Win Now vs Win Later

[Void]

Reading several threads, along with the one about the SI franchise article I wanted to ask the question...

Do you all think its more important to go for a championship now (or relatively soon) or win later?

My opinion is that I think if the opportunity is there you should always try to win now. If u franchise it all to win now (like the Ravens, Bucs, etc may have done) you get the championship or at least get near there, then rebuild for years after.

but if you try to win later, you are rebuilding for years with the CHANCE to be good later... and then the guys you're building with may or may not even resign with your team 3-4 years down the road when they all come into their prime...

It just seems like to me in this day and age of sports, if you EVER have the opportunity to make a solid and realistic run at a championship, you should do what you have to to do it... continually building for the future makes you the Arizona Cardinals IMO....

I just wish I could write this better, hopefully you know what I'm getting at.

I mean if you said trade Ronnie Brown and a 1st round pick for Peyton manning and the dolphins will win 1 to 2 championships in the next 4 years but but Peyton would leave after that with us sucking for 4 years after that I think I would do it no question.

 

[BigDogsHunt]

I think I understand, and if I do, maybe you phase the question a different way:

Do you everything it takes to win the championship this year, or build the foundation of a championship franchise for future years?

I say teams that are only a few players or plays away from consistency go for the championship every year (the Dolphins of the 80's and 90's). They had a great foundation and only were a few players or plays away from going deep in the playoffs and the SB Championship. The Eagles, Colts, Patriots, Pitts seem to be 4 of the modern franchises that fit this mold. Or, like the Bucs, Ravens you find the one hit wonders that put it all together for the one great year, but maybe didnt have enough to sustain long term success consistently.

The other option is to not sacrifice the future by trading away picks, signing older FA to a long term contract when developing a rookie may be better. And ultimately its putting a scheme, a system, an accountablity of purpose in place that everyone associated with the franchise knows what is being asked, and what is being expected.

I think we are that team this year. I think it wasnt long ago that the Patriots, Colts, Eagles, and Pitt were those team as well.

Maybe I missed your point, but this is how I see it.

 

[Void]

thats my point... but the problem with sports these days in the build later thinking is that you can't keep players for 10 years.... so i guess what i'm saying is, its not as important to try to "find that QB we can keep for 12 years) when we really only need one for like 5 to 6 years... because by then the entire team will have most likely turned over, save a few players... and its time to reload again...

 

[StLouisFinFan]

Reading several threads, along with the one about the SI franchise article I wanted to ask the question...

Do you all think its more important to go for a championship now (or relatively soon) or win later?

My opinion is that I think if the opportunity is there you should always try to win now. If u franchise it all to win now (like the Ravens, Bucs, etc may have done) you get the championship or at least get near there, then rebuild for years after.

but if you try to win later, you are rebuilding for years with the CHANCE to be good later... and then the guys you're building with may or may not even resign with your team 3-4 years down the road when they all come into their prime...

It just seems like to me in this day and age of sports, if you EVER have the opportunity to make a solid and realistic run at a championship, you should do what you have to to do it... continually building for the future makes you the Arizona Cardinals IMO....

I just wish I could write this better, hopefully you know what I'm getting at.

I mean if you said trade Ronnie Brown and a 1st round pick for Peyton manning and the dolphins will win 1 to 2 championships in the next 4 years but but Peyton would leave after that with us sucking for 4 years after that I think I would do it no question.

Neither. I think the Patriots got it right when they figured out that in today's NFL, you must establish a system, a philosophy that survives year in and year out, with a solid foundation of a few key players that epitomize your team's values, you focus on drafting new talented young players in each year's draft that fit into your system best, and plug in the occasional FA that fits your system. This way the system is successful, not the players, so it disarms the power held by the free agency monster the NFL player's association has created over the past 10 years. Simply put, the Patriots, and even the Eagles, have figured out a way to exempt themselves and their success from being held hostage to the very question you have asked today. Either one of your options is a win/lose situation, it's just a matter of when. If Saban's smart, and I think he is and then some, you'll choose neither and be bold enough to do it the right way.

 

[ROCKET]

A good GM can do both.

 

[BigDogsHunt]

thats my point... but the problem with sports these days in the build later thinking is that you can't keep players for 10 years.... so i guess what i'm saying is, its not as important to try to "find that QB we can keep for 12 years) when we really only need one for like 5 to 6 years... because by then the entire team will have most likely turned over, save a few players... and its time to reload again...

Sure, but its also like StLouis said.....its the system that is the foundation. The trick or secret is to find talented players not so much in football skill but rather in your systems skill. Find the most talented players that match and maximize your system.

Another thread was started asking do you choose talent or scheme. The foundation is the scheme and then you draft players that best fit it. Its not 100% concrete as you may mold the scheme to some players or some players are molded to the scheme. But bottom line is the foundation system/scheme first and players second.

Its also why over time new dynasties are built and old ones fade away because coaches, owners, front office personnel change and therefore the system changes, or for some its that the most talented of players within a scheme retires and suddenly the backup doesnt maximize the scheme the same way. It happens all the time.

I think we were once fortunate under Shula to have a system in place where players that best fit it were brought in (over the decades the system may have been tweaked from a run to pass system but it was still Shula's system). You can see the issues created from the JJ to Wanny different system that didnt have matching players.

Now we have Saban and from all indications his pedigree is about having a plan and installing a system. Then finding players to maximize it, like Belichick, Parcells, Reed, Cowher, have done. Certainly it doesnt guarantee a championship but it increases the consistency level of how close you are to a championship.