Actually, you make a lot of good points. I completely agree about free agency. It's done more bad to the league than any of the rule changes people complain about or the evolution of statistics, which, if you ignore them, have barely made a difference in the competitive balance if you view it from 5,000 feet.Rupert Patrick wrote:I think it is much easier today to rise from an also ran to become competitive. The 2008 Lions went 0-16, and by 2011 were 10-6 and in the playoffs. In 2007 the Dolphins were 1-15, and the following season were 11-5 and won the AFC East in a tiebreaker over the Patriots who went 16-0 the previous season. I think if the right personnel show up in a mediocre franchise (Drew Brees and Sean Peyton comes to mind) they can turn things around in a hurry and keep them competitive. Back in the 70's you used to be able to write off half or more of the league as being out of the running for the playoffs before the season started, these days, I might write off a half dozen or less teams that I think have no chance of making it to .500 going into a season. With free agency and improvements in identifying and qualifying talent via the draft, the gap between the haves and the have nots is a lot less than it was in the 70's.mwald wrote: Rupert made a good point about the also-rans of the decade, but not sure it’s any different today.
In the 70's, the Steelers didn't have to worry about losing an LC Greenwood or John Stallworth or Rocky Bleier or Donnie Shell to Free Agency every single year, those guys were going to be with the team as long as the team wanted them to be there or until they chose to retire or were injured and were forced to quit. If the Steelers had to deal with Free Agency in the 70's, there is no way they would have won four Super Bowls in six seasons. Belichick has managed to do it in New England with one anchor at QB (Brady), and very few guys who have spent their entire careers there. How many future HOFers played for the Pats in that era? Brady of course, and Vinatieri. Junior Seau was there for a year, but he had already punched his ticket for Canton before he got to New England. After that maybe one or two, not counting the active guys like Welker, and Gronkowski if he can stay healthy for about 8-10 more years at an elite level.
I think what you're saying works in the negative, however. That is, free agency has caused good teams to break apart and not stay together. When that good team loses more games next year, they are replaced by wins somewhere else.
With the exception of QBs or the occasional Reggie White, free agency doesn't contribute much to turning a bad team around, though. I think coaches have more impact, as Jim Harbaugh in San Francisco instantly proved with essentially the same cast.