Quote:
Originally Posted by Easy 6
This, all damn day long
There is no magic elixir
|
The problem is that it's absolutely going to have to be a balancing act.
You can focus on the best possible short-term solution available but it's going to almost certainly come at the expense of the long-term answer. I.e. you can target Armstead/Stanley and likely get a very strong (if intermittently unavailable) effort but with very little true long-term value.
Or you can focus on the long term and go through growing pains with Kingsley or a draft pick.
Or you shoot for the middle with someone like Jackson. You're trading some short term certainty for possible long-term stability. There's a good chance he's not as good as Stanley or Armstead now. But he's not as risky as Kingsley. You're also paying a lot more for it.
It's all about where you want to put your emphasis.
To haughtily act like any specific path forward is foolish is just typical Clay bullshit.
****ing guy has been wrong more than anyone on this board (primarily because he never shuts up) but never hesitates to act like he has all the answers.
Any answer here is going to be a matter of preference and an ability to get to 'yes'.