Posted: 11:00 a.m. Sunday, March 17, 2013
That's an unfair characterization - I know. There were proponents on both the pro-Dahl and anti-Dahl sides. I was just a bit flabbergasted by how vehement some of the anti-Dahl folks were, and I thought that the topic needed a bit a context before we jumped into discussion today.
Context #1: Depth. I don't think Mr. Dahl will be a starter on this team, except for on Special Teams. This is probably a good thing. Based upon the scouting reports from Rams fans, Dahl isn't prime starting material. That said, he has a ton of starting experience. This is huge for a back-up / role player. If we ever need him to come off the bench, the whole secondary shouldn't collapse. The scheme will probably have to be adjusted a bit to make up for his deficiencies, but the defense would survive. This is particularly important in that Dahl provides depth at a position of intense need for this team. Moreover, depth here also means competition. We want / need camp bodies to provide competition. If we can get cheap vets who have proven that they can play in this league, that is so much better than a sixth round pick that will likely just be cut.
Context #2: The Baalke / Harbaugh effect. These guys know what they are doing. The cap problems aren't going to explode because of this signing. There's no way a Baalke front office, which has consistently been more than diligent when it comes to money, would let a role-player break the bank. I fully believe that Baalke has the wherewithal to spend frugally (in regards to the cap) on a guy who, at best, will compete for a starting spot. That 3 year, $5 million contract? I bet it coddles the cap like a newborn baby. Anyway, if we get two guys clearly better, then he gets cut in camp. No harm, no foul.