Flex Tape Team Building

[megared]

After much thought and deliberation, it's time to admit that that under Bruce Allen, we have developed and deployed the Flex Tape Team Building Strategy.

 

 

Every offseason, the front office realizes we need to acquire new pieces in order to theoretically become a 'better' team.  While some roster turnover is inevitable, Bruce inexplicably weakens the team further by letting go of players he doesn't need to.  In doing this, he creates a new weakness and haphazardly 'patches' it. 

 

 

In the end, we end up in a similar situation to what we were the year prior...only slightly worse.

 

 

We've all argued ad nauseum the individual circumstances for each player...but the overall trend is troubling.  A few examples:

 

RB:  Let A. Morris go in free agency after the 2015 season.  He signed a very affordable 2 year, $3.5 million contract with the Cowboys and became a third down back.  Ironically, he had enough left in the tank to absolutely gash us last season as a primary back (in case our continued struggles in the run game weren't punishment enough).  

 

WR:  Okay, I could understand the logic that Bruce didn't want to keep both Jackson and Garçon at a cost in excess of $10 million/year each...but the idea of being fine with both of them walking and replacing them with QB turned WR Pryor?    

 

 

QB:  Goes without saying.  Where ever you stand on the spectrum of whether we should've/could've kept Cousins...going from a 29 year old QB to a 35 year old, on a five year contract, when we are nowhere close to fielding a Super Bowl quality roster...

 

 

CB:  Let two young contributors go...counting on unknowns to 'step up'.  Hope's not a strategy, fellas...Orlando Scandrick as a backup plan...

 

 

Future position for Bruce to mess up:  TE.  Super excited to see how we're going to potentially go from Reed and Davis to relying on Sprinkle and God-knows-who else in 2019. 

 

 

 

Bonus Feature:  Bruce Allen's Flex Seal Free Agency deals...one year offers to good players (i.e. Brown, Hankins, McPhee). 

 

Keeps the boat afloat...but probably isn't going to take you new places.

 

 

We're hoping they play good, but not great...because otherwise we probably won't be able to re-sign them. 

 

And then we'd have to find a cheaper alternative in free agency next offseason...rinse & repeat.

 

Can anyone discern a long term strategy of any sort being utilized in our roster management?  It seems like the moves we make are to ensure Bruce's continued employment, and prevent a full bottoming out versus building a perennial playoff team.   

[SkinsGuy]

This probably could've went into the Bruce Allen thread that already exists:

 

 

[megared]

9 minutes ago, SkinsGuy said:

This probably could've went into the Bruce Allen thread that already exists:

 

I thought about that, but specifically wanted to have a discussion as to whether anyone is seeing how our front office moves (whether you agree or disagree with my initial assessment) as "strategic" or "forward thinking".  

[carex]

Alfred Morris rushed for only 243 in 2016, last year he had 547 yards, 128 was against us(127 in the second game, 1 in the first.) 

 

http://www.espn.com/nfl/player/gamelog/_/id/15009/alfred-morris

 

There's his stats.  Letting him go was not a mistake.

 

Alex Smith is going to be 34 this season not 35, he'd be 38 in his final year and more and more guys are lasting to that age.

 

And I do consider them forward thinking.  We've had no real success with the people he's replacing and he's getting stop gaps until we can develop players

 

[megared]

12 minutes ago, carex said:

Alfred Morris rushed for only 243 in 2016, last year he had 547 yards, 128 was against us(127 in the second game, 1 in the first.) 

 

http://www.espn.com/nfl/player/gamelog/_/id/15009/alfred-morris

 

There's his stats.  Letting him go was not a mistake.

 

Alex Smith is going to be 34 this season not 35, he'd be 38 in his final year and more and more guys are lasting to that age.

 

And I do consider them forward thinking.  We've had no real success with the people he's replacing and he's getting stop gaps until we can develop players

 

 

Those were his stats as a third down back with a severely reduced workload.  Considering we haven't had anything resembling solidarity at the RB position since, and for the paltry contract he received...I think letting him go was a mistake.  He averaged almost 5 yards a carry last season...and while you could argue that's Dallas' o-line...I'm not sure any of our guys have the capability to hit the right gaps, follow blocks, not trip over their own feet or fumble in the same play.

 

Semantics aside on the A. Smith contract...do you think we're going to field a Super Bowl quality team in any of the next three seasons (the practical length of his contract)?    

