SkinsHokieFan Posted January 17, 2011 Share Posted January 17, 2011 I am talking about since 2000, when it appers NFL owners and GMs began to really figure out free agency. Has there been any team that brought in a "class" of free agents that went on to win the Superbowl Looking back at the Superbowl winners since 2000 2000- Ravens (no, this team was built on a dominant D which was drafted in the latter half of the 90s) 2001- Patriots (this could be close) 2002- Bucs (the core of this team was drafted, guys like Sapp, Lynch, Brooks. But there were key FAs like Brad Johnson) 2003- Patriots (I would argue no) 2004- Patriots (no) 2005- Steelers (no) 2006- Colts (wasn't this team entirely made up of drafted players?) 2007- Giants (no. Core was drafted, Plaxico was key FA addition back in 2005) 2008- Steelers (no) 2009- Saints (this may count, seeing that Drew Brees was an FA QB) I bring this up because there is an obvious desire in our fan base to do some serious shopping this spring (if a CBA is reached) We potentially could have a free agent class of Vincent Jackson, Ryan Khalil, Davin Joseph, Paul Solali, Stephen Bowen, and Jacoby Jones That would take of needs on the o-line, d-line, and WR corps bringing those 6 guys in. My question is though, is that the right way to build this thing back up? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinfan2k Posted January 17, 2011 Share Posted January 17, 2011 You have to start somewhere. All of these teams used Free agency to some ends to get to their championship. as of right now 2012 draft is full +1 pick. We just have to do it consistently through the draft. It does seem like our top picks when we have them we usually hit on them. we just need more picks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewCliche21 Posted January 17, 2011 Share Posted January 17, 2011 There's no problem with bringing in free agents. You get good players for your team however you get good players for your team. Our problem is that we haven't gotten good players for our team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bang Posted January 17, 2011 Share Posted January 17, 2011 The Bucs. The core of the defense was drafted, but every single skill position player on offense (except Allstott) came from elsewhere. the QB, every RB, every WR, and even the TE. And also arguably their most dominant defender that year, Simeon Rice was also a transplant. ~Bang Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
number twenty-eight Posted January 17, 2011 Share Posted January 17, 2011 I'm pretty conservative in general, but I wouldn't be happy with this. I want homegrown guys, for many reasons. One of the big ones is the compensatory draft pick system, which rewards teams who draft and keep their own and punishes those who don't, so we are cutting off a valuable resource for cheap talent by always neglecting it. Since it has been around, it has essentially kept the good teams flush with picks and kept the bad teams bad (notably, us). I believe the Steelers in the 70s were the last team to have all original players on a superbowl team, but I realize this will never happen again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Tater Posted January 17, 2011 Share Posted January 17, 2011 You can't look at the team that won the SB as to make a point about FA, you have to look at the team about BEFORE they actually got good (usually the season BEFORE they started wining). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
authentic Posted January 17, 2011 Share Posted January 17, 2011 the 2000 ravens had alot of FA's who contributed that year. -Sam Adams -Ben Coates -Trent Dilfer -Sam Gash -Corey Harris -Qadry Ismail -Michael McCrary -Shannon Sharpe -Tony Siragusa -Keith Washington -Larry Webster -Rod Woodson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred Jones Posted January 17, 2011 Share Posted January 17, 2011 Of course we have to use FA to fill holes. We have to many holes to fill and not enough draft picks. The problem in the past was giving up draft picks to obtain FA's. I disagree with that philosophy. That said, you have to have balance. Use the draft and FA to bring in players and make sure if you pay a player they are young and still want to play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skins-Canes-Mounties Posted January 17, 2011 Share Posted January 17, 2011 The Ravens and Bucs for sure. The Jets are in contention this year, and they have quite a number of players that they did not draft. It is all about getting the right players. It doesn't matter where they come from. