Dynasty or Go For Broke?

The Essential Online Seahawks Fan Forum Community. There simply is NO substitute. RATING: PG-13
Dynasty or Go For Broke?
Tue Jan 22, 2013 7:38 am
  • Purely hypothetical - do you prefer the Hawks continue on this path of young players, short term contracts for vets, continue to build talent, and be in the mix every year, or.......

    say screw it - we want the Super Bowl next year so bring in some expensive vets [like a Tony Gonzalzez or whatever] to help win in 2013 even if it screws up the salary cap for years to come and we follow a Super Bowl win with a string of down years where we don't make the playoffs.

    Forget about the details of the above - I am just asking a philosophical question.

    For me - Just ONE Super Bowl win is so important that I would gladly take that even if the Hawks were bad for years to come after that. I do not care about the dynasty. After living & dying through 28 seasons, I just want ONCE for the Hawks to win the Lombardi. I would sell my soul for this if I could figure out how that works. Anyone know where I can find Joe Hardy or Mr. Applegate?
    Image

    Win Forever!
    User avatar
    JonRud
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1177
    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 7:48 am
  • I want the Hawks to win BACK TO BACK and then I can die a happy man!

    One would do just fine though, but I want to witness greatness!

    To answer your question, I'd go with the dynasty approach. With that type of approach, you're bound to win at least one.
    Talkin Seahawks All Day, All Night @ my blog Seafense! http://seafense.blogspot.com/
    User avatar
    NYCoug
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1389
    Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2011 5:45 pm


Re: Dynasty or Go For Broke?
Tue Jan 22, 2013 7:56 am
  • Am I dying of cancer or something? If not, do it the right way...
    Image
    User avatar
    KARAVARUS
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2908
    Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2009 7:09 am
    Location: Omaha, NE


Re: Dynasty or Go For Broke?
Tue Jan 22, 2013 8:02 am
  • 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.
    User avatar
    Dren
    NET Bench Warmer
     
    Posts: 45
    Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2012 11:37 am


Re: Dynasty or Go For Broke?
Tue Jan 22, 2013 8:03 am
  • Tony Gonzalez couldn't get Atlanta to the SuperBowl, and in actuality I would rather have a good team every year that has the chance to go all the way rather than a 1 trick pony.
    Image
    User avatar
    Largent80
    NET Ring Of Honor
     
    Posts: 22062
    Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 12:38 pm
    Location: NFL WORLD CHAMPIONS 2013-2014


Re: Dynasty or Go For Broke?
Tue Jan 22, 2013 8:18 am
  • Go for broke doesn't work. That's what the Eagles tried to do the last two years and look where it got them. They have a system in place and with that system the team is obviously improving each and every year. Do I want them to shy away from big name free agents if its the right fit? No. However I don't want to see them go away from how the organization is being built because they say "we're so close we just need this one or two guys and we've got it." Nothing is guaranteed in the the NFL. There are too many questions with injuries in this league, so you can't afford to put all your eggs in one basket and hope they survive for that one glorious season. Too much risk.
    Image

    "There is no delay of game. We did not let the team know we were scratching our balls"
    User avatar
    IBleedBlueAndGreen
    * NET Injury Guru *
     
    Posts: 1571
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 10:56 am
    Location: Poulsbo, WA


Re: Dynasty or Go For Broke?
Tue Jan 22, 2013 8:20 am
  • We are so close that I think we just continue on the current path!
    Member formally known as AC59
    User avatar
    Jiggy
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2145
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:03 am


Re: Dynasty or Go For Broke?
Tue Jan 22, 2013 8:45 am

Re: Dynasty or Go For Broke?
Tue Jan 22, 2013 8:50 am
  • current path, but some good solid vets would help out tremendously... we're right there..
    World Champs - Sounds good don't it
    User avatar
    hawker84
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3877
    Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2012 2:22 pm
    Location: Tri Cities, WA


Re: Dynasty or Go For Broke?
Tue Jan 22, 2013 8:55 am
  • Build a sustainable model. Augment in a judicious way. Look at doing smart additions like the Patriots did with Dillon, Moss and Welker.
    Image
    Leon Washington 2010-2012 Red Bryant 2008-2013 Chris Clemons 2010-2013 Golden Tate 2010-2013
    Brandon Browner 2011-2013 Breno Giacomini 2011-2013 - Gone but not forgotten.
    Wilson will sign for $18M+ (3/4/2014)
    User avatar
    drdiags
    * The Doc *
    * The Doc *
     
    Posts: 9076
    Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 7:33 am
    Location: Covington, Washington


Re: Dynasty or Go For Broke?
Tue Jan 22, 2013 9:54 am
  • Dynasty. Especially now that we have a future HOF QB.
    User avatar
    Seahwkgal
    * NET Hottie *
     
    Posts: 2187
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 1:27 pm


Re: Dynasty or Go For Broke?
Tue Jan 22, 2013 10:05 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.


    Outstanding post.

    Ask Dan Snyder how often his FA spending sprees have bought him a championship.
    Image

    Super Bowl XLVIII Champions
    User avatar
    volsunghawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 7897
    Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 11:20 am
    Location: Right outside Richard Sherman's house


Re: Dynasty or Go For Broke?
Tue Jan 22, 2013 10:16 am
  • IBleedBlueAndGreen wrote:Go for broke doesn't work. That's what the Eagles tried to do the last two years and look where it got them.


    End of discussion.

    The Patriots model is the one to follow.
    User avatar
    DavidSeven
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3437
    Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2013 9:15 am


Re: Dynasty or Go For Broke?
Tue Jan 22, 2013 10:31 am
  • DavidSeven wrote:The Patriots model is the one to follow.


