Don't ignore the man behind the curtain

[StanleySpadowski]

The Free Agency period is all show and no substance. "Name" free agents rarely make a positive impact on a team's success.

Let's look at this subjectively. Last year's SB champion Steelers had 3 of 22 SB starters who'd played for other teams before. James Farrior was a mid-level signing, Kimo Von Oelhofen was a "who??" signing at the time and Jeff Hartings was another mid-level. All 19 (18) other starters (there is a discrepancy as to whether Randel-El or Wilson, a low level FA signing was the "starter" and I can't find a definitive answer in a cursory search but that's almost irrelevant) were Pittsburgh draft choices.

Even their opponents the Seahawks set the bar pretty high with 14/22 draftees starting the SB for them. I'd guess that Bryce Fisher would be considered the biggest "name" FA signing starting for them.


Looking back through the Super Bowl winners since the advent of the Cap, I'm finding that this is the norm, not the exception. Successful teams are built through the draft, an occasional trade and mid-to-low end Free Agents.



Also, look at last year's FA crop. According to Adam's comp pick post, the highest dollar value FA was Lamont Jordan. He really made an impact on the Raiders' record right? Do a quick read of that post. You'll see that of the high value or "name" FAs, none really played that big of a role in putting a team over the top.

 

[gbrittain]

The Free Agency period is all show and no substance. "Name" free agents rarely make a positive impact on a team's success.

Let's look at this subjectively. Last year's SB champion Steelers had 3 of 22 SB starters who'd played for other teams before. James Farrior was a mid-level signing, Kimo Von Oelhofen was a "who??" signing at the time and Jeff Hartings was another mid-level. All 19 (18) other starters (there is a discrepancy as to whether Randel-El or Wilson, a low level FA signing was the "starter" and I can't find a definitive answer in a cursory search but that's almost irrelevant) were Pittsburgh draft choices.

Even their opponents the Seahawks set the bar pretty high with 14/22 draftees starting the SB for them. I'd guess that Bryce Fisher would be considered the biggest "name" FA signing starting for them.


Looking back through the Super Bowl winners since the advent of the Cap, I'm finding that this is the norm, not the exception. Successful teams are built through the draft, an occasional trade and mid-to-low end Free Agents.



Also, look at last year's FA crop. According to Adam's comp pick post, the highest dollar value FA was Lamont Jordan. He really made an impact on the Raiders' record right? Do a quick read of that post. You'll see that of the high value or "name" FAs, none really played that big of a role in putting a team over the top.

I totally agree with this. Teams are built through the draft. FA should serve to fill a few holes, but not field a team.

I know there is much hoopla over the Commanders, but I think it would be unprecedented to win a Superbowl with only about six or seven players starting that were actually drafted by the Commanders.

The key for Dallas in relation to the Commanders though is to draft well. Outside last year, Dallas has struggled somewhat in their drafts.

I would rather have a great draft than a great FA haul any day of the week.

 

[superpunk]

Very nice post, SS. There is a model for success in the salary cap era. And it is NOT overpaying for other teams FAs.

That model has produced nothing but failure.

 

[CrazyCowboy]

The Free Agency period is all show and no substance. "Name" free agents rarely make a positive impact on a team's success.

Let's look at this subjectively. Last year's SB champion Steelers had 3 of 22 SB starters who'd played for other teams before. James Farrior was a mid-level signing, Kimo Von Oelhofen was a "who??" signing at the time and Jeff Hartings was another mid-level. All 19 (18) other starters (there is a discrepancy as to whether Randel-El or Wilson, a low level FA signing was the "starter" and I can't find a definitive answer in a cursory search but that's almost irrelevant) were Pittsburgh draft choices.

Even their opponents the Seahawks set the bar pretty high with 14/22 draftees starting the SB for them. I'd guess that Bryce Fisher would be considered the biggest "name" FA signing starting for them.


Looking back through the Super Bowl winners since the advent of the Cap, I'm finding that this is the norm, not the exception. Successful teams are built through the draft, an occasional trade and mid-to-low end Free Agents.



Also, look at last year's FA crop. According to Adam's comp pick post, the highest dollar value FA was Lamont Jordan. He really made an impact on the Raiders' record right? Do a quick read of that post. You'll see that of the high value or "name" FAs, none really played that big of a role in putting a team over the top.

This is a very good post and example of how you build a championship team.

 

[TruBlueCowboy]

That's nice and all, and we're definitely getting closer to a "draft built team" but the Cowboys are still far away from it. Ya gotta use free agency to fill some of those obvious holes and not gamble that you'll be able to fix it with an unknown rookie. That's really all I hope Bill & Jerry realize.

 

[HTownCowboysFan]

The Free Agency period is all show and no substance. "Name" free agents rarely make a positive impact on a team's success.

