Quote
RFL
I would welcome responses to 2 issues:
- The assumption that we faced a choice between upgrading the OL or the receivers.
- The strategy of choosing to subordinate OL upgrades to receiver upgrades.
Nice post RFL and I think your premise has some validity. I also agree that they would have been hammered as well if they went in the other direction. To your points:
- I'm not sure they saw it that they had to choose to upgrade one over the other. They did upgrade both, but in different ways and to different degrees. Of course some would say they didn't upgrade the OL at all, but really they did, even if only marginally. I think the change at LT will make a huge difference.
- I think the strategy of subordinating OL to WR (in the draft) was because of the talent available - both in the draft and in the FA market. The draft didn't offer much in the way of OL so they went the FA route for the most part. They missed out on Groy but got Whitworth and Sullivan. The draft had much more TE/WR talent so they went that way for that group. Also, they've spent a lot of draft capital on OL the last few years. I know none of those guys have stood out yet, but I'm optimistic at least some of them will be improved.
What they've done so far looks to me like they examined the entire landscape, from the roster to FA to the draft and came up with a strategy to improve the roster. They had a plan. They worked their plan. Whether it was a good plan or not remains to be seen but it seems obvious they weren't just shooting darts blindfolded.