 

Disagree on the forward thinking part.  IMO, every offseason has been the same fire drill to scramble and put together a competent team, by filling the most gaping of holes.

[carex]

we got a third down back who's actually suited to be one.  Also, Morris had a total of seven receptions last year so I'm doubting your claim he's a third down back.  His average is helped by his game with two carries for 78 yards, and one for 11

 

 

[megared]

30 minutes ago, carex said:

we got a third down back who's actually suited to be one.  Also, Morris had a total of seven receptions last year so I'm doubting your claim he's a third down back.  His average is helped by his game with two carries for 78 yards, and one for 11

 

Some teams that are able to establish the line of scrimmage are actually able to run the ball on 3rd down.  I know it goes against everything we've known to be true the past few seasons, but it is possible...

 

In all seriousness, considering we never used Morris as a 3rd stringer, my point was we could've had a proven guy for relatively cheap.  We didn't need him to be Tomlinson or Faulk to justify paying him less than 2 mil per year.  As far as the Cowboys went, as soon as they drafted Zeke, Morris was only going to be a 'change of pace' back, behind him and McFadden.

 

Had we kept him, maybe Gruden's system could've been refined to get production from the ground game.  Right now, we don't even know to what degree our run game is broken, how much of it is system, personnel, schemes, playcalling?  We do know that the front office and coach feel that we need to address the position in some way.  

 

Getting back to the theme of the thread, it was an unnecessary gamble that resulted in the position being weakened for (at least) the past 2 seasons.  And to date, no way in which we've addressed it has satisfied anyone.  

[Voice_of_Reason]

I agree, th S probably could have gone in the Bruce thread.  And don’t agree with everything.

 

 It it was damn funny.

[TSO]

I don’t even care about the points being made or whether I agree or not... this is quality ES stuff right here.  

[zoony]

Laugh all you want, but that **** legit fixed the roof on my doublewide.  Go skins!

[OVCChairman]

I can appreciate the post as it was hilarious....

 

But I also disagree with a good part of it.  Losing Alf was not a major issue.  He's a guy you root for, he's a guy you like to have on your team.  He's a guy that was made very successful by a system.  A system that cannot have sustained success especially without the personnel we had in 2012.  As special as 2012 was, the whole thing was a flash in the pan.  Griff is out of the NFL, Trent Williams is the only O-lineman still here and Ryan Kerrigan is the only starter still here on Defense.  We're a different team with a system that appears to be capable of long term success.  We've set the franchise record for passing yards in a single season with average talent.  We're a lot younger than we were and the majority of our contributors are gearing up to be home grown talent here.  We're building through the draft, and re-signing some of our big pieces.  Some of them are leaving, yes, but we can't afford to re-sign everyone.  

 

Of the players that have left this year, the glaring issue with Kirk is a big black eye that has been argued on this board for.  That said, it's gotten to the point where we could not have done anything about it and he was on his way out the door.  Fuller leaving sucked a bit but he was part of a bigger deal that included a starting QB.... that's going to cost to get.  Breeland was at a point where you'd like to keep him, but is he worth what he's going to get?  Thats a conversation that can absolutely be had. Other than that, name me a key contributor we can't live without.... Spencer Long, Will Compton, Niles Paul, Ryan Grant, Trent Murphy, Junior Gallette, Shawn Lauvao, Terrelle Pryor... come on.. what did we lose?  Gallette showed flashes but I don't want to pay him elite pass rusher money like he wants.  

[megared]

1 hour ago, OVCChairman said:

I can appreciate the post as it was hilarious....

 

But I also disagree with a good part of it.  Losing Alf was not a major issue.  He's a guy you root for, he's a guy you like to have on your team.  He's a guy that was made very successful by a system. 

 

A system that none other than Clinton Portis also had his best season in.  Bottom line, I can't see any rational reason why Morris wasn't re-signed for peanuts...in order to turn over the running game to Matt Jones, who did so well, by the way that he began last season as the #5 RB on our depth chart.  I'm pretty sure his duties included something like holding the foam rollers that actual RBs run through during drills.  

 

Bruce to the RB position:

 

Quote

In other ways it didn’t make sense: The Redskins lacked a proven 16-game back on the roster; the run blocking was suspect at best; and Morris fit the description of the sort of players Washington desired -- hard-working, dependable. Also, the Redskins still don’t have a back who fits exactly what they want, those who can create holes for themselves even when the blocking breaks down.

