Om Field: Taking Free Agency in Context

[BigHairedAristocrat]

Originally Posted by -Om-

Nice speech, BHA, but you're in the wrong thread. I believe you were looking for one in which someone actually suggested that "big splashes in free agency equates to success in the regular season."

while you didnt specifically state it, your well-worded dream play with Landry intercepting the ball and Romo nearly getting killed in large part due to Haynesworth made me think you were in favor of such a move... my bad.

It was a well written article and a nice change of pace from the usual cynicism of JLC. I was just pointing out that your article focused on the potential positives. As SBXVII pointed out, the skins are 50/50 in their free agency moves. Theres just as good a chance that our moves will get us to 4-12 next year than there is we'll be 12-4. Truth is, if the skins do what they usually do, neither is a realistic. IMO, mo matter what is done in the offseason, its highly unlikely this team will ever be below 6-10 or above 10-6 as long as Snyder and Cerrato are running things.

Originally Posted by Ruhskins

But you can't also let this track record be the sole reason behind your opinion on moves that have not happened yet. If a person feels that the front office is going to screw things over and over again, or if they believe any move they make is going to end up in disaster, what's the point of being a fan.

Trust me, I know the bonehead/stupid moves the team has made, however they have also made some good moves (Fletch, Moss, Sellers, Washington, Hall, etc., etc.). I can't let past mistakes automatically make me believe that every single acquisition made by the FO is going to be bust, without looking at the circumstances around it. Also, let's not forget that a lot of these signings, like anything else in the NFL, is about taking chances and risks.

You prove my point. For every stupid move the team makes, there is also another really good one. I never said every move they make will be a bust. I agreed with SBXVII that its 50/50. History has proven that 50/50 isnt good enough.

and yes, the NFL, like any other busines, is about taking risks. But taking risks isnt about rolling the dice (atleast it shouldnt be). I work in the Enterprise Risk Management division of a responsible financial institution that made wise decisions to avoid contributing to the financial crisis that this country is in right now. It didnt stay out of trouble by not taking risks - you cant make money if you dont take risks - it stayed out of trouble by taking the right risks.

More often than not, Vinny Cerrato and Daniel Snyder do not take the right risks. To their credit, they do well in making decisions when theres not much risk involved (London Fletcher, low round draft picks). However, whenever they take an otherwise unaccaptable risk because the potential reward is high, more often than not, they make the wrong choice. Vinny Cerrato and Daniel Snyder are simply not good risk managers.