A Tale of Two Teams...
 

I didn't write this, but I thought was an interesting take on two teams headed in very different directions...

***
Watching the Bears last night, we could not help but think back to one of the worst football games ever seen - that 2004 debacle the Redskins and Bears conspired to play that October in The Windy City. Both teams seemed to have very similar talent and very similar warts (particularly on offense). Lovie Smith and Joe Gibbs were just beginning their coaching eras. The Skins went 6-10 that year; Bears went 5-11.

One team made a few shred moves that season - the Ogunleye trade (something the Redskins never could pull the trigger on, man could they use that guy), but went with youth overall and built around the draft. The other has been a perpetual, crazy spender in free agency, over-pursuing average talent, often at the expense of the draft.

The Bears knew they had a defensive mastermind in Smith, so why not indoctrinate young, hungry players right into his mold, getting the chance for the coach to get his professional fingerprints on them before anyone else, rather than try to sell someone on his program, or get them to adopt their ways or techniques to his? Makes sense, eh? So they welcome Lance Briggs (drafted in 2003), Tommie Harris (2004) and Nathan Vasher (2004). Not a bad group to build around.

[I]Not sure if anyone calls them "Core Bears" over there, but I suppose they could. [/I]

In 2003, Bears GM Jerry Angelo dealt the fourth overall pick to the New York Jets in exchange for two first round selections (Michael Haynes and Rex Grossman). By the end of the draft weekend, Chicago had selected 12 players, the most of any team in the NFL. From 2003-2005, Angelo's drafts yielded 16 rookie starters, who made 101 starts in those three seasons. Check this out from the Bears 2006 media guide: Angelo's mantra during his tenure in Chicago has been "reward your own" and he has followed through by taking a proactive approach with the team's key players. A total of 13 current players, including Pro Bowlers Brian Urlacher, Olin Kreutz and Mike Brown, have received contract extensions since Angelo's arrival and nearly 75 percent of the Bears 2006 roster is signed through the next two seasons.

Okay, the Bears didn't have a first-round pick in 2006, but they had two second round picks. One of them, cornerback Devin Hester is ridiculously sick (actually watching him break open yet another game last night spawned this entry). Every time I've seen a Bears game this dude is taking it to the house. He's got to be Special Teams Player of the Year. Set the single-season record with seven returns for TDs last night (he ran back two against the Rams), and still has three games to play (that missed field goal return against the Giants a few Sunday nights ago might be the play of the year).

So let's rejoin the original thought process here. Okay, in 2005 both teams make strides and reach the playoffs. Both went out in the divisional round (Skins won a wildcard game to get there; Bears has a bye as the No. 2 seed). But the Redskins went a bit nuts in the offseason despite all their progress, changing the offensive system, throwing around record-setting contracts to free agents, trading multiple picks for guys with no history of winning or producing Pro Bowl seasons, overhauling a bulk of the secondary, and throwing around millions to those who stayed and the new offensive play caller (Al Saunders).

The Bears, well, they stuck to their plan. They didn't just talk about it, they actually kept everyone around; no key defections. They added depth at QB and DB to fortify their run and saved up cap space and draft picks for the future, to continue on their upward trend. Novel ideas, all. Chicago is on the brink of clinching home field advantage through the playoffs with an 11-2 record (9-0 vs. the NFC). Washington is 4-9 (2-7 vs. the NFC), rudderless, grasping and clinging to whatever the next plan will be, looking at another offseason of huge questions and probes into the structure of the organization. Lovie Smith will consider whom to rest and how to play out the bye week as they make a Super Bowl run. Angelo will keep on scouting and tending the long-term future of his organization.

Coach Joe will somehow try to wear both hats, sticking with bruised veterans to try to milk every possible W out of this lost season, while spending January assessing the state of the franchise and what to do next at the macro level (while still readily admitting that he essentially operates always as a coach and isn't big on multi-year plans).

There was basically nothing separating these two teams at the dawn of the Smith/Gibbs eras, except the Hall of Fame credentials of Gibbs and his staff. The Redskins actually won that ugly game in Week 6 of 2004, 13-10, snapping a four-game losing streak, while the Bears were in the midst of a four-game losing funk themselves. It was Mark Brunell vs. Jonathan Quinn, and they combined for 160 passing yards, one TD, two INTs and a collective 39.96 rating. The Bears' only TD came off a fluky, deflected Brunell pass that was returned 70 yards for a score. Since that sunny-and-surprisingly-pleasant Sunday, Chicago is 26-14, with two straight division titles and high championship hopes. The Redskins are 18-21.