 

“He’s sorely missed from a personality standpoint,” Redskins left tackle Trent Williams said. “You always need blue-collar, hard-working guys like that in the locker room, especially a guy who had accomplished so much. It helps a young guy to realize that no matter how good you think you are, you can still continue to improve. He’s one of those guys. No matter how many 100-yard games he had, you could never tell the difference because he was working just as hard the next week.”

Redskins players miss Alfred Morris' blue-collar mindset

[OVCChairman]

7 hours ago, megared said:

 

A system that none other than Clinton Portis also had his best season in.  Bottom line, I can't see any rational reason why Morris wasn't re-signed for peanuts...in order to turn over the running game to Matt Jones, who did so well, by the way that he began last season as the #5 RB on our depth chart.  I'm pretty sure his duties included something like holding the foam rollers that actual RBs run through during drills.  

 

 

 

 

I don't disagree with you... Jones clearly was not an answer either.  My point was losing Alf was not some sort of major destructive move to the offense.  He went on to continue to carry a clipboard and pads on a team that had the best O-line in football.  CP's best season came in Denver and they didn't run a triple option style offense.  Shanny JR put a system in place unlike anything Papa Shanny had ever run so to say it was the same system is unfair.   

[megared]

21 minutes ago, OVCChairman said:

 

 

I don't disagree with you... Jones clearly was not an answer either.  My point was losing Alf was not some sort of major destructive move to the offense.  He went on to continue to carry a clipboard and pads on a team that had the best O-line in football.  CP's best season came in Denver and they didn't run a triple option style offense.  Shanny JR put a system in place unlike anything Papa Shanny had ever run so to say it was the same system is unfair.   

 

Obviously we'll never know now, but how different could things have played out for our offense, and Jones in particular if he still had a viable guy on the team that, coincidentally never fumbles, still mentoring him?  I'm personally of the opinion that Jay's power run game scheming is ineffective with how our line is currently configured, in combination with the formations he lines the guys up in.  But now we can't even determine that until we have someone that we absolutely know is capable of being a decent running back.  

 

My point is you can't look at the moves in a vacuum and say 'oh he wasn't important'.  It's like a game of Jenga...the problem is Bruce still doesn't know what pieces he shouldn't tinker with in order to keep continuity.  As a result, we're stuck in year 1 of a rebuild every offseason, where we know we can't simply fill a few gaps via the draft and see what happens...because we're letting go of guys we have no business parting ways with.  And while some turnover is expected, some of it is due to a lack of foresight.  Are you telling me we couldn't have approached Breeland or Murphy last season and worked on extending them?  Not everyone has the resolve of Kirk, especially when their contracts aren't fully guaranteed and you're dangling millions in their face for a signature.  Some teams do it as a standard practice...and if they can't find common ground they're shipping the guy out on the first thing smoking in order to get compensation. 

 

Same story with Garcon/Jackson...you identify which one you want to keep and extend them...what you DON'T do is let your top two WRs expire at the same time.  Both of them had down years in 2017...but down for them is at least double the catches and yardage Pryor gave us.  And either one probably would've been more productive working with Kirk again versus their new teams simply due to familiarity.  They could've certainly slept-walked to better stats than Pryor had...

 

From the deja vu files...once Josh Norman is too expensive to keep, we will have a gap at a position that was one of the strengths just two seasons ago.  Why?  Because Bruce included a good young guy as a throwaway in a trade, and didn't even bother to think about extending the other guy.  By all indications, Breeland is not going to break anyone's bank...but we should be reassured it's fine, because we signed Orlando-freaking-Scandrick?  

 

Finally, disagree with the scheme differences you're bringing up between Kyle and Mike.  Kyle got his chops under Kubiak, who was a Mike disciple.  They all were running zone schemes.  Are formations and route trees different?  Yea, of course Mike wasn't running the pistol and was strictly a WCO guy...but I don't think there's a dramatic difference in outside zone running plays...which is what Portis and Morris excelled in.  

[carex]

I may be wrong, but I don't think many teams keep demoted players for any length of time, especially not in the modern NFL

[bobandweave]

On 4/8/2018 at 2:30 PM, megared said:

 

Disagree on the forward thinking part.  IMO, every offseason has been the same fire drill to scramble and put together a competent team, by filling the most gaping of holes.

