Quote:
Originally Posted by rm1369
Yes it can be done that way. It is a viable method. Polian’s Colts followed largely the same philosophy. And I believe it cost them rings. They traded greatness for longevity IMO. Every method has strengths and weaknesses. The strength to this one is obvious, the weakness is not peaking and not adapting. What I see are teams that are willing to take more risks winning big more. It may mean more ups and downs, but that comes with built in advantages too - better draft picks. We have Irsay’s meddling to thank for AR, not Ballard. That’s just the most obvious example why a lost season isnt always a bad thing. Especially if you have the QB in place. To me it doesn’t make sense to not consider the window open now. If you do and AR is good, you help his development by giving him support, lessening his load, and you add a year to the window. If he sucks, well isnt it better to bottom out and have a shot at another QB? We saw where mediocre got us when the team had no QB. Why go back there? Restructure a deal or two, be aggressive looking at a 2-3 yr window, and see where AR takes you.
And I will say for the 1000th time that doesn’t necessarily have to be big names. It can be, but doesn’t have to be.
|
For the most part, the Cheatriots used a similar method and were more successful. Yes, they cheated, but they also proved that you can sustain success if you have the QB in place, and you manage the cap well. The window does not require a QB on a rookie contract.