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laxpunk2006 Posted January 17, 2011 Share Posted January 17, 2011 All of those teams had a blend of FA and draft picks. There is no exact formula for X% must be free agents while Y% must be draft picks. For a team such as oursor any team with a large talent deficiency free agency is necessary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhead36 Posted January 17, 2011 Share Posted January 17, 2011 You can't build long lasting success via FA. The best teams in the league year in and year out are great drafting teams. I mean do the Steelers ever sign big name FAs? Obviously every team has to go the FA route at some point but the best teams year in and year out build the primary core of their club through the draft and only use FA to add that last piece or two to get them over the hump. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MusicCitySkin Posted January 17, 2011 Share Posted January 17, 2011 This is insane. Every Super Bowl team has had free agents that were keys to their success. They just also happened to have a core group of players they also drafted. The trick is finding the right balance and combinations. Hell, the first team you named, The Ravens, had acquired both Rod Woodson and Shannon Sharpe for that Super Bowl team. The fact is, it is most likely impossible to have a team that doesn't utilize free agents. Drafted players bust, get hurt, get traded, or become free agents themselves. The trick is playing free agency intelligently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S.T.real,lights,out Posted January 17, 2011 Share Posted January 17, 2011 You can't build long lasting success via FA. The best teams in the league year in and year out are great drafting teams. I mean do the Steelers ever sign big name FAs? Obviously every team has to go the FA route at some point but the best teams year in and year out build the primary core of their club through the draft and only use FA to add that last piece or two to get them over the hump. Yup i totally agree with that. We try to build an enitre team through FA and only have 2-3 draft picks pan out for us. Hopefully we can 5-6 picks work for us and maybe add 1-2 guys through FA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darklight1216 Posted January 17, 2011 Share Posted January 17, 2011 Baltimore certainly depended heavily on free agents as others have said. Even if that wasn't the case, there is a first time for everything. Good players are good players no matter how they were acquired. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thinking Skins Posted January 17, 2011 Share Posted January 17, 2011 How many of the teams built through FA were built through big name free agents? I wonder how many guys on those teams were signed to big contracts? On the Ravens, probably only Sharpe and Woodson. And I can't imagine the Bucs owner having a bunch of high piriced guys as they're known as being cheap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCSaints_fan Posted January 17, 2011 Share Posted January 17, 2011 Alot of the key starters for the Saints last year weren't drafted by them: Offense: Brees (FA) Shockey (trade) David Thomas (FA) Lance Moore (FA) Defense: Sharper (FA) Greer (FA) Vilma (trade) Fujita (FA) Gay (FA) Shanle (trade) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Brown #43 Posted January 17, 2011 Share Posted January 17, 2011 All teams need a mix of both to be successful. The reason FA is such a dirty word in these parts is because we've made a lot of mistakes in free agency over the years. That doesn't mean that free agency is inherently bad. It just means you have to use it wisely and judiciously. If you drive your car 100 MPH in a 25 MPH zone and you wrap your sled around a telephone pole, it means you used your car imprudently. It doesn't mean that cars are bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dro89 Posted January 17, 2011 Share Posted January 17, 2011 Jets signed alot of FAs if im not mistaken...could be wrong.. they look to be headed to sb. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redskins804 Posted January 17, 2011 Share Posted January 17, 2011 Uh you don't have to look far... Look at the Jets and Bears who are ONE win away to the superbowl... Jets: They gave up a lot to move up and get Sanchez. That is pretty much a Free Agent like move. Then they picked up brylan Edwards and gave up a 5th round pick for Santonio Holmes. Holmes was clutch yesterday and that catch was superman-like. They always spent crazy money on Revis. They also picked up LT who was another big time free agent. That is 5 guys off the top of my head. Bears: Gave up the whole lot to pick up Cutler who has been much better than last year. Paid some major cash for a new Offensive Coordinator. Picked up Julius Peppers for big time money. ... FA's are not bad if the coaches are established and the game plan is right. Obviously you pick up guys who will buy into what you are aiming for. The problem with the skins is that they dont choose FA's wisely and invest in idiots like Albert fatboy.... However, if done properly, FA's can work out well Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
