Quote:
Originally Posted by rm1369
So the only team with arguably an equivalent level QB (NE) was unquestionably better than Polian’s Colts? That same team employed a more aggressive style in building their roster
|
Yes, bold statement: The 2000's New England dynasty (set aside questions of legitimacy), with Belichick as coach/GM, was better than Polian's Colts. Actually, it ended up only being the first half of a 20-year dynasty. You know who else they were better than? Quite possibly everyone in NFL history. Why is that a particular knock on Polian? Their system worked well. That doesn't invalidate Polian's system. Colts easily could've won another Super Bowl or two if they didn't play alongside that team. They were already a Dwight Freeney sprained ankle away from winning their second and tying PIT for the decade.
Also, go back and dig a little with NE and you'll see a splash like in '07, but mostly "bargain bin" guy as you say. And what Belichick was known for which was actually trading away his good players in exchange for picks, not the other way around. 100 draft picks in 10 seasons from '01-'11. [/QUOTE]
Quote:
Originally Posted by rm1369
replicates a 1-1 SB record in 4 years (what took 13 w Polian).And you still see no possible evidence[/B] for the idea that with a more complete roster, Manning would have been more successful.
|
Yes, an almost unprecedented situation occurs and arguably the best QB in the league gets his pick of the litter to go to another team. He chose the Broncos over every other team because they were loaded with talent, much like many of his Colts teams he played on before.
What's the point here? Are we seriously going to extrapolate his four years in DEN and act like he easily would've had a more Belichick/Brady-like resumé if he'd had their FO for the bulk of his career?
And this "no possible evidence" thing... We're getting things tangled. This discussion didn't start with me saying Polian's way is the truth and the light. I have no problem acknowledging other teams' success with a different approach. It started with you, as you always do, saying that this type of method is "a good way to stay mediocre longer." Which is bullshit.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rm1369
You want to compare Polian’s teams to the other 30 that did not have a GOAT level QB.
|
Yes, I compare them to the entire league. If your bar is to only compare teams to the 9 SB's in 18 years Patriots and you think that's realistic, then have fun. There's a lot more to that story.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rm1369
And even then you concede one of them (Steelers) is arguably more successful.
|
Yes, the Steelers had a great run along with IND and NE. Roethlisberger is not a GOAT candidate, but as much as I hate him, he probably goes down as a top-10 guy.
The Steelers had a great run alongside IND and NE in the 2000's. And the Steelers, the Rooneys, and 22-year GM Kevin Colbert were notorious for being conservative. Just like Polian, they hyper-focused on the draft and home-grown players and used free agency sparingly.
And just like many Colts fans, many Steelers fans piss and moan about how "stingy" or "ultra-conservative" their team and GM are. I assume you don't like how the Steelers operated in the 2000's, either.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rm1369
You could put prime Manning on the 2022 Texans and they are a 10-11 win team and would have won the division. So no, all of those win totals don’t show the strength of what Polian built. They show the brilliance of Manning.
|
That's bullshit. You're trying to imply that Manning carried dogshit rosters to hollow 12-win seasons but couldn't compete with the actual top teams in the league. They competed against a 1st-place schedule and beat or at minimum were highly competitive with the best teams the league had in a given year.
And Manning wasn't there when the Buffalo Bills that Polian built 4-peated as AFC Champs. Also wasn't there when Polian built an expansion Carolina Panthers team that beat the the SB champs and made it to the NFC Championship in year 2.