View Single Post
  #45  
Old 04-06-2024, 09:18 AM
Racehorse's Avatar
Racehorse Racehorse is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: God's green Earth
Posts: 14,447
Thanks: 23,237
Thanked 5,976 Times in 3,404 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rm1369 View Post
The Patriots were the exact opposite of the colts. No they didn’t buy big name free agents often, but they took chances on veteran players constantly and reinvented their team constantly. Just the top of my head they traded for:

Randy Moss
Corey Dillon
Danny Amendola
Wes Welker

And I believe signed Darrell Revis as a free agent. Plenty more guys they acquired other than in the draft. They loved experienced vets. They changed much more than the Colts did and you didn’t see them with the same weaknesses year after year either.

Yes having a hall of fame level QB makes sustained success easier. I don’t disagree.

No a rookie contract isnt a requirement, but it’s a significant advantage. Especially for a team that wants to straight line contracts.
You named five players over the course of 20 years for them, but we have had Ballard for just 7. Further, Ballard has added as many vets via trade or free agency as they did. So, you have to ask yourself what the difference is. It is having the franchise QB in place.
__________________
Keep your political crap out of a football forum! Nobody here gives a rat's a**
Reply With Quote