Oh boy, the dip**** crawled back out of his hole. Can't believe we've lost so many longtime members lately, but we're still stuck with this clown.

My "hole" was a Havana Suite on the Carnival Vista out of Galveston for the past week, thank you very much. Assuming, of course, it was I to whom you were referring. What "hole" have you been in for the past few months? Missed you!

I think there is another reasonable perspective. When you decide to pay top dollar to a player at a given position, you essentially commit to trying to build around that position as one of your key areas of strength for years to come, which comes at the expense of having money to invest in other positions. If you are a hapless franchise in a 10 year playoff drought maybe beggars can't be choosers and you take what you can get because any elite player could help you make the playoffs. But if you are looking for a ring, I think you have to consider where your dollars are best spent and be willing to make hard choices and let some stars walk.

For various reasons, I don't think the wide receiver position is the best position to make a top dollar investment in. Most of the best receivers in the salary cap era never earned a ring: Randy Moss, Terrelle Owens, Andre Johnson, Calvin Johnson, Chad Ochocinco, Larry Fitzgerald, Julio Jones, etc. Certainly good receivers got rings but often the absolute top tier receivers were relegated to perennial contenders with exciting offenses that couldn't make the leap. There are various reasons this could be. When an average or developing QB has a superstar WR they may often become dependent on targeting that receiver too much and becoming a one dimensional offense or passing game. This may work great against worse teams in the regular season, but top defenses in the playoffs may find a coverage scheme to shut this down and then bam, the whole offense disappears. Also a young QB developing with a superstar receiver may actually be hindered not helped. Instead of learning to spread the ball all around, they may get the best results just relying on the #1 whenever anything breaks down or gets complicated, so instead of their skills as a QB progressing over the years to make more reads and tighter throws, their skills may regress. But even with regressed skills and lack of ability to read defenses, use al their receivers, and make tight throws, they may rack up big stats with that star receiver. Then you end up signing a mediocre QB to a top 5-10 QB contract, and suddenly their star receiver starts to age and lose a step, and everything falls apart. I think its best for a young QB to develop in a diverse offense without a superstar wide receiver. This is how Brady developed. This is how Brees developed with Colston being a very good receiver but not megatron. This is how Peyton Manning developed with a young draft pick wide receiver in Marvin Harrison who blossomed over time but was not an immediate extreme top outlet. Then as that QB matures, perhaps you can have a superstar receiver.

Back when Michael Thomas was on his rookie deal, I thought we should trade him when Brees retired for these reasons. He was super elite, and that has not been a good formula for developing a young QB or winning a ring. Had we done so, we would be better off. We did trade away Jimmy Graham and were better off. Colston was more of a good #1 receiver but not a record breaker all pro. If Olave turns into a Colston type and does not need an extreme contract, maybe we can keep him. But overall I think if his value gets too high, the smart thing is to trade Olave not to give him the same contract Jefferson and Chase will get.

In general I think our money is better invested in the defense and in the offensive line. Corners also often lose a step as they age so like New England, I would be careful to be on the hook for big long term money to a corner into their 30's, though the first contract after the rookie deal can work out. A big challenge for us is that just when we struck it rich with great draft picks, we struck it rich as some particular positions where long term investment is a big risk. So we ended up sinking big money into WR and RB which is a thing that smarter franchises like New England and Pittburgh who have won multiple rings over the years have hesitated to do.

Bako,

I appreciate you taking the time to write out a well thought out post on the subject. It actually makes sense to manage it based on the maturity of the rest of the offense. Maybe that's why the Chiefs decided to trade Tyreek Hill instead of signing him to the mint.

SFIAH

Breaking NEWs.... THOMAS aint playing the rest of the season..and has not played the last 3 seasons... for MILLIONs....

AWESOME Contract AND has a thug Defending him to boot

SAINTs Truth!!!

Hasn’t played in three seasons? Who was that the kicked Atlanta’s butts first game of the season?

Meh... whatever.... i bet you all were wishing he were out there last night. Kicked the falcons butt ... as if.

It’s called being truthful. You should give it a try. Anyway the Saints lost last night so you should be happy.