 

See here I disagree with you. We went into this season with two huge needs when the final seconds of the 2017 season expired.

 

RB and NT

 

Instead of actually fixing this and bringing in anyone Bruce decided to ignore these issues completely.

 

Then since he wasn’t done screwing the team up he opens a huge hole in the defense where they were actually good in 17 and let’s not one but two starters go at DB. Then Bruce decided he wasn’t done there and decided to let two pass rushers go. One actually wanted to stay. Who did we replace these four guys with? A 30+ year old DB and a 29 year old part time pass rusher. News flash, Scandrick and McPhee don’t equal Breeland, Fuller, Murphy, and Junior

 

Now dont get me wrong trading for Smith was the right thing to do. The problem is he decided not to bring back Breeland. That would have been smart. And yes Bruce still has the draft coming up to tease us that they will draft well and get these positions fixed but until shown otherwise do we really have proof they actually will?

 

Great post, loved it

[OVCChairman]

1 hour ago, megared said:

 

Obviously we'll never know now, but how different could things have played out for our offense, and Jones in particular if he still had a viable guy on the team that, coincidentally never fumbles, still mentoring him?  I'm personally of the opinion that Jay's power run game scheming is ineffective with how our line is currently configured, in combination with the formations he lines the guys up in.  But now we can't even determine that until we have someone that we absolutely know is capable of being a decent running back.  

 

My point is you can't look at the moves in a vacuum and say 'oh he wasn't important'.  It's like a game of Jenga...the problem is Bruce still doesn't know what pieces he shouldn't tinker with in order to keep continuity.  As a result, we're stuck in year 1 of a rebuild every offseason, where we know we can't simply fill a few gaps via the draft and see what happens...because we're letting go of guys we have no business parting ways with.  And while some turnover is expected, some of it is due to a lack of foresight.  Are you telling me we couldn't have approached Breeland or Murphy last season and worked on extending them?  Not everyone has the resolve of Kirk, especially when their contracts aren't fully guaranteed and you're dangling millions in their face for a signature.  Some teams do it as a standard practice...and if they can't find common ground they're shipping the guy out on the first thing smoking in order to get compensation. 

 

Same story with Garcon/Jackson...you identify which one you want to keep and extend them...what you DON'T do is let your top two WRs expire at the same time.  Both of them had down years in 2017...but down for them is at least double the catches and yardage Pryor gave us.  And either one probably would've been more productive working with Kirk again versus their new teams simply due to familiarity.  They could've certainly slept-walked to better stats than Pryor had...

 

From the deja vu files...once Josh Norman is too expensive to keep, we will have a gap at a position that was one of the strengths just two seasons ago.  Why?  Because Bruce included a good young guy as a throwaway in a trade, and didn't even bother to think about extending the other guy.  By all indications, Breeland is not going to break anyone's bank...but we should be reassured it's fine, because we signed Orlando-freaking-Scandrick?  

 

Finally, disagree with the scheme differences you're bringing up between Kyle and Mike.  Kyle got his chops under Kubiak, who was a Mike disciple.  They all were running zone schemes.  Are formations and route trees different?  Yea, of course Mike wasn't running the pistol and was strictly a WCO guy...but I don't think there's a dramatic difference in outside zone running plays...which is what Portis and Morris excelled in.  

 

 

Where is all this money coming from?   We have like $20 mil in cap space if we're lucky, and that doesn't include rookie contracts.   We've re-signed Brown and Foster to very fair deals, added a pass rusher who is inexpensive, added P. Rich, and other small pieces.  We don't have the cap space to pay Garcon/Jax, Murphy, Gallette, Breeland, and whoever else we may have let go.  Next year we have Scherff, P. Smith, Crowder, and Thompson coming to the end of their deal.  We can't ASSUME that the cap will go up another $10 mil, and there is NO way we would be able to bring all, or any for that matter, of those guys back if we had signed some of these other BACKUPS to new contracts.  

 

As far as approaching Breeland and Murphy about extending... I'd imagine we KNEW we weren't going to be bringing either back.  In fact I'm a little miffed we didnt flip Breeland for something instead of just letting his contract expire in a relatively down season.  Murphy was untouchable due to getting popped for PEDs coincidentally enough following the best season of his career... it smells really bad that he made such a step forward and then got hit.... I would actually expect him to fall off or get popped again.  

