Originally Posted by
milkman
Philly and Tampa's situations are different than ours.
However, if the choice is between a QB in his thirties who has 2 or 3 years left to play and a young QB who has the potential to be the leader of his team for years to come, in most circumstances, I would pick the younger QB and take my chances.
That includes Joe Montana.
Montana was the greatest QB ever, but I thought then, and to this day still believe the better long term option at that time was to persue Steve Buerlein in free agency.
Buerlein was nowhere near the QB that Montana was, but with those Chiefs teams of the 90s, we could have been an actual SB contender in the years following Montana'a retirement.
He wasn't great, but he sure as hell would have been a damn sight better than the hacks that followed Montana.
And because of those hacks, I never believed we were anything more than pretenders.
I assumed "several" to mean more than two, which is why I brought up the Vermeil years.
I hated Dick Vermeil, so didn't have any problem with including those years in the "trenches of ****" years.
But in the end, I hate(d) ****her and Marty also, so as far as I'm concerned we've been in those trenches for.....oh......37 years now.