Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Trace Pyott

Would you rather?

Would you rather?  

36 members have voted

  1. 1. Which would you rather our team do?

    • Go all in and be super aggressive and be basically guaranteed a sb win.
      17
    • Be consistently good but not a favorite for the next 5 years. Basically what we are doing.
      19


Recommended Posts

Would you rather go all in during free agency and basically guarantee yourself a super bowl  let’s say 95% chance  but the catch is .....your team will be terrible afterward for the next 4 years or would you basically do what we have been doing for the last 15 years and go the consistently good route and look for consistency.     Basically is that one ring worth being miserable for the next four years or is the glory better than being just above mediocre on a consistent bAsis and having a winning team for the next 5 years?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Always the super bowl. But that's not a realistic premise. Going all in and super agressive in Free Agency in no way guarantees anything. Nowhere close.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For arguments sake let’s say choosing the consistent route guarantees you will make the playoffs as the last seed every year for the next 5 years.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know it’s not realistic lol. I’m just asking hypothetically.  I remember when the marlins won the World Series and gutted the team after.  I was a Braves fan and we would win our division every year for 14 years  but only the World Series once  and the marlins would be terrible it Seemed every year but they ended up winning more World Series in that 15 year period than the Braves. I always would think which fan base had it better??  So I’m wondering what you guys think about it when referring to the colts. I genuinely have no idea how I feel about it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you think right now on the Pats forum there is a thread:

"Would you rather cheat AGAIN and be guaranteed another super bowl AGAIN" or "stick to the rules and have the same chances as the other 31 teams?"

  Hey, Ballard has his approach, NE has theirs.  How far over the line are you willing to step?  And in NE, you hear the whole state say "what line?"

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unless they get bored of winning I don’t think New England will be changing anything especially not because it’s the right thing to do. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Going all in in free agency does not guarantee a thing.

The only thing guaranteed is you will have a team full of over paid players.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, crazycolt1 said:

Going all in in free agency does not guarantee a thing.

The only thing guaranteed is you will have a team full of over paid players.

Yes, I agree and then when it doesn't work out you got all that dead money. I for one am happy with what Ballard is doing and it's going to make us a good team for a long time. We will get free agents and it just won't be those insane extremely expensive long term team buster deals that sink a team in the future. There are very few teams that make the playoffs after breaking the bank I don't know the exact number but it's not good. So everyone who's upset just relax and be glad we got the best and smartest GM in the NFL on our side. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Trace Pyott said:

Would you rather go all in during free agency and basically guarantee yourself a super bowl  let’s say 95% chance  but the catch is .....your team will be terrible afterward for the next 4 years or would you basically do what we have been doing for the last 15 years and go the consistently good route and look for consistency.     Basically is that one ring worth being miserable for the next four years or is the glory better than being just above mediocre on a consistent bAsis and having a winning team for the next 5 years?

There are no guarantees. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Go all in and be super aggressive and be basically guaranteed a sb win."

 

giphy.gif

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jeeez does  anyone on here know the meaning of a hypothetical debate? I’m not staying there are guarantees in real life lol. Let me say it again!  In real life no guarantees. Ok to make things easier for folks to understand let’s say an imaginary fairy says the colts can win the super bowl this year but be horrible for the next 4 years.  Or......we can be GUARANTEED to win  10 games and make the playoffs the next 5 years which would you do?  Does this make it easier to understand??  Again I know there are no guarantees in real life. I wrote it the way I did to make it a somewhat plausible scenario and relative to what we are going through now. It was my mistake. I was just wanting to know what is the better outcome. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would choose winning the SB, I could brag about that for 4 years.  

 

Wait a minute, I hate losing,,,, this is tooooo hard of a decision.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tell that tonall those redskin, Eagles and many other teams who tried the dream team buy a championship crap.....they imploded. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Best chance of winning the SB is getting yourself to the playoffs regularly and hoping the stars align for you.  

 

The going all in on one year rarely ends up working.  

 

There simply are no guarantees or anything close to it.  Anyone who says differently is fooling themselves.  

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll take the 1 SuperBowl win and 4 years of losing thereafter.   

 

 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think i'd have to take the superbowl but man i hate losing more than i enjoy winning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ya, that poll gives a pretty good comparison to the whine rate around here. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm.  "All In" was the Colts slogan for the playoffs when they lost to the Jets in PM's last game as a Colt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Trace Pyott said:

Jeeez does  anyone on here know the meaning of a hypothetical debate? I’m not staying there are guarantees in real life lol. Let me say it again!  In real life no guarantees. Ok to make things easier for folks to understand let’s say an imaginary fairy says the colts can win the super bowl this year but be horrible for the next 4 years.  Or......we can be GUARANTEED to win  10 games and make the playoffs the next 5 years which would you do?  Does this make it easier to understand??  Again I know there are no guarantees in real life. I wrote it the way I did to make it a somewhat plausible scenario and relative to what we are going through now. It was my mistake. I was just wanting to know what is the better outcome. 

 

In that purely hypothetical scenario.....you always take the ring.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seems like a bit of a false choice. But if you could be guaranteed a SB win from certain moves...of course you do that. I can't believe the majority of people would vote against a SB win.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

“Go all in and be super aggressive and be basically guaranteed a sb win.”

 

Is that how that works?

 

giphy.gif?cid=19f5b51a5c8a7954327376356b

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Valpo2004 said:

Best chance of winning the SB is getting yourself to the playoffs regularly and hoping the stars align for you.  