Re: A Tale of Two Teams...
 

Who wrote it?

Re: A Tale of Two Teams...
 

JLC took quite a beating for that post. Some valid observations there, but a lot of things conveniently ignored. The North has been a pretty soft division, really for about 5 years.

The Bears like their youth, sure, but they've had very little success building off that youth in their offense, relying on old guys like Muhammad and TJones who were both high-priced FA's, I might add.

Much like the comparison I made earlier today between the Skins and Dallas, the real standout here is the defense, and the D and ST of Chicago has really kept this team in contention for the past two years.

We thought we'd be bypassing the hit-or-miss problems of home-growing players via the draft by signing seasoned FA's who would make an impact immediately. We've had some really, fantastically bad luck with FA signings, to put it mildly. But honestly, if it weren't for the big contract numbers, I don't know that anyone would care or freak out so much about it.

We could just as easily have had a bunch of draft picks that slowly proved to be bad bets, too. Ol' 50/50 anybody?

Re: A Tale of Two Teams...
 

[quote=TAFKAS;259496]Who wrote it?[/quote]

It was on Jason La Canfora's blog on WashPost this afternoon.

Re: A Tale of Two Teams...
 

[QUOTE=dgack;259499]It was on Jason La Canfora's blog on WashPost this afternoon.[/QUOTE]

Thanks. Interesting article. I always find it curious that people like to basically say that only the Redskins really go after free agents. I mean you could say both the Bears and Redskins went hard after El and Arch and ultimately the Redskins outbid the Bears. Or you could say the Bears stuck to their plan while the Redskins went after El and Arch

Re: A Tale of Two Teams...
 

[QUOTE=dgack;259498]We thought we'd be bypassing the hit-or-miss problems of home-growing players via the draft by signing seasoned FA's who would make an impact immediately. We've had some really, fantastically bad luck with FA signings, to put it mildly. But honestly, if it weren't for the big contract numbers, I don't know that anyone would care or freak out so much about it.

We could just as easily have had a bunch of draft picks that slowly proved to be bad bets, too. Ol' 50/50 anybody?[/QUOTE]

Yeah, but draft picks don't inflict as much damage to the cap. If they don't pan out, at least you have more room left to make adjustments.

And I've never understood why the Redskins seem to be the team that worries about playing rookies more than anyone else in the league. It's as if they selected players from middle school. What are they so afraid of?

By now, there should be no doubt as to which strategy doesn't work.

Re: A Tale of Two Teams...
 

[quote=TAFKAS;259506]Thanks. Interesting article. I always find it curious that people like to basically say that only the Redskins really go after free agents. I mean you could say both the Bears and Redskins went hard after El and Arch and ultimately the Redskins outbid the Bears. Or you could say the Bears stuck to their plan while the Redskins went after El and Arch[/quote]

Yeah, it's absurd. We are an easy target because Snyder makes a lot of other teams angry with how free and fast he is with the checkbook, so when it DOESN'T go right, it's like they can't wait to throw stones, or go find some idealized vacuum setting where cultivating talent through the draft worked perfectly for one team, and then use it as a case study to point out how stupid we are as a club.

Steinbrenner fields the best baseball team money can buy every year, and he isn't demonized the way Snyder is. Is it just a cap thing? Clearly, some of the early experiments with FA sprees (Bruce Smith, Deion, etc.) were spectacular failures and maybe that's what's still dogging Snyder, I don't know. But I frankly doubt that any other team in the league would have gotten this much shit for signing Randle El, Lloyd, AA, and Carter.

Re: A Tale of Two Teams...
 

[quote=Beemnseven;259509]Yeah, but draft picks don't inflict as much damage to the cap. If they don't pan out, at least you have more room left to make adjustments.
[/quote]

I guess my problem with that statement is, we're always hearing about how insane we are with cap wizardry, so why do we even care about cap damage? I mean, we were told at one point by all the media blabbermouths we wouldn't even be able to field a team due to cap hell, and we ended up fine.

If the front office ever basically said, "we sure would have liked to have done X, but we couldn't because we screwed ourselves on AA and Lloyd", but I don't ever recall us being hosed by the cap in a way that limited our strategy for personnel moves... maybe I'm just blocking it out?

Re: A Tale of Two Teams...
 