Let's look at this subjectively. Last year's SB champion Steelers had 3 of 22 SB starters who'd played for other teams before. James Farrior was a mid-level signing, Kimo Von Oelhofen was a "who??" signing at the time and Jeff Hartings was another mid-level. All 19 (18) other starters (there is a discrepancy as to whether Randel-El or Wilson, a low level FA signing was the "starter" and I can't find a definitive answer in a cursory search but that's almost irrelevant) were Pittsburgh draft choices.

Even their opponents the Seahawks set the bar pretty high with 14/22 draftees starting the SB for them. I'd guess that Bryce Fisher would be considered the biggest "name" FA signing starting for them.


Looking back through the Super Bowl winners since the advent of the Cap, I'm finding that this is the norm, not the exception. Successful teams are built through the draft, an occasional trade and mid-to-low end Free Agents.



Also, look at last year's FA crop. According to Adam's comp pick post, the highest dollar value FA was Lamont Jordan. He really made an impact on the Raiders' record right? Do a quick read of that post. You'll see that of the high value or "name" FAs, none really played that big of a role in putting a team over the top.

Thank you for saying that -- the darn TRUTH. Great post my friend.

 

[LucaBrasi]

the most sane, rational post I've seen on this board in 3 days. I have yet to see the most active free spending team in March win a SB in the free agency era. That includes the Cowboys last year. IMHO, this free agency class sucked and I'd rather the Boys re-sign Williams, Newman, James, and Witten next year then blow their load on some over-priced jabrone this offseason. SB teams are built through the draft. Under Parcells, I'd say that's been an unquestioned succes in 2 out 3 years. Let's hope it continues on April 29.

 

[Zaxor]

The Free Agency period is all show and no substance. "Name" free agents rarely make a positive impact on a team's success.

Let's look at this subjectively. Last year's SB champion Steelers had 3 of 22 SB starters who'd played for other teams before. James Farrior was a mid-level signing, Kimo Von Oelhofen was a "who??" signing at the time and Jeff Hartings was another mid-level. All 19 (18) other starters (there is a discrepancy as to whether Randel-El or Wilson, a low level FA signing was the "starter" and I can't find a definitive answer in a cursory search but that's almost irrelevant) were Pittsburgh draft choices.

Even their opponents the Seahawks set the bar pretty high with 14/22 draftees starting the SB for them. I'd guess that Bryce Fisher would be considered the biggest "name" FA signing starting for them.


Looking back through the Super Bowl winners since the advent of the Cap, I'm finding that this is the norm, not the exception. Successful teams are built through the draft, an occasional trade and mid-to-low end Free Agents.



Also, look at last year's FA crop. According to Adam's comp pick post, the highest dollar value FA was Lamont Jordan. He really made an impact on the Raiders' record right? Do a quick read of that post. You'll see that of the high value or "name" FAs, none really played that big of a role in putting a team over the top.

I totally agree that the best and soundest way to build a team is through the draft

 

[StanleySpadowski]

That's nice and all, and we're definitely getting closer to a "draft built team" but the Cowboys are still far away from it. Ya gotta use free agency to fill some of those obvious holes and not gamble that you'll be able to fix it with an unknown rookie. That's really all I hope Bill & Jerry realize.

I'm not advocating ignoring FA. I'm merely trying to show how FA has affected a team's chance at winning the Super Bowl.

I was wrong in my original post though, Wistrom would be considered a bigger FA "splash" signing than Fisher but Fisher outplayed him through the season.

After a quick search of starters at superbowl.com, it looks like the Buccaneers were the closest to a "rent-a-team" to ever win the Super Bowl and most of their non-original team players were on the offensive side of the ball, clearly not the strength of their team, and were all relatively modest FAs like Brad Johnson.

Even teams that tried to get that one missing piece to push them over the top seemed to come up short. The Eagles went after Kearse yet still only pushed them from NFCC game losers to Super Bowl losers.

During the Patriots Super Bowl run their biggest "name" FA signing was Colvin who was promptly injured and has never really been a factor for them. The Rams didn't have a "name" FA although they did trade for Faulk.

I guess we have to go the whole way back to the Packers and Reggie White to find the best FA signing when it comes to a "name" signing impacting the team's ultimate goal of winning the Super Bowl.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

The Free Agency period is all show and no substance. "Name" free agents rarely make a positive impact on a team's success.

Let's look at this subjectively. Last year's SB champion Steelers had 3 of 22 SB starters who'd played for other teams before. James Farrior was a mid-level signing, Kimo Von Oelhofen was a "who??" signing at the time and Jeff Hartings was another mid-level. All 19 (18) other starters (there is a discrepancy as to whether Randel-El or Wilson, a low level FA signing was the "starter" and I can't find a definitive answer in a cursory search but that's almost irrelevant) were Pittsburgh draft choices.

