 

Howard was getting better. Did we need to do better? Yeah. Now let's do that. And in this regard, yeah, I guess I'm willing for that player to be a rook. Moreso than FS, though at this point, I really just wish we had two #1s rather than scrape the bargain bin and rely on such a player.

 

I wouldn't say we are neglecting yet, we just unloaded a chunk of our secondary. Since we don't yet know who we will end up with. I think we are actually addressing the secondary situation.... It still may get better or worse, but the situation is being addressed.

I think Manning will be pretty good. He's got the 'tude, but he will screw up on the way too.

 

"Think" and "will" aren't here and now. Certainly, agreed, I think he'll be good. But while I'll certainly say he starts, to expect what he did in the playoffs, as an average, or even expect to see that again? No, I'm not there. I know he'll grow but he's got a lot to grow still. He's never been picked on, and that's something to see before one annoints.

I'd say, in comparison, we're neglecting. We've had more than ample time to talk to Vincent, Taylor, and others, and the only guy we've been successful to visit so far had been Hawkins, a very, very minor signing. Till then, it was all line, if you include TE as line which in this offense may as well be.

Now, following Grant, they're going to start to talk to DBs. As in reaction to the move. As if they didn't prepare for other options before they knew what he'd do. As in all this "we didn't really want him, he's a stopgap" type talk is just that, talk.

 

mags, you know good and well that Fox/Hurney would NEVER do anything reactionary.