[QUOTE=dgack;259513]I guess my problem with that statement is, we're always hearing about how insane we are with cap wizardry, so why do we even care about cap damage? I mean, we were told at one point by all the media blabbermouths we wouldn't even be able to field a team due to cap hell, [B]and we ended up fine.[/B][/QUOTE]

Fine? Our 4th losing season in 5 years? You don't see anything wrong with an organization whose player-personnel decision makers field teams like that?

Re: A Tale of Two Teams...
 

[quote=Beemnseven;259520]Fine? Our 4th losing season in 5 years? You don't see anything wrong with an organization whose player-personnel decision makers field teams like that?[/quote]

With respect to the cap, dude, with respect to the cap. As I've said in countless other posts, there was NO REASON to expect we would regress from last year's showing, and in fact, if the defense had held steady we probably would have easily made the playoffs in this year's weak NFC field.

It's easy to freak out and scream about stupid decisions in hindsight, but honestly, who was fuming mad this summer when we made these FA deals? We were all smug as hell, knowing that The Danny didn't mind spending the cash, and his cap wizards would find a way to make it work.

I seriously don't recall too many people calling for Grilliamss, Gibbs, or Snyder's heads because of those moves.

Re: A Tale of Two Teams...
 

[quote=dgack;259522]With respect to the cap, dude, with respect to the cap. As I've said in countless other posts, there was NO REASON to expect we would regress from last year's showing, and in fact, if the defense had held steady we probably would have easily made the playoffs in this year's weak NFC field.

It's easy to freak out and scream about stupid decisions in hindsight, but honestly, who was fuming mad this summer when we made these FA deals? We were all smug as hell, knowing that The Danny didn't mind spending the cash, and his cap wizards would find a way to make it work.

I seriously don't recall too many people calling for Grilliamss, Gibbs, or Snyder's heads because of those moves.[/quote]

We didnt call them out for two reasons, 1, we don't break down the tapes over and over to see who is good to what degree, when people are signed to a 30 mil contract, you naturally assume they are a stud and fit the stystem well 2. We got caught up in the hype because of the huge contracts, this season was actually very predicable if you broke down who we played last year vs who we played this year, our lack of depth, the holes in our defense due to releases, the role that each player would play (Rogers, Arch, Taylor, were all supposed to be physical hitters, none of them were supposed to be quality covers, and springs's injuries were predicable plus the fact that he is gettting older and slower, and we had no depth at the secondary), Warrick Holdman starting, Brunell still being our QB, We had alot of key players on the downfall of their careers (Daniels, Wynn, Springs, Washington, Griffin, Saleve'a, Wright, Prioleau, Wright, Fauria, Jansen, Hall, Patten) (I'm not saying they're all bad, they're just not going to get any better, they are all in their 30s), We are mainly a run team but we signed two huge contracts to recievers when we have no good QB to get it to them (we had to have 8 men blocking almost every play last year just to have Brunell have enough time to see the open man, and when there was two he generally didnt see the open one, so how is he going to see who is open with less time) and we already had our go to guy at reciever, and Al Saunders's system supposively takes 3 years to pick up. There were signs

Re: A Tale of Two Teams...
 

It was bad enough that the redskins were signing washed up free agents to huge contracts prior to Gibbs, now under Gibbs they sign free agents that dont seem to pan out and they give away draft picks in the process. The team is taking a double hit.

Gibbs is not a personnel guy and his moves are proving disasterous. This team needs a GM now.

Re: A Tale of Two Teams...
 

We've still had far more hits than misses regarding free agency.

Re: A Tale of Two Teams...
 

[QUOTE=Mattyk72;259592]We've still had far more hits than misses regarding free agency.[/QUOTE]

2002 record: 7-9
2003 record: 5-11
2004 record: 6-10
2005 record: 10-6 (the year we DIDN'T make a big free agent splash)
2006 record: 7-9 at best

Yep. Sounds like solid personnel to me!

Re: A Tale of Two Teams...
 

[quote=Beemnseven;259599]2002 record: 7-9
2003 record: 5-11
2004 record: 6-10
2005 record: 10-6 (the year we DIDN'T make a big free agent splash)
2006 record: 7-9 at best

Yep. Sounds like solid personnel to me![/quote]

I'm talking about since Gibbs came back.

The players we aquired in 2004 were the foundation of the playoff run in '05.

Re: A Tale of Two Teams...
 

[QUOTE=irish;259586]Gibbs is not a personnel guy and his moves are proving disasterous. This team needs a GM now.[/QUOTE]

I really think the issue is more with scouting than whether or not we have someone who is a "general manager"

Re: A Tale of Two Teams...
 

