- Messages
- 4,966
- Reaction score
- 4,239
i was reading an article on nfl.com about how the two super bowl teams were built. the first thing that jumps out at me is that only half of the total starters in the super bowl were drafted by their respective teams. these teams do not appear big proponents of the "draft and develop" philosophy. and in fact neither team has any of their 2017 draftees starting.
21 of the 44 starters in the super bowl were not members of their respective teams just two years ago. and of those 21 starters, only four were acquired through the draft.
now the eagles acquired a total of 26 players through free agency, waivers and trades in 2016 and 2017. that's half of their 53-man squad. and frankly, they are in a bit of a predicament cap-wise. the patriots however acquired a total of 29 players through free agency, waivers and trades over the past two seasons (six of them are on ir). and their cap situation isn't much different from the packers.
it seems to me that a pretty strong case has been made for the importance of using all avenues of player acquisition, and not just dabbling in free agency but embracing it as a way to build the roster.
patriots:
eagles:
21 of the 44 starters in the super bowl were not members of their respective teams just two years ago. and of those 21 starters, only four were acquired through the draft.
now the eagles acquired a total of 26 players through free agency, waivers and trades in 2016 and 2017. that's half of their 53-man squad. and frankly, they are in a bit of a predicament cap-wise. the patriots however acquired a total of 29 players through free agency, waivers and trades over the past two seasons (six of them are on ir). and their cap situation isn't much different from the packers.
it seems to me that a pretty strong case has been made for the importance of using all avenues of player acquisition, and not just dabbling in free agency but embracing it as a way to build the roster.
patriots:
eagles: