Quote:1.  You have to find a way to not have as many rookie starters playing at once. That's a recipe for disaster and you shouldn't put paying customers though basically 16 preseason games knowing the outcome will be bad. I dont get paid to figure it out but you have to get more good productive young vets in here to blend with this youth that will go out and compete. All that money in cap space and we sign dudes who are ready to retire looking for one more check and others who were reported not good(Beadles, Gerhart).


2.  When you have guys like Willie Young and Emmanuel Sanders in the building you can't let them leave. More money and theyre probably signing a contract and not getting on a plane going to other teams. Look what both of them are doing for other teams. Even players like Cliff Avril was out there for a long time two years ago and we didn't even bring him in to talk. And he's from here. Like Malabar said keep some of the players we let leave that were good on short contracts until you draft talent that's equal to or better than them.

1.  So what rookies would you replace with vets and what vets would you have signed to replace them?  You can figure Emmanuel Sanders to replace one of the WRs, but which one?  Besides experience, what does he offer the other receivers don't?  He doesn't have Lee's deep speed, and doesn't have Robinson's size and catching radius. Besides, if Shorts and Doss could stay healthy, then you would have solved the experience at WR issue without signing Sanders.  Furthermore, Sanders is thriving with arguably the GOAT at QB, an absolute stud at WR in Demariyus Thomas, another stud slot WR in Welker, and a stud TE in Julius Thomas all taking coverage away from him.  There is NFW he could have been as effective in Jacksonville in the first five weeks.  What veteran QB would you have signed to replace Bortles?  We had a veteran QB in Henne in the lineup, and the fans couldn't wait to get him out of the lineup.  You can make the case we could have gone after another C instead of Mack to replace Bowanko, but the others were seen as mediocre choices from De la Puenta to Evan Dietrich Smith, because neither the Saints nor the Packers, who both have a vested interest in protecting their QBs, chose to re-sign those guys.  Related question:  You specifically cited their status as rookies as being "a recipe for disaster."  Do you mean to say that it is an experience issue, and not a pure talent issue, with all of these rookie starters?

 

2.  I already addressed the players leaving issue so I won't address it here.  I addressed Sanders, above.  Willie Young is a player the team was after, and as a rotational guy, he would have been a decent contributor.  But let's put this in perspective.  Right now he has five sacks playing on a better team that has played with leads.    Even with his contributions to the Bears, Chicago is a middle of the pack defense right now.  Willie Young's presence on the team still didn't preclude the blowout loss to the Packers, nor did it preclude Carolina from putting up 31 on them.  With the ineptitude on offense being what it is, to say nothing of the secondary, Young wouldn't have made the difference here, either.  Besides, it isn't as if in letting Young walk, they put in rookies.  Both DE spots are manned with experienced players who know the scheme and were proven leaders on a Super Bowl team.  The one argument you can make is for Cliff Avril, but did he even pay this team a visit?  I think (as I recall, and if I am mistaken please correct me) after his experience in Detroit, he wanted to play for a contender, which is exactly why he signed with Seattle.

---