How can we even declare this a good move? I could agree that the jury is still out on the move. But declaring it a good move at this point after our secondary just got abused by the only real competent passing offense we've played this season is the definition of knee-jerk reaction. Miami Dolphins + Vontae Davis probably = Win vs. Colts
Open up Excel, and go all the way to the right, and then go allll the way to the bottom. Whatever cell that is, that's the Bills.
I'm not suggesting Ireland build the team through free agency. I'm suggesting he fill holes and add depth. He did neither. Hard to do when only one guy makes the team. Spin it however you want, Ireland's free agency was a failure. If you want an example of how to improve a team via free agency, look at what the Buccaneers did this season.
The campaign to declare 2012 Free Agency a disaster is really stupid and it doesn't seem like most people pre-disposed to hating Ireland are even buying into it. Virtually all of those players were signed with the idea that they would likely be released in a best case scenario(The success of the younger player they were to provide insurance for).
Unless Nolan Carroll shows he's the future at CB, I think this would all but guarantee we draft a CB in either the first or second round. I wouldn't put a lot of eggs in the basket when it comes to Marshall and his back injury. He might come out of it perfectly fine, or he could have re-occurring issues. And in this age of pass efficiency differential, I wouldn't think twice about it.
I actually like Marlon Moore, always have. I doubt that's the reason though. They signed Anthony Armstrong (remember him?) as well.
As great a rookie campaign as Martin is having, Tampa Bay's offensive success has more to do with the resurgence of Josh Freeman. The resurgence of Josh Freeman has had much more to do with adding Vincent Jackson and Carl Nicks in free agency. (yes I realize he's currently injured).
Really? Free agency is only about taking guys you will probably cut if younger players or rookies pan out? That's the only purpose of free agency? That's what you're basing your defense of Ireland's free agency on? And you're calling my statement stupid? Ok.
And TBs proclivity to pay that kind of money in free agency is why haven't sustained success in recent history.
You mean the 4-4 Bucs, with 3 wins coming against the 1-7 Chiefs, 2-6 Panthers, and 3-5 Raiders? So you're lauding a team for their .500 record while at the same time criticizing our GM for ours? I don't understand that logic. Besides, comparing us to the Bucs isn't apples to apples. Even IF Vincent Jackson, Carl Nicks, and Doug Martin posed the answers we're looking for, there's only one each of them, and we didn't have the cap space for Jackson or Nicks, nor the draft freedom for Martin considering our desperate need of a RT (as well as the presence of Bush & Thomas). Plus, the Bucs already had an apparent franchise QB in place; meanwhile we had to use this year to get ours. So, if you want to draw any comparisons to the Bucs, you'll have to wait until next offseason when we're in a similar cap & draft situation.
Tampa Bay is notoriously cheap. This is the first time in years they've spent like this. Someone correct me, but I can't even remember the last guy they spent big money on before this year.
It's tempting to get caught up in the criticism of Ireland because he has made mistakes, however, he has had some success also. When I start thinking about what Ireland has or hasn't done, I remember that quite a few people wanted Scott Pioli and what it might have been like here under his stewardship. There is plenty of rumors that Pioli may be fired in Kansas City, we could dump Ireland and hire Pioli?
actually we showed interest in Jackson and we had just enough cap space to squeeze his deal in, even if we signed him to the same numbers as Tampa did. now we would've been capped out but seeing as how every guy Ireland signed didn't do **** anyway it wouldn't have really mattered lol. so instead of spending 12+ mil in free agency on the handful of bums we signed who gave us nothing, I would've rather just gave all that money to V-Jax.
None, but his deal was different. He was signed essentially to be a #4 WR or worse, and because of Brian Hartline's injury and Chad Ochocinco's career suicide he was placed in the spotlight and didn't stand up to the scrutiny.
No, it's not, but it's an absolutely valid path to take. If Ryan Tannehill/Matt Moore, John Jerry, Koa Misi, etc. weren't playing like they are, and their replacements were out there and losing us games, then you'd have a point.
All this talk of FA failure is a joke right? After signing our own players including Big Paul (a huge FA signing) we did not have very much money left. On top of that there were very few really good FA realistically open to us after signing our own.
That's ok... we spent about 3 minutes on free agency this year, like all the other good teams do. It basically hinged on Marshall, but i know the critics like to consider Ocho and Naanee as supposed focul points of the offense, to really try and make our free agency look as bad as possible. Keep ignoring Paul Soliai, ofcourse. Nevermind..... we have different philosophies on how to build a team. Which explains why i favor Ireland and you don't. We'd have to be crazy to trade away Marshall just to over-pay the inferior Jackson who actually has more legal troubles. Free Agency is over-rated, ask the Skins,Cowboys,Eagles,Jets etc. You'd probably have to give Bellichek and Thompson and Newsome F's every year for not doing anything either ya know.
I agree about Vincent Jackson. Guy has as many DUI's as Cromartie has kids he can't name. I'm not really interested in that kind of player, no matter how talented. And I also agree that a successful F.A. period doesn't mean signing paying every high profile F.A. more money than they're worth. It's a recipe for cap disaster and under production. And I don't think the F.A. market was particularly plentiful. My real problem is how the CB position was handled in this particular case. and If Belichick didn't have Tom Brady, he wouldn't have a job. He's done nothing but destroy the defense he inherited from Parcells. Gronk and Hernandez were nice hits, but without Brady, their value is significantly lowered. If Brady went down, they might not win another game. Wouldn't shock me if Belichick retires along with Brady. All those picks he's had over the decade and nothing to show for it. Ted Thompson is excellent in the draft, so he doesn't have to pay a premium on F.A., and we'll see how Newsome does without Ray Lewis.
LOL Marshall= the new whipping boy. I'm sure Daniel Thomas, Chris Clemons and Jeff Ireland are all relieved. BTW, Marshall got hurt in the 1st half of the Oakland game, so if he sucked while healthy it was for all of 5 quarters.
.... and that's why you would fail miserably as a GM. Again, this isn't Madden Football where you can simply turn off injuries, nor ignore your entire team in order to focus on 1 receiver. We signed Soliai & extended Wake, who are currently worth more to this team combined than Jackson would've been, and we made sure to wisely sign a QB in case Tannehill was either drafted by another team or wasn't ready to go this year. We also had only 1 pass rusher, no right tackle, and problems at right guard that needed attending to if nothing more than an insurance policy.
How do you figure Belichick inherited the Pats D from Parcells? Tuna left the Pats after the '96 season, and Belichick didn't take over til 2000. Since then, his best defensive teams in New England were superior to any of Parcells defenses while he was there.
