Except, choosing Rue guarantees there will be no next year.ckparrothead said:I definitely agree, none of them was a great choice. But the simple fact of the matter is we paid the highest price of any of them, for the worst of them.
So in your golden girls analogy, it would be like paying $5,000 to sleep with Estelle Getty, when you could have paid $500 to have Rue McClanahan hold you over until there would hopefully be a little better stock available next year.
inFINSible said:Except, choosing Rue guarantees there will be no next year.
ckparrothead said:I don't understand how that could have been the case. Grabbing Kurt Warner would not have hurt Spielman anymore than paying a 2nd rounder for Feeley. In fact, the price he paid for Feeley was probably pretty high up on Huizenga's reasons not to give a rats arse whether the new head coach wants the GM title or not.
I guess if you've been having a tough day at the track, some people continue trying to play smart and pick and choose their odds, and others bet it all on the nag with 50:1 odds.
Spielman put it all on the line. That makes him a bad GM.
inFINSible said:Only, Warner is the nag here, on his last legs, proven unreliable, glue truck waiting out front.
Feeley, the 3 year old, possibly loaded with potential according to at least one very well respected colleague, and with a whole career still ahead of him.
ckparrothead said:"nag" status is not tied to a horse's age. The nag was NOT Warner. It was Feeley, who was a 3rd string QB.
In this case Warner had gotten a raw deal in an offense that provided him plenty of weapons but also refused to protect him and refused to give even SOME semblance of a threat from the ground game.
The difference between Saban and Spielman is that when Saban wanted to get hold of an A.J. Feeley type player (Cleo Lemon), he paid a 6th round pick. When Spielman wanted to do the same, he paid a 2nd.
inFINSible said:And you're suggesting he would have been better off behind our 2004 o-line while Ricky was smoking rope in Thailand??
Saban has time, Speilman didn't.
ckparrothead said:Yes, Warner would have been much better than Feeley. That I can say with absolute certainty.
Rick Spielman had JUST been given the title of GM. He had plenty of time. It was Wannstedt that did not. He had absolutely no reason to believe his fortunes were tied to Dave Wannstedt, because the two had come to plenty of disagreement about a bunch of issues and Rick had just received a huge vote of confidence by giving him GM power over Dave.
Spielman lost his job within a year because he went around pissing away draft picks like Nick Nolte on a bender. He publicly humiliated the franchise by giving a 2nd rounder for a 3rd string QB, a 3rd rounder for a 3rd string runner, and a 4th rounder to move up one spot for Vernon Carey where the Vikings went around openly telling everyone that they snookered us into that trade. THAT is why Rick Spielman lost his job.
He had the tools to do the job and if he hadn't acted like a 12 year old with A.D.D. in a video arcade, he could have kept it for a while.
Warner would have been out for the year before preseason ended.ckparrothead said:Yes, Warner would have been much better than Feeley. That I can say with absolute certainty.
.
inFINSible said:Sitting on his hands making "safe' moves would have netted the same results. Guaranteed.
There was no stopping the avalanche.
ckparrothead said:Selective memory sure is nice. The guy not only remembers things wrong, but he conveniently leaves out other stuff.
First off, Mark Brunell had an 85.9 QB rating last year, led his team to the 2nd round of the playoffs, helped Santana Moss gain like 1,500 yards or something...and to this guy, Brunell is simply "that guy that is stinking it up in Snyderville".
Second, yes...Drew Henson and Billy Volek were two guys who were also available. Drew Henson has done nothing in Big D and now is going the way of the dodo. But the dude simply ignores how in 2004, the same year Feeley was stinking it up and throwing more interceptions returned for a TD than I've ever seen before, Volek came in for McNair for 10 games, grabbed an 87.1 QB rating completing 61.1% of his passes with 18 TDs and 10 INTs.
The guy also conveniently forgets that Jeff Garcia, Kerry Collins and Kurt Warner were three veterans that were set to be available. And, while I would not exactly hang my hat on any of them as franchise performers, all three have performed better than Feeley did since the time in question. Garcia, the worst of the three, had a 76.7 rating in Cleveland in 2004 then a 65.1 rating in Cleveland. Collins put together ratings of 74.8 and 77.3 in Oakland. Warner, probably the most successful of any of the options discussed aside from maybe Brunell, put together an 86.5 rating in NY, and a 85.8 rating in ARI.
When Feeley got his big chance, he coughed up a 61.7 rating. When he got more chances prior to 2005, he got busted down to third string. Then when he got more chances with San Diego this off season, he got busted out of the roster altogether in favor of two rookies, Charlie Whitehurst and Brett Elliott.
Nothing will ever vindicate Rick Spielman for his decision that year. He paid the highest price among all of the QBs discussed, and got arguably the worst one of the bunch (depending on how you feel about Henson).
Plus he forgot an extremely important lesson when it comes to making these decisions. Not only are you not guaranteed to pick the right one among a group of QBs available in any given year, there is no guarantee that ANY of them are the franchise player you hope...because any given year there is probably only a 1/3rd or 1/2 chance that ANY QB that changes hands, turns out to be a franchise guy within a few years.
Spielman's an idiot, end of story.
inFINSible said:Sitting on his hands making "safe' moves would have netted the same results. Guaranteed.
There was no stopping the avalanche.
Nothing will ever vindicate Rick Spielman for his decision that year. He paid the highest price among all of the QBs discussed, and got arguably the worst one of the bunch (depending on how you feel about Henson).
A bad rep never stopped anybody from getting a new job in the good 'ole boy system.ckparrothead said:That's a copout. If there aren't any great moves to be made, that isn't an excuse for getting coked up and blowing draft picks like sailors at a thai brothel.
Spielman made horrible moves as a GM, and he got fired for it. If you choose to believe that a more conservative (wiser) approach would have also got him fired, that's your choice. At least he'd still have a decent reputation.