    No thanks, teams have caught up to the Patriots finesse up tempo Oregon gimmicky offense.......which is why they haven't won a SB since 2004. The AFC East has made the Pats appear better than they are. The fact is they get a six game head start on every other AFC team by having the Dolphins, Jets and Bills on their schedule every year, and it's been that way for a long time now.

    I'd rather follow the Hawks/49'ers model. Big/athletic/fast/nasty D and ball control offense predicated on run game and dynamic QB play.
    If there is no Seahawk football in heaven, then we will never die.
    User avatar
    Sgt. Largent
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2725
    Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2012 10:10 am


Re: Dynasty or Go For Broke?
Tue Jan 22, 2013 10:43 am
  • Thanks for all the replies. This thread didn't go in the direction I anticipated which is ok. I guess what I was trying to ask was which would you rather have if you could pick one:

    1) Seahawks win the Super Bowl in 2013, followed by a string of mediocre seasons where they don't challenge for a SB.

    or

    2) Seahawks are great for the next 6-8 years, almost always in the playoffs, have a chance at the SB every year, but maybe never win one, or maybe win 2 or 3.

    All I was trying to convene is that I just want a SINGLE Super Bowl Championship, then I can die happy. Just get me that one boys....
    Image

    Win Forever!
    User avatar
    JonRud
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1177
    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 10:46 am
  • Sgt. Largent wrote:
    DavidSeven wrote:The Patriots model is the one to follow.


    No thanks, teams have caught up to the Patriots finesse up tempo Oregon gimmicky offense.......which is why they haven't won a SB since 2004.



    Uh, I'm not talking about copying their offense. I'm talking about their model of refusing to overpay for big-name FAs and consistently developing guys who fit their system.

    And they haven't won a SB since 2004 because it's damn hard to win one. They've been contending for 12 years now.
    User avatar
    DavidSeven
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 3437
    Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2013 9:15 am


Re: Dynasty or Go For Broke?
Tue Jan 22, 2013 10:48 am
  • JonRud wrote:Thanks for all the replies. This thread didn't go in the direction I anticipated which is ok. I guess what I was trying to ask was which would you rather have if you could pick one:

    1) Seahawks win the Super Bowl in 2013, followed by a string of mediocre seasons where they don't challenge for a SB.

    or

    2) Seahawks are great for the next 6-8 years, almost always in the playoffs, have a chance at the SB every year, but maybe never win one, or maybe win 2 or 3.

    All I was trying to convene is that I just want a SINGLE Super Bowl Championship, then I can die happy. Just get me that one boys....


    Option 2. Definitely option 2. I want our team to be one of the league's elite that is a legitimate SB team every single year for decades... not a flash-in-the-pan like the Bucs were.
    Image

    Super Bowl XLVIII Champions
    User avatar
    volsunghawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 7897
    Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 11:20 am
    Location: Right outside Richard Sherman's house


Re: Dynasty or Go For Broke?
Tue Jan 22, 2013 10:57 am
  • DavidSeven wrote:
    Sgt. Largent wrote:
    DavidSeven wrote:The Patriots model is the one to follow.


    No thanks, teams have caught up to the Patriots finesse up tempo Oregon gimmicky offense.......which is why they haven't won a SB since 2004.



    Uh, I'm not talking about copying their offense. I'm talking about their model of refusing to overpay for big-name FAs and consistently developing guys who fit their system.

    And they haven't won a SB since 2004 because it's damn hard to win one. They've been contending for 12 years now.


    Not being able to cheat by knowing the defensive calls hasn't helped them, either.
    Super Bowl Champions XVLIII
    User avatar
    Sarlacc83
    * NET Philistine *
     
    Posts: 14363
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:02 am
    Location: Portland, OR


Re: Dynasty or Go For Broke?
Tue Jan 22, 2013 11:02 am
  • DavidSeven wrote:
    Sgt. Largent wrote:
    DavidSeven wrote:The Patriots model is the one to follow.


    No thanks, teams have caught up to the Patriots finesse up tempo Oregon gimmicky offense.......which is why they haven't won a SB since 2004.



    Uh, I'm not talking about copying their offense. I'm talking about their model of refusing to overpay for big-name FAs and consistently developing guys who fit their system.

    And they haven't won a SB since 2004 because it's damn hard to win one. They've been contending for 12 years now.


    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.
    If there is no Seahawk football in heaven, then we will never die.
    User avatar
    Sgt. Largent
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2725
    Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2012 10:10 am


Re: Dynasty or Go For Broke?
Tue Jan 22, 2013 11:07 am
  • drdiags wrote:Build a sustainable model. Augment in a judicious way. Look at doing smart additions like the Patriots did with Dillon, Moss and Welker.

    As usual, our friend the good Doctor is spot on. Going for broke for a one year thing often backfires as has been mentioned several times in this thread. Do it right and you're in the mix every year and eventually you get one or two (please let it be God so I can die happy.....thank you).
    Last edited by hawksfansinceday1 on Tue Jan 22, 2013 11:10 am, edited 1 time in total.
    From the white sands
    To the canyon lands
    To the redwood stands
    To the barren lands

    Image
    User avatar
    hawksfansinceday1
    NET Pro Bowler
     
    Posts: 10745
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 10:38 am
    Location: Vancouver, WA


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: 1177
    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: 3437
    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: 3437
    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: 11281
    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: 624
    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: 10238
    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: 2121
    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 Veteran
     
    Posts: 9686
    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: 624
    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: 519
    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 Tue Jul 22, 2014 5:27 pm

Please REGISTER to become a member

Return to [ THE OFFICIAL NET NATION FAN FORUM ]




Information