Dynasty or Go For Broke?

The Essential Online Seahawks Fan Forum Community. There simply is NO substitute. RATING: PG-13
Re: Dynasty or Go For Broke?
Tue Jan 22, 2013 11:08 am
  • I still can't believe the Pats beat the Rams in 2001. That Rams team was amazing. If Martz wasn't so darn stubborn and ran the ball they would have won.
    Image

    Win Forever!
    User avatar
    JonRud
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1179
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 7:58 pm
    Location: New Jersey - Site of Super Bowl XLVIII


Re: Dynasty or Go For Broke?
Tue Jan 22, 2013 11:17 am
  • Sgt. Largent wrote:I agree with your first sentence, but I still think they're overrated, and have been for a few years now. Put the Patriots in any other division and they'd be lucky to win 10-11 games........instead of their usual 13-14 in the awful AFC East.


    True enough, though the Jets have had a few sporadic good years. It really doesn't look like it's getting any tougher for the Pats anytime soon.

    NFC West is definitely going to be a dog fight for years to come. All the more reason to consistently build for the future.
    User avatar
    DavidSeven
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3609
    Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2013 9:15 am


Re: Dynasty or Go For Broke?
Tue Jan 22, 2013 11:27 am
  • Sarlacc83 wrote:Not being able to cheat by knowing the defensive calls hasn't helped them, either.


    This is also true, but let's be honest, they're a helmet catch and a Wes Welker drop away from having two rings post-Spygate.
    User avatar
    DavidSeven
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3609
    Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2013 9:15 am


Re: Dynasty or Go For Broke?
Tue Jan 22, 2013 11:43 am
  • Keep it going. Even if you go for broke, it doesn't guarantee you will win that year (See: Eagles).

    It's better to stick with the plan.
    Image
    User avatar
    HawkFan72
    NET Pro Bowler
     
    Posts: 11346
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 10:50 am
    Location: Antioch, CA


Re: Dynasty or Go For Broke?
Tue Jan 22, 2013 12:50 pm
  • Buy low, sell high, hope for the best, plan for the worst, never trade the long term for the short term, and do all of this regardless of any feelings of urgency our competition might be giving us. This is what we do now. Enjoy it!
    BirdsCommaAngry
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 630
    Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2013 6:25 pm


Re: Dynasty or Go For Broke?
Tue Jan 22, 2013 1:14 pm
  • Unless Seattle trades away half their roster, I don't think breaking on "go for broke" is even possible. The roster is so young and so good. We aren't exactly the '94/'95 Rockets or the '08 Celtics. Those were old teams that made bold moves to win a championship.

    What I am afraid of, and I think it will likely happen, is that Seattle passes on some premium talent in round one in favor of reaching for a need on the defensive line for a player that will likely have a James Carpenter type impact in the NFL. I don't mind the James Carpenter pick, because we didn't pass on anyone notable to get him. If we had passed on a WR like Roddy White or a TE like Zach Miller to get him, I'd be pissed. Well, that looks like a very real possibility this year.
    User avatar
    kearly
    * Mr Random Thought *
     
    Posts: 10714
    Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2007 1:44 am


Re: Dynasty or Go For Broke?
Tue Jan 22, 2013 1:16 pm
  • kearly wrote:Unless Seattle trades away half their roster, I don't think breaking on "go for broke" is even possible. The roster is so young and so good. We aren't exactly the '94/'95 Rockets or the '08 Celtics. Those were old teams that made bold moves to win a championship.

    What I am afraid of, and I think it will likely happen, is that Seattle passes on some premium talent in round one in favor of reaching for a need on the defensive line for a player that will likely have a James Carpenter type impact in the NFL. I don't mind the James Carpenter pick, because we didn't pass on anyone notable to get him. If we had passed on Roddy White or Zach Miller to get him, I'd be pissed. Well, that looks like a very real possibility this year.


    Fortunately, JS has consistently harped on his support of the philosophy to pick the best player available over reaching for a need.
    User avatar
    Fox0r
    * NET News Scoop *
    * NET News Scoop *
     
    Posts: 1874
    Joined: Mon Jun 08, 2009 6:30 pm
    Location: Lynnwood, WA


Re: Dynasty or Go For Broke?
Tue Jan 22, 2013 3:13 pm
  • Fox0r wrote:
    kearly wrote:Unless Seattle trades away half their roster, I don't think breaking on "go for broke" is even possible. The roster is so young and so good. We aren't exactly the '94/'95 Rockets or the '08 Celtics. Those were old teams that made bold moves to win a championship.

    What I am afraid of, and I think it will likely happen, is that Seattle passes on some premium talent in round one in favor of reaching for a need on the defensive line for a player that will likely have a James Carpenter type impact in the NFL. I don't mind the James Carpenter pick, because we didn't pass on anyone notable to get him. If we had passed on Roddy White or Zach Miller to get him, I'd be pissed. Well, that looks like a very real possibility this year.


    Fortunately, JS has consistently harped on his support of the philosophy to pick the best player available over reaching for a need.


    But we know that is not totally true. Irvin was a reach no doubt about it. but he was the right fit for our system in a spot of need.

    Carpenter was also a reach and they did so because OL was our biggest weakness.