[QUOTE=TAFKAS;259603]I really think the issue is more with scouting than whether or not we have someone who is a "general manager"[/QUOTE]

I know it is en vogue to bash the Skins but I have heard several times that the Skins employ one of the worst scouting offices in the league. I don't get it. Why? A guy like Chrid Landry who is the scout for FSR basically said they are the worst in the league.

Re: A Tale of Two Teams...
 

[QUOTE=Mattyk72;259601]I'm talking about since Gibbs came back.

The players we aquired in 2004 were the foundation of the playoff run in '05.[/QUOTE]

Like I said in an earlier post, Gibbs making personell decisions has been a huge disaster because we are making bad free agent signings and giving away draft picks too. This team needs a GM so Gibbs can go back to doing what he does best, coaching.

Re: A Tale of Two Teams...
 

[quote=irish;259615]Like I said in an earlier post, Gibbs making personell decisions has been a huge disaster...[/quote]

Huge exaggeration.

Re: A Tale of Two Teams...
 

Schneed has had some nice posts in the past outlining the hits vs. misses regarding personnel moves the team has made under Gibbs. Perhaps he can release his updated version? Hint, hint. ;)

Re: A Tale of Two Teams...
 

[quote=Citizens for 81;259619]Huge exaggeration.[/quote]

To say the least.

That huge disaster led to 11 wins last year, not sure how they did that in spite of this huge disaster.

Re: A Tale of Two Teams...
 

[QUOTE=Citizens for 81;259619]Huge exaggeration.[/QUOTE]

If you think signing free agents that dont work out or play and giving away draft picks for the privlidge isnt a disaster the Redskins may have a position for you.

Re: A Tale of Two Teams...
 

The blog makes a valid point, one that is certainly not original.
It doesn't state that it's an either/or proposition between the draft & free agency, rather that the Bears chose to build the CORE of their team via the draft. Of course they added some free agents to fill needs but they didn't do so at the expense of their previous players.
It's important to note that we've not only signed big $ free agents, but we also did so while cutting some players, e.g. Ryan Clark.
Anyone who says this team has never been in "cap hell" has a short memory for this past spring when if it weren't for the new cba we would've had to make some mean cuts.
I don't disagree w/anyone that says the draft isn't a guaranteed way to build a winner, it's just the most effective, cheapest & most efficient. Of course teams have drafted poorly for years, but nowadays I just think its not that hard to have a 50% or higher success rate in the draft. By that I call success having players that you'd like to re-sign at the end of their rookie contract. The more picks you have the better chance you have of reaching this success. Either way, the players don't cost much, which gives you more cap room to bring in a FEW needed free agents.
Look at the success we've had in the draft the past few years - Cooley, ST, Rogers (ok, maybe not up to par yet), Campbell, Golston, hopefully Rocky. Of course there were late rnd. picks that didn't pan out, but the later the rnd. the less chance they make it. We trade away all of our most valuable picks from which a team can be built on the cheap - rnds. 2-4.

Re: A Tale of Two Teams...
 

[QUOTE=Mattyk72;259622]To say the least.

That huge disaster led to 11 wins last year, not sure how they did that in spite of this huge disaster.[/QUOTE]

And they had 15 wins in 1991, who cares, thats over and done with. This year is the only year that counts and this team has 4 wins this year and not many picks in next year's draft because they have been given away in the process of assembling this years 4 win team. I call 4 wins a disaster especially in light of the team talking Super Bowl.

Re: A Tale of Two Teams...
 

[quote=irish;259627]If you think signing free agents that dont work out or play and giving away draft picks for the privlidge isnt a disaster the Redskins may have a position for you.[/quote]

I can think of 2 free agents that have not worked out well (off the top of my head).

That's not to say many of the incoming free agents have been ridiculously overpaid though.

While most of the acquisitions haven't been to the probowl, they have been successful for the most part.

Re: A Tale of Two Teams...
 

