My issue with signing top free agents is two-fold. First, they typically get paid more than they're worth because they are highly sought after. Second, you have fewer years left of them playing well. Couple those two, and it usually doesn't pan out. Occasionally, it does, but it is more like 50/50, with a much higher price tag than a draft pick. Granted, draft picks are often 50/50 and need a learning curve, but the ones you hit on could be around much longer than any free agent.

On a side note, I do not want the NFL to become a mercenary league like the NBA is now. That game is hard to watch!

The players run the league in the NBA

In the NFL the owners still have most of the control.

I agree I like the NFL system better.

Very very true!

I will say I enjoy watching the Pacers continue to win without a star. They beat Paul George and Westbrook and the Thunder last night.

Plus watching Lebron and the Lakers miss the playoffs is pretty damn funny too.

I pretty much stopped watching after the Pacers lost to the Lakers in the 2000 finals. Seen a handful of games since. Still no championship for the Pacers... almost 19 years now. Never gonna win one.

That's funny, because I'm kind of the opposite (again). While I absolutely agree that a franchise QB is the key piece, without Luck I'd probably be more in favor of looking shorter term because it doesn't seem to me that teams without a franchise QB really have long, dominant periods. So in those circumstances it might make sense to me to try and make a surge, then to allow the team to reload for a season or two (where they might have a high draft pick to get a QB).

I really don't disagree with this, nor do I think this is necessarily what the Colts are doing. They did bring in Slauson, for example. I just think that its treacherous to start signing skill position players in their late 20's/early 30's, because those skill sets need to be finely tuned and the stats suggest that they'll be on the downside of their career at that point. Plus you'll probably be paying them based upon performance while they were in their mid-to-late 20's.

When you have a franchise QB you can have a dynasty. That's what I'm looking for.

I'm not sure that there is any one best way to build a football team. To me, the most important thing is that you have A way, that you understand it and that you do not allow yourself to deviate much,if at all. Ballard/Reich (it is a great thing for this organization that they seem to work as one) have a plan and really seem to know where they want to take this team. So far it has worked about as well as I could have hoped for. One year ago everyone, and I mean everyone, thought we had the least talented team in football. Thru 6 games that seemed to hold (although you could see things, like the offensive line, start to jell if you looked beyond our record), then it started to turn. For the first time in years I find myself being comfortable watching someone who apparently knows what the hell they are doing build this team. I'm really enjoying this build.

here in LA the local sports media is in pseudo-meltdown mode over the state of the lakers. kinda funny to listen to.

Would you consider the Peyton led Colts a dynasty?

I enjoy it. Entitled fanbase. Sick of all the new Rams fans too. I was walking out of a game this year and some asshat tough guy was pissing on a tree in front of everyone. He saw me giving him a dirty look and tried to start a fight with me.