I noticed that 5 of our 6 lowest ranked players (3 Stars 5.6 and 5.7) are OL/TE (and no highly ranked OL)
Is this some sort of shift in strategy?.
e.g. finding long-term development project kids with potential upside?
Or maybe the OL depth chart is full, so we're just "mining" hoping to find a hidden diamond at low cost?
Not sure but this feels very different than the past few years when we were brining in high 4 star and 5 stars
Our OL is our key strength and we are going to lose them ALL next year in Arch's first year.
Seems like a bit of a concern...or maybe not since we dont seem to be pushing for 5 stars to replace them. Maybe they feel good about the 2nd team OL stepping up. Note sure...hence the question to the board for thoughts
Is this some sort of shift in strategy?.
e.g. finding long-term development project kids with potential upside?
Or maybe the OL depth chart is full, so we're just "mining" hoping to find a hidden diamond at low cost?
Not sure but this feels very different than the past few years when we were brining in high 4 star and 5 stars
Our OL is our key strength and we are going to lose them ALL next year in Arch's first year.
Seems like a bit of a concern...or maybe not since we dont seem to be pushing for 5 stars to replace them. Maybe they feel good about the 2nd team OL stepping up. Note sure...hence the question to the board for thoughts
