Is there a compelling argument for doing what they've done in FA? I've yet to read one.
There’s certainly a logic to it, but that logic doesn’t seem to align with winning games as the priority.
Eh I think you're being fairly pessimistic.Is there a compelling argument for doing what they've done in FA? I've yet to read one.
I think the most compelling reason to give you is that it in no way, shape, or form sets us up for success in 2024. 2023 is already gone, and we all know it, but we're not going to carry a single one of these schmoes into the following year. If one of them breaks out, well, we'll have to re-sign them and will likely let 'em walk because they're too expensive. We will have even less good players next offseason than this offseason. Unless we have two record-breaking drafts and go on an insane FA spending spree, which is somehow a good idea, 2025 is our first shot to compete. That's icky.
So you agree the plan would be to be good again in 2024, which is a bad plan. Gotcha. Two good offseasons includes FA, and we have unarguably not had a good FA this offseason.Eh I think you're being fairly pessimistic.
If you look at the Rams model, they basically won a Superbowl with a few really good players and a bunch of scrubs. For the past few years, I would look at the Rams roster and think, "Man if any of their stars go down for 6-8 games, this team is cooked." The point is that it really only has to be a handful of stars.
With two good offseasons, the Cardinals can be competitive again.