Quote Originally Posted by sharpe1027 View Post
I'm not saying one approach is inherently better than the other. I am saying they aren't equivalent.
Agree. Depends on the situation.

Signing your own sends a message of loyalty
Signing your own is less risky because you have medicals and a clearer picture of what their assignments are
Signing your own, you know how trust worthy the person is

For a number of reasons, you don’t want to be signing UFA and letting your guys go.



There are as many unique situations as there are stars in the sky. Sometimes your guys you drafted are ass holes. No one in the lockerroom blinks when you let an ass hole leave. So ALWAYS signing your own doesn’t make sense.

Nor does NEVER dipping in UFA. Everyone knows when Oren Burks is holding the team back. No one’s gonna be offended if you brought in Fred Warner.

I think the method that would give you the best chance is to draft well. But no one can do that consistently. It’s just never happened. Same way a hitter in baseball doesn’t go 2 for 2 or better every game. It’s just never happened and I’d bet everything I have it will never happen.

So you draft well first. And then you sign your best players (good people, high performance, all the things that go into “best”.) If you have a bad draft or two, I think you’re better to front load a little than to bring in a bunch of UFAs. Maybe you aren’t quite as good one year, but youll be able to sign all your good ones that come up a year or two later.

So kind of bounce between front loading or backloading depending on the opportunities available. And by opportunities, I mean opportunities to sign your own as priority number 1.

If you don’t draft well, ever, and you just suck, sure, sign a bunch of UFAs to try to save your job. But you getting fired either way. My game plan only works if you can perform in the draft more often than the average.