    Now they think DL is our biggest weakness again which it is, but I think #2 WR, #2 TE, and OLB are also areas we can improve.

    To think we could pass up a Pro Bowl WR, TE, or LB to draft a solid but unlikely Pro Bowl level DT or DE is reaching again. How pissed would you be if we get a DT who is not as porductive as Mebane or almost is equal but SF draft Hopkins and he turns into a weapon for years opposite Crabtree?
    Image
    User avatar
    Wenhawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2136
    Joined: Sat Dec 12, 2009 6:38 am
    Location: Graham, WA


Re: Dynasty or Go For Broke?
Tue Jan 22, 2013 3:25 pm
  • I'm under the impression that our team is well-balanced enough and has enough depth that we have the luxury of being able to draft the best players available on the board instead of drafting for need.

    Even our perceived areas that need improvement (defensive line, wide receivers, etc.) are not glaringly bad.

    And even then, a lot of our answers for those areas that can use improvement can be found in free agency. As a matter of fact, the free agency pool this year is quite strong, and exactly fit our needs on the team. If we signed a Mike Wallace, Cliff Avril, or a Henry Melton, it would basically allow the FO to take a more relaxed approach towards the draft and merely take the best players available.
    Image
    User avatar
    Winterfell
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 128
    Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2013 3:55 pm
    Location: The Wall


Re: Dynasty or Go For Broke?
Tue Jan 22, 2013 5:55 pm
  • Going for broke with old vets rarely works in the NFL, injuries and the salaries seem to be a double negative, in fact our dedication to our own older vets may have created a lot of our demise in the first place, adding more dug the hole to bury us in.

    We have built a predator here, something that wants blood and can go for it; unfortunately we are in the same situation now that we were in when the AFC West was our home.
    49ers Good/ Broncos Good,
    Rams good/Raiders good,
    Seahawks Good/ Seahawks Good
    Cheifs good/ well no 5th team anymore here.
    Chargers offensively good/ Arizona defensively good (both can surprise on any Sunday)

    To win we need to be young, hungry, aggressive and built for multiple seasons.
    Image

    To Be P/C or Not P/C That is the Question..........Seahawks kick Ass !!!!
    Used to be an Alumni till they pulled a USC on me...
    .Net official Clueless, Dumbass, Douche, Simpleton, CensoredTard , Idiot, member of the 38 club.
    User avatar
    chris98251
    .NET Hijacker
     
    Posts: 10137
    Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 10:52 pm
    Location: Renton Wa.


Re: Dynasty or Go For Broke?
Tue Jan 22, 2013 6:39 pm
  • Wenhawk wrote:
    But we know that is not totally true. Irvin was a reach no doubt about it. but he was the right fit for our system in a spot of need.

    Carpenter was also a reach and they did so because OL was our biggest weakness.

    Now they think DL is our biggest weakness again which it is, but I think #2 WR, #2 TE, and OLB are also areas we can improve.

    To think we could pass up a Pro Bowl WR, TE, or LB to draft a solid but unlikely Pro Bowl level DT or DE is reaching again. How pissed would you be if we get a DT who is not as porductive as Mebane or almost is equal but SF draft Hopkins and he turns into a weapon for years opposite Crabtree?


    That depends on how much credence you give to the stories about how the Jets would've taken Irvin shortly after where we had selected him and likewise with the Steelers and Carpenter. Regardless, "BPA vs need" is just a strange concept because BPA in itself is a subjective formula which factors in positions of need to one extent or another depending on the FO.
    BirdsCommaAngry
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 630
    Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2013 6:25 pm


Re: Dynasty or Go For Broke?
Wed Jan 23, 2013 4:06 am
  • If the question was 1 guaranteed SB then followed by 4 bad years or 8 years of having a shot I would gladly take the SB.
    If there was a Reggie White out there that gave us the DL we want that might get us over the hump but signing meant we might lose players like Flynn,Carp, KC,Tate and Browner 2 years from now, I take White.
    I wouldnt break the bank for position like TE or WR but pocket collapsing DT are even harder to draft than franchise Qbs seems like.
    This offseason I would take a shot at the DTs in FA and take my chances even if it meant losing a couple of players down the road.I dont think drafting one of this years class will help us next year that much
    justafan
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 522
    Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2011 6:37 am


Re: Dynasty or Go For Broke?
Wed Jan 23, 2013 6:09 am
  • Dren wrote:I say build a dynasty. When does going for broke ever work in the NFL? Also, what happens when you go for broke but things still don't pan out the way you planned them? Build a young nucleus, make something special out of the Seattle Seahawks franchise. Why throw away everything they've been working on for one shot, when you can possibly have multiple shots down the road. Instant gratification isn't always the most gratify thing.

    :13:

    How many times did the REDSKINS try to do the BUILD for one SB and totally fall flat on their face? I say do it like the packers,Pats,Colts,Steelers do and build it for the long hall.
    PatsFanNH
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 290
    Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2012 10:07 am




It is currently Mon Sep 01, 2014 4:01 am

Please REGISTER to become a member

Return to [ THE OFFICIAL NET NATION FAN FORUM ]




Information
  • Who is online