[QUOTE=freddyg12;259633]The blog makes a valid point, one that is certainly not original.
It doesn't state that it's an either/or proposition between the draft & free agency, rather that the Bears chose to build the CORE of their team via the draft. Of course they added some free agents to fill needs but they didn't do so at the expense of their previous players.
It's important to note that we've not only signed big $ free agents, but we also did so while cutting some players, e.g. Ryan Clark.
Anyone who says this team has never been in "cap hell" has a short memory for this past spring when if it weren't for the new cba we would've had to make some mean cuts.
I don't disagree w/anyone that says the draft isn't a guaranteed way to build a winner, it's just the most effective, cheapest & most efficient. Of course teams have drafted poorly for years, but nowadays I just think its not that hard to have a 50% or higher success rate in the draft. By that I call success having players that you'd like to re-sign at the end of their rookie contract. The more picks you have the better chance you have of reaching this success. Either way, the players don't cost much, which gives you more cap room to bring in a FEW needed free agents.
Look at the success we've had in the draft the past few years - Cooley, ST, Rogers (ok, maybe not up to par yet), Campbell, Golston, hopefully Rocky. Of course there were late rnd. picks that didn't pan out, but the later the rnd. the less chance they make it. We trade away all of our most valuable picks from which a team can be built on the cheap - rnds. 2-4.[/QUOTE]

This is the best post I ahve seen in a long time.

Re: A Tale of Two Teams...
 

[quote=irish;259635]And they had 15 wins in 1991, who cares, thats over and done with. This year is the only year that counts and this team has 4 wins this year and not many picks in next year's draft because they have been given away in the process of assembling this years 4 win team. I call 4 wins a disaster especially in light of the team talking Super Bowl.[/quote]

Ok so we'll only discuss this season then.

You know what else has been a disaster? The adjustment to a new offense, Portis going down, and key injuries that have really hurt the defense. Those factors have played just as heavily into this season as personnel.

And for the record the team in 1991 was 17-2 overall.

Re: A Tale of Two Teams...
 

[QUOTE=irish;259635]And they had 15 wins in 1991, who cares, thats over and done with. This year is the only year that counts and this team has 4 wins this year and not many picks in next year's draft because they have been given away in the process of assembling this years 4 win team. I call 4 wins a disaster especially in light of the team talking Super Bowl.[/QUOTE]

All we have to do is pray and everything will be ok ;)

Re: A Tale of Two Teams...
 

I won’t criticize the fa signings overall from a personnel standpoint, as Gibbs did bring in some good guys. What I take issue with is;
1) The price & contract; AA & Loyd will be on the books for us for a while, yet you could argue that both have already made a negative impact on the field.
2) Signing fa’s and not re-signing guys like Pierce, Clark
3) Giving away high draft picks w/little to no return. Aside from the JC trade, in which it was necessary to give something & worth it to move up & snag a potential franchise qb, teams loot us for draft picks in every trade.

Re: A Tale of Two Teams...
 

[quote=irish;259640]This is the best post I ahve seen in a long time.[/quote]

Thanks Irish! Like all of us here, I've certainly thought about these issues a bit.

Re: A Tale of Two Teams...
 

I'm stealing this post from another board to outline what we really gave up in trades in terms of the points system teams use for trades. I constantly see people saying we get ripped in trades (which isn't true), so here's some details:

[quote]Campbell Trade--draft points

Gave up: 2005 3rd rounder: 225 Points
2006 first rounder: 22nd pick: 360 points-value 22nd pick in 2nd round
2006 fourth rounder: 31.4 points-value 22nd pick in 5th round

Total: 616.4 total points

We recieved a 2005 first rounder: 25th pick: 720 points.

Note: the 2006 picks are valued as a round later because they were future picks. Consider it interest.

We actually came out ahead--by quite a bit --on the Campbell trade. The 103 points is actually equal to the 3rd pick in the fourth round.[/quote]

[quote]McIntosh trade

Gave up 2006 2nd rounder: 53rd pick: 370 points
2007 2nd rounder: 6th pick in 2nd round: 240 points-value 6th pick in 3rd rd
2006 6th rounder: 189 pick: 16.8 points.
Got back 2006 2nd rounder: 35th pick: 540 points.

We lost 86.8 points in this trade...which is equal to the 8th pick in the fourth round. We paid a fourth rounder too much. If we would have went to the playoffs this year, we would have broke even.

This trade was consumated with the idea we would make the playoffs, which was not a bad idea.
[/quote]

source: [url=http://www.extremeskins.com/forums/showthread.php?t=184323]EXTREMESKINS.com - Campbell Trade/McIntosh Trade[/url]

Re: A Tale of Two Teams...
 

[QUOTE=Mattyk72;259641]Ok so we'll only discuss this season then.

You know what else has been a disaster? The adjustment to a new offense, Portis going down, and key injuries that have really hurt the defense. Those factors have played just as heavily into this season as personnel.

