_sturt_
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 4,394
- Reaction score
- 4,303
Um. And. The 25 yr old was getting paid approximately the same amount, regardless.Just that his time in KC was far, far less about his talent and more about saving money.
I'll grant you this much, but only this much... there was a potential slight (by NFL standards) payroll downside one year later for Player A that didn't apply to Player B.
So, if Player A and Player B were seen as producing approximately the same, you're right, you go with the player who doesn't have the potential to slightly impact next season's cap situation.
You have to, in return, grant that it shouldn't be a surprise to anyone that a 25 yr old would be clearly superior to a 30 yr old. It shouldn't surprise anyone that a team would provide insight into how they thought the 25 yr old would perform by virtue of having given the 25 yr old a considerable contract--ie, one that is indicative of "we plan to play this guy."
There's something, then, damning about a 25 yr old unable to show himself superior to a 30 yr old when by virtue of the evidence, clearly the expectation was that he would do just that. At best, the evidence allows us to can say he was approximately his equal.