MossWelkowski
Rotational Player and Threatening Starter's Job
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2010
- Messages
- 1,420
- Reaction score
- 102
Registered Members experience this forum ad and noise-free.
CLICK HERE to Register for a free account and login for a smoother ad-free experience. It's easy, and only takes a few moments.Correct. 60+ douchebags.Wrecks was an idiot for not keeping him. Just the same, I can't bring myself to watch that carnival show again. Nearly everyone on that team is detestable.
And now Danny has landed a deal to become the worldwide spokesperson for Sketchers performance footwear line...
they have great 1st stringers and no depth and he says that's how your supposed to build a team
agreedThat is one philosophy. And a valid philosophy. If your players stay healthy it can result in a very strong team. But comes with quite a bit of risk if you have too many injuries.
It is very much the philosophy of the Colts. A team that has had considerable success this decade not as much as NE or Pitt, but clearly one of the better teams in the league.
Disagree, please explain your thinking about how Shula didnt value depth?It was Don Shula philosophy.
Again, don't agree. What is your thinking here? It sounds like you are just naming teams that have/had a good QB and threw a lot. That doesnt mean they dont value depth. In fact, I think both of these teams have made great investment in depth and that is why they have succeeded.Green Bay and the Saints also to a large degree employee this thinking. Two teams that have also had great success.
Really, its a matter of more expensive veteran depth vs cheap young depth.It is however, not the philosophy of NE or the Steelers both of whom take a whole 53 man perspective.
I prefer NE's approach, but I won't dismiss the Colts approach out of hand. It is a valid way to build a team.
The Jets are actually closer to the Redskins