And for the record the team in 1991 was 17-2 overall.[/QUOTE]

Those injuries were very key but every team has players get hurt, injuries happen. Unfortunately this team had no players that were able to step in and minimize the impact of those injuries.

As for the new offense, only the Redskins would scrap their O after making the playoffs. I'm glad you now agree with me that the Redskins did put in a new offense instead of tweaking the old one like you had stated in past threads.

Re: A Tale of Two Teams...
 

[QUOTE=Mattyk72;259649]I'm stealing this post from another board to outline what we really gave up in trades in terms of the points system teams use for trades. I constantly see people saying we get ripped in trades (which isn't true), so here's some details:





source: [url=http://www.extremeskins.com/forums/showthread.php?t=184323]EXTREMESKINS.com - Campbell Trade/McIntosh Trade[/url][/QUOTE]

This is a good theoretical analysis. I cant say we came out ahead or got crushed in the JC move since JC has barely played. Maybe next year we will get a better idea if this theoretical analysis is in fact correct.

Re: A Tale of Two Teams...
 

[quote=irish;259650]Those injuries were very key but every team has players get hurt, injuries happen. Unfortunately this team had no players that were able to step in and minimize the impact of those injuries.

As for the new offense, only the Redskins would scrap their O after making the playoffs. I'm glad you now agree with me that the Redskins did put in a new offense instead of tweaking the old one like you had stated in past threads.[/quote]

Of course they installed a new offense, right from day one Gibbs said the offense was going to be Saunders' deal. I don't think I've ever tried to say anything to the contrary.

The transition was supposed to be smoother considering that Gibbs and Saunders were both spawned from the Coryell philosophy. It's not like they were trying to do a complete 180 offensively, speaking from the point of view of offensive philosophies.

Re: A Tale of Two Teams...
 

[QUOTE=irish;259650]Those injuries were very key but every team has players get hurt, injuries happen. Unfortunately this team had no players that were able to step in and minimize the impact of those injuries.
[/QUOTE]

But a lot of teams have that problem. Look how injuries hurt the Eagles last year. Look how the Giants' swoon this year coincided with guys getting hurt. Look how the Panthers buried themselves in a hole they are struggling to get out of now when they lost the first two games of the year without Steve Smith.

Re: A Tale of Two Teams...
 

[quote=irish;259652]This is a good theoretical analysis. I cant say we came out ahead or got crushed in the JC move since JC has barely played. Maybe next year we will get a better idea if this theoretical analysis is in fact correct.[/quote]

I'm just trying to point out the rationale behind the trades. We frequently hear people say why did we give up all these picks, well if you just look at the points system it's very easily explained.

Whether the players work out in the long run isn't the argument I'm trying to make, it's was the trade a fair value at the time it was made.

Re: A Tale of Two Teams...
 

[QUOTE=Mattyk72;259656]I'm just trying to point out the rationale behind the trade. We frequently hear people say why did we give up all these picks, well if you just look at the points system it's very easily explained.

Whether the players work out in the long run isn't the argument I'm trying to make, it's was the trade a fair value at the time it was made.[/QUOTE]

Do you have any analysis on the TJ Duckett move in regard to the draft picks we used on that one?

Re: A Tale of Two Teams...
 

The blog makes some valid points. I know we're all fans here but you've got to be able to look at this objectively. Yes, our FO has made some good choices in FA and the draft, but the questionable choices outway the good ones.

Re: A Tale of Two Teams...
 

[quote=irish;259658]Do you have any analysis on the TJ Duckett move in regard to the draft picks we used on that one?[/quote]

I don't but I'll try to find something. It might be a little tough considering how convoluted the details of that 3-way trade are.

I'm not sure how they would assign points to an existing player, the points are used for the draft.

Re: A Tale of Two Teams...
 

[QUOTE=Mattyk72;259653]Of course they installed a new offense, right from day one Gibbs said the offense was going to be Saunders' deal. I don't think I've ever tried to say anything to the contrary.

The transition was supposed to be smoother considering that Gibbs and Saunders were both spawned from the Coryell philosophy. It's not like they were trying to do a complete 180 offensively, speaking from the point of view of offensive philosophies.[/QUOTE]

You maintained in a prior thread that all AS was brought in to do was tweak the current Gibbs O and modernize it. It was not a new O just a tweak of the old. I said that a 700 page playbook looked like a new O to me but you insisted it was just a tweak. I'm glad you now see the acquisition of AS for for what it is, a new O.