Even their opponents the Seahawks set the bar pretty high with 14/22 draftees starting the SB for them. I'd guess that Bryce Fisher would be considered the biggest "name" FA signing starting for them.


Looking back through the Super Bowl winners since the advent of the Cap, I'm finding that this is the norm, not the exception. Successful teams are built through the draft, an occasional trade and mid-to-low end Free Agents.



Also, look at last year's FA crop. According to Adam's comp pick post, the highest dollar value FA was Lamont Jordan. He really made an impact on the Raiders' record right? Do a quick read of that post. You'll see that of the high value or "name" FAs, none really played that big of a role in putting a team over the top.

excellent post

 

[TruBlueCowboy]

I'm not advocating ignoring FA. I'm merely trying to show how FA has affected a team's chance at winning the Super Bowl.

I was wrong in my original post though, Wistrom would be considered a bigger FA "splash" signing than Fisher but Fisher outplayed him through the season.

After a quick search of starters at superbowl.com, it looks like the Buccaneers were the closest to a "rent-a-team" to ever win the Super Bowl and most of their non-original team players were on the offensive side of the ball, clearly not the strength of their team, and were all relatively modest FAs like Brad Johnson.

Even teams that tried to get that one missing piece to push them over the top seemed to come up short. The Eagles went after Kearse yet still only pushed them from NFCC game losers to Super Bowl losers.

During the Patriots Super Bowl run their biggest "name" FA signing was Colvin who was promptly injured and has never really been a factor for them. The Rams didn't have a "name" FA although they did trade for Faulk.

I guess we have to go the whole way back to the Packers and Reggie White to find the best FA signing when it comes to a "name" signing impacting the team's ultimate goal of winning the Super Bowl.

Well.... going with the teams that made the Super Bowl, not just won....

The Eagles wouldn't have gone w/out TO and Kearse.
The Pats sure as hell benefit from nearly 1,500 yards by Corey Dillon in their last run.
The Panthers came out of nowhere because of Jake Delhomme, with Stephen Davis, another mercenary, leading the running game.
Tampa Bay you already stated.
Oakland was a pure merc squad.
The Rams grabbed some big names like Aeneas Williams.
The Giants got to the big one with Kerry Collins.

I can think of loads of free agents or players traded for to prevent their free agency who helped a team get over the hump and reach the big one.

Yes, you're right, you need good drafting first and foremost, but this is a league of parity. Signing the right free-agent makes all the difference these days.

 

[gbrittain]

Well.... going with the teams that made the Super Bowl, not just won....

The Eagles wouldn't have gone w/out TO and Kearse.
The Pats sure as hell benefit from nearly 1,500 yards by Corey Dillon in their last run.
The Panthers came out of nowhere because of Jake Delhomme, with Stephen Davis, another mercenary, leading the running game.
Tampa Bay you already stated.
Oakland was a pure merc squad.
The Rams grabbed some big names like Aeneas Williams.
The Giants got to the big one with Kerry Collins.

I can think of loads of free agents or players traded for to prevent their free agency who helped a team get over the hump and reach the big one.

Yes, you're right, you need good drafting first and foremost, but this is a league of parity. Signing the right free-agent makes all the difference these days.

I guess I am taking the middle ground on this issue. Like I said earlier, I do believe the best way to build a team is through the draft, but as you pointed out FA definitely has its merits.

For all the debate concerning Washington and FA vs draft, I will say they are better team today than they were when they lost to Seattle in the playoffs.

I do not know if Washington will set a new precedent by being a "Super" successful rent a team or not, but I would rather face Thrash/Patten/Jacobs than Randle El and Brandon Lloyd.

I have no problem making fun of the Washington RentSkins, but I will not pretend they did not better their team either.

 

[Alexander]

Well.... going with the teams that made the Super Bowl, not just won....

The Eagles wouldn't have gone w/out TO and Kearse.
The Pats sure as hell benefit from nearly 1,500 yards by Corey Dillon in their last run.
The Panthers came out of nowhere because of Jake Delhomme, with Stephen Davis, another mercenary, leading the running game.
Tampa Bay you already stated.
Oakland was a pure merc squad.
The Rams grabbed some big names like Aeneas Williams.
The Giants got to the big one with Kerry Collins.

I can think of loads of free agents or players traded for to prevent their free agency who helped a team get over the hump and reach the big one.

Yes, you're right, you need good drafting first and foremost, but this is a league of parity. Signing the right free-agent makes all the difference these days.

Like most things, it is not a black or white situation. Nor is there a "right" way or a "wrong" way.

Anyone who is suggesting the draft is unimportant is incorrect. But it is also a fallacy that you can just build a winner in this day and age purely through the draft. You have to pick the right players and use free agency as another type of draft.