addicted Posted January 17, 2011 Share Posted January 17, 2011 All teams need a mix of both to be successful. Exactly. The bigger question to me is which teams since 2000 won the Superbowl without significant free agent players? The answer is none of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wrecker Posted January 17, 2011 Share Posted January 17, 2011 Free agent aquisition wasn't our biggest problem in the past. It was trading draft picks for aging "used to be stars on other teams" (Danny Fantasy Football) players and then over paying them with huge salary cap killing contracts. We then had no cap room left for quality back-ups. 1 or 2 key injuries to starters and there goes the season. You can really add quality and depth to your roster with smart free agent additions, just don't go for the big splash (Haynesworth). Go for quality good character players. We probably could have found 2 very good quality defensive players for the contract we gave Haynesworth. This year we did the opposite and seemed to go bargain basement hunting and signed a bunch of aging veterans coming off injuries for relatively cheap. How many of those panned out? I hope this year we can be somewhere in the middle of these extremes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhead36 Posted January 17, 2011 Share Posted January 17, 2011 Uh you don't have to look far...Look at the Jets and Bears who are ONE win away to the superbowl... Jets: They gave up a lot to move up and get Sanchez. That is pretty much a Free Agent like move. Then they picked up brylan Edwards and gave up a 5th round pick for Santonio Holmes. Holmes was clutch yesterday and that catch was superman-like. They always spent crazy money on Revis. They also picked up LT who was another big time free agent. That is 5 guys off the top of my head. Bears: Gave up the whole lot to pick up Cutler who has been much better than last year. Paid some major cash for a new Offensive Coordinator. Picked up Julius Peppers for big time money. ... FA's are not bad if the coaches are established and the game plan is right. Obviously you pick up guys who will buy into what you are aiming for. The problem with the skins is that they dont choose FA's wisely and invest in idiots like Albert fatboy.... However, if done properly, FA's can work out well Jets also drafted and developed: Dabrickshaw(sp) Ferguson, who is an elite LT. Nick Mangold, elite C. Shonn Greene, who would be a stud RB for them if they didn't get LT(still is really). Dustin Keller who's a very good TE. Then of course on D you got Revis who's the best CB in the league. David Harris is a stud MLB. Shawn Ellis up front is a stud DE as well. They have four big name FAs in their core in Edwards, Holmes, LT, and Bart Scott. Kris Jenkins doesn't count since he's on IR. The ratio still heavily favors the draft. As far as the Bears go, their only real non drafted players of note are Cutler, Peppers, and Chester Taylor. I don't think anyone else on the Bears that's a big time player was a FA/trade. Guys like Urlacher, Briggs, Hester, Kreutz, Olsen, etc. etc. were all Bears draft picks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoony Posted January 17, 2011 Share Posted January 17, 2011 Obviously, I think the biggest issue is in trading picks for Free Agents. But beyond that, I think there is something to be said for a guy finally "getting paid" and going soft. Take, for instance, Fat Albert. You know who should be most upset about his BS? Not the fans or coaches... but other big name players around the league. Sooner or later they are going to realize that guys like Fat Al are ruining the Free Agent market. Won't be long and nobody is going to get paid. Teams will be comprised almost entirely of young drafted guys who play for peanuts. 'specially after they get the rookie wage scale in place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD_washingtonredskins Posted January 17, 2011 Share Posted January 17, 2011 All teams need a mix of both to be successful. The reason FA is such a dirty word in these parts is because we've made a lot of mistakes in free agency over the years. That doesn't mean that free agency is inherently bad. It just means you have to use it wisely and judiciously. Exactly...had we refused to make a FA splash and built through the draft with similar results, the fans would be yelling that we need to spend some money and sign some established veterans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Full Monty Posted January 17, 2011 Share Posted January 17, 2011 I am talking about since 2000, when it appers NFL owners and GMs began to really figure out free agency.Has there been any team that brought in a "class" of free agents that went on to win the Superbowl Looking back at the Superbowl winners since 2000 2000- Ravens (no, this team was built on a dominant D which was drafted in the latter half of the 90s) I'd put the Ravens as a mix, with key players coming in as free agents. 3/4 of their defensive line were free agents (Siragusa, Sam Adams, Michael McCrary). Rod Woodson, Shannon Sharpe, and Trent Dilfer were all FA's too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.