Originally Posted by dalemurphy
a few things:
1. The CBs that "don't fit our scheme" still flood the market and drive down the price of the ones that "do fit".
2. Clearly, you have a high opinion of Jason Allen. However, you do realize that teams often have 3 or 4 CBs on the field at the same time? So, even if these guys are on his level, why wouldn't we want them as well?
3. Who cares if they are "over-rated"? If they are solid players that make the team better and the market determines that they can be signed for a discounted rate, I'm hardly concerned whether they are as good as ESPN analysts believe they are.
1. CBs that don't fit the scheme are not ones we can actually use. So, while there may be 11 FA CBs , maybe only 6 are usable.
2. The CBs were pretty bad last year, but the main issue is that if you get a Aso or a Joseph, you cut off half the field. Now, the Safteys can cheat and help the other CB, help each other, and patrol the middle of the field. With Allen type players, they are not good enough to solo, so you need to keep a safety nearby, which opens up additional passing areas. One elite CB can significantly upgrade your D.
3. If they are overrated and basically on the level of Allen, why bring them in? Jackson was horrible, but got dramatically better as the season wore on. Allen was Allen. We have Brandon Harris as well. If the players we bring in are on the level of Allen, we may as well stick with our Allen and Jackson. At least Jackson has potentially more upside than some of the names you mentioned.