 

 

[carex]

19 minutes ago, bobandweave said:

 

See here I disagree with you. We went into this season with two huge needs when the final seconds of the 2017 season expired.

 

RB and NT

 

Instead of actually fixing this and bringing in anyone Bruce decided to ignore these issues completely.

 

Then since he wasn’t done screwing the team up he opens a huge hole in the defense where they were actually good in 17 and let’s not one but two starters go at DB. Then Bruce decided he wasn’t done there and decided to let two pass rushers go. One actually wanted to stay. Who did we replace these four guys with? A 30+ year old DB and a 29 year old part time pass rusher. News flash, Scandrick and McPhee don’t equal Breeland, Fuller, Murphy, and Junior

 

 

I like Breeland.  But you look around here and all people do is complain about him, until it's time to let him go.

 

And Murphy didn't do crap for us last year he wa hurt

 

This whole roster situation is the Skins having faith in their drafting ability

 

The Skins aren't looking at Scandrick to replace Breeland and Fullere, they're looking at Moreau, Dunbar, Holsey and Scandrick to replace them

 

They aren't looking for  McPhee to replace Junior and Murphy, they're looking at Ryan ANderson and McPhee to replace Galette

[bobandweave]

59 minutes ago, carex said:

 

I like Breeland.  But you look around here and all people do is complain about him, until it's time to let him go.

 

If you haven’t noticed I am a free thinker and hardly ever agree with the majority on anything including football

 

Sure Breeland wasn’t perfect then again who is? And are you saying we would be better off without him then if they kept him? Seems to be a theme here

 

59 minutes ago, carex said:

 

And Murphy didn't do crap for us last year he wa hurt

 

See above

 

 

59 minutes ago, carex said:

 

This whole roster situation is the Skins having faith in their drafting ability

 

Is it? Look around at this team and it’s drafting. How many guys do they still have from the 2014 draft on the team? One. How many guys are here from the 2016 draft class? Two. This shows they have faith in the drafting ability to you? It doesn’t to me. Having faith says they re-sign the drafted players because they believe in them. And who’s controlling the roster and making those picks...Bruce Allen. 

 

 

59 minutes ago, carex said:

 

The Skins aren't looking at Scandrick to replace Breeland and Fullere, they're looking at Moreau, Dunbar, Holsey and Scandrick to replace them

 

They aren't looking for  McPhee to replace Junior and Murphy, they're looking at Ryan ANderson and McPhee to replace Galette

 

Sure they are but at this time of the year we should remember that our hopes of these guys at times is hope lost. What have Anderson, Moreau, Dunbar, and Hosley done to warrent so much faith? Not saying I think they can’t do it but I believe it when I see it. And this is not what good teams do. It’s one thing to believe in a guy enough to draft him, it’s another if he can play. Time will tell but I’m not a believer in Bruce Allen’s way of doing things

[skinfan2k]

The foundation is poor and Bruce Allen keeps thinking we can remodel a ****ty house and foundation with some paint and some minor work.

[carex]

what had Murphy done when he was asked to at least partially replace Orakpo?  Breeland when he beat out Amerson?   Junior Galette is the only guy we lost this off season who wasn't drafted by us.  So we have drafted pretty well

 

We have one 2014 player still on the roster, but as a group they've won **** for the Skins, so why be so wedded to them?  As individuals though several other teams thought they were good enough to do something.  That's a sign of good drafting.  Seriously, you're being totally inconsistent here, saying we don't draft well while talking about losing people we've drafted who've doe something

 

@skinsfan2k- if the foundation is so poor, why are so many complaining about people leaving here?  Aren't they just part of the poor foundation?

[bobandweave]

14 minutes ago, skinfan2k said:

The foundation is poor and Bruce Allen keeps thinking we can remodel a ****ty house and foundation with some paint and some minor work.

 

Amen and some of us are just sick of smoking the hopepium that Bruce is selling

 

13 minutes ago, carex said:

what had Murphy done when he was asked to at least partially replace Orakpo?  Breeland when he beat out Amerson?   Junior Galette is the only guy we lost this off season who wasn't drafted by us.  So we have drafted pretty well

 

Over the past four drafts we have had moments, not that it matters when we let them all go like that. If Bruce is still in control come this time next year I would bet money between the 15 class we will be lucky to keep two of those guys 

 

 

13 minutes ago, carex said:

 

We have one 2014 player still on the roster, but as a group they've won **** for the Skins, so why be so wedded to them? 

