just take a moment to get your head around this one. we currently have great luck identifying good players but have had failures which have cost us dearly. we needed a nando of the champions league, a cisse of france not what they did at anfield. as we seem to have 'links' to the kraft organization, i think it would behove both parties to get together to examine the ways both parties select players and look specifically at the failures. why i say this is that the patriots are built in a similar fashion to us and typically win. they have a thoughtfull head coach - (bob billicheck) -- who reminds me of a poorly dressed rafa. what i am saying is that they choose the same sort of player and expect the same out of them.
the real purpose would be to look at the failures , to try to limit their occurance. there must be markers that could be found. kronkamp isn't a bad player nor is nando but they failed. why??? maybe someone with a fresh look, different experience may see a co-relation.
face it, there is alot of talent available so why do certain teams succeed with the darkhorses while others buy big names and fail. its easy to say that given chelsea's money anyone can win but look at real madrid.
player recruitment is where we will win it ( with roman's money its our only hope) and maybe this can give us an advantage.
for illustration i will give you matt millen's (detroit lion's gm) first round picks
joey harrington qb-- not mobile but you insert system where mobility is re'q- like playing xabi as a winger
charles rogers-- wide reciever-- 2 failed drug tests-- came from michigan state-- a major party school
roy williams wide reciever-- doesn't know how to practice
mike williams- wide reciever-- forgets to got to training
of course the offense was terrible
compare to new england who got tom brady 4 rounds later than harrington and he's great
what i mean is that to excell we need superior personnel choices and this may be one chance to get an advantage, though rafa is great at it already but can always be better