Supplemental free agents are what pushes many teams over the top. New England got them with Vrabel and Harrison, two huge pieces.

 

[wileedog]

I have no problem making fun of the Washington RentSkins, but I will not pretend they did not better their team either.

And in the first 4 rounds of the draft we will probably add 3 or 4 potential starters to the Commanders 1. Our first two picks could conveivable have more impact (if we choose well) than Randal the $31M #3 WR ever will.

Its not over yet.

 

[Chuck 54]

The bottom line is that the Skins have holes, and the Cowboys have holes.

They had holes at WR and TE (after losing Royals) and SS. They also have holes at DE and OL depth.

They have filled their holes at WR and TE...they look to have added a nice SS to upgrade the position for them...and they still need some OL depth...they are set at starters.

The Cowboys have holes on the OL, depth at WR and TE, LB, and FS.

We have filled part of the hole on the OL, but still need to address OT and all the other holes.

At this point in time, it would be foolish NOT to admit that the Skins have made the greatest improvements through FA (that's not the same as saying they'll be the best team in our division)...they've made the biggest splash in FA of any team in the NFL so far, with only Cleveland being close.

However, FA isn't over...if we sign a LB, an OT, a FS, a TE, a WR, or at least 3 of those positions before the draft, we'll have also had a offseason.

 

[Chuck 54]

And in the first 4 rounds of the draft we will probably add 3 or 4 potential starters to the Commanders 1. Our first two picks could conveivable have more impact (if we choose well) than Randal the $31M #3 WR ever will.

Its not over yet.

We should probably just trade our 2nd round pick since these guys haven't made a decent contribution in quite a few years.

 

[StanleySpadowski]

Well.... going with the teams that made the Super Bowl, not just won....

The Eagles wouldn't have gone w/out TO and Kearse.
The Pats sure as hell benefit from nearly 1,500 yards by Corey Dillon in their last run.
The Panthers came out of nowhere because of Jake Delhomme, with Stephen Davis, another mercenary, leading the running game.
Tampa Bay you already stated.
Oakland was a pure merc squad.
The Rams grabbed some big names like Aeneas Williams.
The Giants got to the big one with Kerry Collins.

I can think of loads of free agents or players traded for to prevent their free agency who helped a team get over the hump and reach the big one.

Yes, you're right, you need good drafting first and foremost, but this is a league of parity. Signing the right free-agent makes all the difference these days.

Did you happen to notice your list included mostly Super Bowl losers? I didn't think that was the goal.


Remember, Dillon wasn't a Free Agent, the Patriots traded a pick for him (a second rounder if I remember correctly).

I comes out in the end that team's who are overly active in FA are seldom teams who end up with the Lombardi.

 

[gbrittain]

And in the first 4 rounds of the draft we will probably add 3 or 4 potential starters to the Commanders 1. Our first two picks could conveivable have more impact (if we choose well) than Randal the $31M #3 WR ever will.

Its not over yet.

I could not agree with you more. I think the likes of Brandon Lloyd, Randle El, and Archuleta are easily obtained through the draft in later rounds. Of course as rookies they might be a year or two away, but a whole lot cheaper.

 

[wileedog]

The Eagles wouldn't have gone w/out TO and Kearse.

Not true. Kearse hasn't done squat there and TO was injured for the 2nd half of the season and the all of the playoffs except the SB.

The Pats sure as hell benefit from nearly 1,500 yards by Corey Dillon in their last run.

The Pats won the year before with garbage at RB. Fact is, they wouldn't have won anything without the best 6th round draft pick ever, and a UFA kicker.

The Panthers came out of nowhere because of Jake Delhomme, with Stephen Davis, another mercenary, leading the running game.

The Panthers would be nowhere without Steve Smith. Fox is a good coach too.

Tampa Bay you already stated.
Oakland was a pure merc squad.
The Rams grabbed some big names like Aeneas Williams.
The Giants got to the big one with Kerry Collins.

All these teams imploded shortly after there SB appearance. Why? Because back loaded FA contracts DO eventually catch up with you.

 

[Nors]

Its all talent evaluation: Look at Pats - they went on their dynasty run leveraging FA/Trades. No one is advocating "Big Name" signings. But when you have opportunity to upgrade your roster - you do it. And folks we are not doing much here.

Draft? Of course you build teams in draft. And note wise one - the other 31 teams have drafts too oh no

Steelers you say? Lets look at how they leveraged FA?

These are guys they have brought in......

Farrior
Kriewaldt
VanOelhoffen
Bettis
Harting
Staley
C Wilson
Batch
Maddox
Gardocki
Morgan
Morey
Brooks
Kirshke
Iwuoma
Carter
Logan

Adding players in FA is a viable option to improve your team. The man behind our curtain? Judas Priest, wake up!!!!!

http://www.nfl.com/teams/depthcharts/PIT