 

Because you don’t draft to lose all of your picked players. What’s the message? And you certainly don’t let good 24-25 year olds go so you can sign 29-30 year olds. That’s not how you turn a bad team into a good one

 

13 minutes ago, carex said:

As individuals though several other teams thought they were good enough to do something.  That's a sign of good drafting. Seriously, you're being totally inconsistent here, saying we don't draft well while talking about losing people we've drafted who've doe something

 

Drafting well to me says that the team likes them enough to resign when the contract becomes due. Don’t you think that means something or do you think that teams don’t think about the players past the first contract?

 

If a team always picks good players but never signs them to a second contract that it’s poor planning? Either they picked the wrong guys or they have an idiot running the team that doesn’t see a problem with that?

 

This falls on Bruce because he controls the roster and the team. In two weeks when they draft a guy at 13 what are we all gonna hear? How he’s a Redskins for life. Only in reality Bruce is treating this team like a farming system and if it wasn’t for the stupid stadium deal I think Dan would see this as a failure

[carex]

43 minutes ago, bobandweave said:

 

Amen and some of us are just sick of smoking the hopepium that Bruce is selling

 

 

Over the past four drafts we have had moments, not that it matters when we let them all go like that. If Bruce is still in control come this time next year I would bet money between the 15 class we will be lucky to keep two of those guys 

 

 

 

Because you don’t draft to lose all of your picked players. What’s the message? And you certainly don’t let good 24-25 year olds go so you can sign 29-30 year olds. That’s not how you turn a bad team into a good one

 

 

Drafting well to me says that the team likes them enough to resign when the contract becomes due. Don’t you think that means something or do you think that teams don’t think about the players past the first contract?

 

If a team always picks good players but never signs them to a second contract that it’s poor planning? Either they picked the wrong guys or they have an idiot running the team that doesn’t see a problem with that?

 

This falls on Bruce because he controls the roster and the team. In two weeks when they draft a guy at 13 what are we all gonna hear? How he’s a Redskins for life. Only in reality Bruce is treating this team like a farming system and if it wasn’t for the stupid stadium deal I think Dan would see this as a failure

 

you're ignoring how sort term the older players signed are.  They are clearly viewed as stop gaps.  Just about every player we have lsot has a younger cheaper option behind

[bobandweave]

7 hours ago, carex said:

 

you're ignoring how sort term the older players signed are.  They are clearly viewed as stop gaps.  Just about every player we have lsot has a younger cheaper option behind

 

No im not. That’s the point of this post to me how Bruce slaps those glue stickers all over the team without much of a plan other then hey there is a leak and hope it works.

 

I get depth, outside of special teams you could argue this point for every position out there but bodies and stickers don’t equal talent. It’s about quality not quantity 

 

What good is a lot of depth if the depth iplay average they have downgraded going with the depth over the talent. We saw that last season losing the two receivers. They had depth, they thought the depth would play as well as the departed and they didn’t.

 

There is nothing wrong with depth as long as the depth is due to become a starter. Have any of those guys shown yet they can play? Simply next man up strategy doesn’t always work. And some positions they haven’t even bothered to replace or add to yet that were obvious needs for the team. That’s Bruce for you

[carex]

51 minutes ago, bobandweave said:

 

No im not. That’s the point of this post to me how Bruce slaps those glue stickers all over the team without much of a plan other then hey there is a leak and hope it works.

 

I get depth, outside of special teams you could argue this point for every position out there but bodies and stickers don’t equal talent. It’s about quality not quantity 

 

What good is a lot of depth if the depth iplay average they have downgraded going with the depth over the talent. We saw that last season losing the two receivers. They had depth, they thought the depth would play as well as the departed and they didn’t.

 

There is nothing wrong with depth as long as the depth is due to become a starter. Have any of those guys shown yet they can play? Simply next man up strategy doesn’t always work. And some positions they haven’t even bothered to replace or add to yet that were obvious needs for the team. That’s Bruce for you

 

that is not depth in the modern era of the NFL.  It's to expensive.  These days, the second you acquire the next starter at a position you mark the end of the time the current starter is on the team.  If he isn't outright cut, he'll be allowed to move on when his contract expires