I agree with a lot of this. I'm with you that I'd rather Fitz look forward than backward. He should be proactive, not reactive. Which is why I'm fine moving on from Holtz and Schmid, if you don't have a spot for them year then why bother hanging on? Just rip the band-aid off and get it over with.
I just think that these attempts to plug certain holes are opening up larger, more valuable holes elsewhere. 18 months ago we had surplus talent, now we're having trouble icing a full top-12. This didn't happen over night, we've slowly been bleeding skill for a bit now. We're getting slower and more simple, and I don't think that's the right direction to go in after committing to Jack, Nico, and Bratt as the core.
I'm not expecting +50 wins every year. I'm fine with getting more physical, but getting "harder to play against" shouldn't come at the cost of what made you a great team. It looks to me like they're banking way, way too hard on Jack carrying this forward group and I just think that's a losing strategy.
who have we lost that you would preferred to have kept?
Sharangovich was maybe a miss.
Holtz I think just didnt work here and wouldnt have had the proper time to develop now that we want to contend.
Wood wasnt exactly bad.. or.. good? Idk he felt fine for what he was but maybe became a bit too expensive.
Anderson could have maybe been decept bottom-6 depth and he plays the way they want.
Zacha was a tough one, I personally would have kept him but maybe the change of scenery is what did it for him so im happy hes happy.
McLeod is a Pejorative Slur.
Boqvist I dont think was much other than speed and some flair when he got open.
Im probably missing a few, maybe even an important one, but I dont feel as though the talent weve bled is bad to any extent that we wont be able to ice a true contender. Maybe weve lost in value on some of those deals but weve managed to not take a big risk with any of our top-6 talent (besides Holtz if you feel that way)