 

The going all in on one year rarely ends up working.  

 

There simply are no guarantees or anything close to it.  Anyone who says differently is fooling themselves.  

 

Not as a #6 seed though...like in this unrealistic premise. Homefield advantage has been the stated goal I believe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, shastamasta said:

 

Not as a #6 seed though...like in this unrealistic premise. Homefield advantage has been the stated goal I believe.

 

The 6th seed is sort of barely sneaking into the playoffs.  I would argue that a team is selling itself short by just doing the bare minimum to get into the playoffs.  

 

My point generally speaking is you want to build as good of a team as you can to compete in the long run.  The teams who go all in on FA in order to win the SB within a certain short window rarely succeed at that.  

 

The most realistic way of winning is to simply make your window as long as it possibly can be.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just don't want the Kansas City model which Ballard seems to be following. I'd rather have a Super Bowl on Luck's record when he is done, I honestly like the guy,  vs the "win 10 games, placate the fans and front office, and go to the playoffs and get bounced" KC model. You have to take intelligent chances to win a Super Bowl and I just don't think Ballard will ever take chances. I think Irsay would like to win the big one but I also think he lets the people he hired do their job so to me, this is on Ballard.

I know this isn't a popular outlook but the answer to whether this proved out to be true will only come over time.

And remember when the Colts other "GM of the year" had a great draft...what did he follow up that draft with? Let's see what Ballard follows up his historic draft with. Even blind squirrels find a nut once in awhile.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, CheezyColt said:

Always the super bowl. But that's not a realistic premise. Going all in and super agressive in Free Agency in no way guarantees anything. Nowhere close.

Agreed, 100%, but neither does the route that CB is taking.  How about a middle road, 1 or 2 play makers gives you and your team an opportunity to contend.  Those play makers are not in the 2nd or 3rd wave, and they rarely come at the #26 draft spot too!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Everyone on this board is so far to the left or right, it's stupid. Why does it have to be so black and white? Can't he maintain his conservative integrity, while also hiring a guy or two that may take them over the top? Does it truly have to be one way or the other? Ultra conservative or super aggressive...it's like Trump vs Clinton in here. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The bottom line is that Ballard's approach is dependent on hitting in the draft, which is always a bit of a crapshoot. We now have three major contenders in the AFC besides us. Pats will be there until Brady and Belichick retire. The Chiefs have a great team with a 23 year old Mahomes who is as good as Luck. Finally, the Browns have a young top 10 QB in Mayfield and a stacked team around him. The Jets and Raiders are future threats possibly as well.

 

We can't wait out teams and win the SB. The reason FA doesn't work so often is because the teams that load up on them are nowhere near a SB and don't have a QB. We do. Time to make our move before half the AFC is on our level.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Jared Cisneros said:

The bottom line is that Ballard's approach is dependent on hitting in the draft, which is always a bit of a crapshoot. We now have three major contenders in the AFC besides us. Pats will be there until Brady and Belichick retire. The Chiefs have a great team with a 23 year old Mahomes who is as good as Luck. Finally, the Browns have a young top 10 QB in Mayfield and a stacked team around him. The Jets and Raiders are future threats possibly as well.

 

We can't wait out teams and win the SB. The reason FA doesn't work so often is because the teams that load up on them are nowhere near a SB and don't have a QB. We do. Time to make our move before half the AFC is on our level.

 

There's 2 groups of people on this forum, ones that echo your sentiment, and those that love Ballard's conservative approach and follow everything he does/says no questions asked. I'm with you man. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks to those who decided to vote. My god I can’t believe how even the voting was. That’s how I feel. I can’t really decide. I would say 75% of me would want that Super Bowl but winning the majority of those other 64 games might be better than that one win and tons of loses.  

    

   I think I’m one of the people who hate losing more than I love winning lol. Anyways I wasn’t trying to cause a debate on Ballard or his plan I was really just trying to figure out what would be better as a fan base. As a pacers fan I often grapple with this same idea. Blow the team up that realistically has no shot or make it to the playoffs. I still don’t know exactly how I feel either choice honestly but you guys helped a lot. Thanks. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would rather have a team that is competitive every year. Most of the Manning years only got us to the Super Bowl twice. with one win, But at least those years was a great ride to watch as a fan each season. And just because we came up short during that era, it didn't take away from it.

A lot of people were critical of that era but, not many other teams made it past the Patriots ether.

You take out the x factor (Patriots) during that time, I think it would be a total different situation.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/14/2019 at 3:11 AM, Trace Pyott said:

Would you rather go all in during free agency and basically guarantee yourself a super bowl  let’s say 95% chance  but the catch is .....your team will be terrible afterward for the next 4 years or would you basically do what we have been doing for the last 15 years and go the consistently good route and look for consistency.     Basically is that one ring worth being miserable for the next four years or is the glory better than being just above mediocre on a consistent bAsis and having a winning team for the next 5 years?

 

Frank Reich was hired Feb 2018 by Ballard who you must by now realize he is never gonna go all in on FA . If you have'nt noticed the Colts have in 1 season turned it around building this team on a solid foundation which means the Colts are not buying what your selling .

 

Grigson brought in the free agents IMO the over the hill gang as did Polian when 18 went down it did'nt work . 

 

Cleveland has sucked along time in Basketball & Football .  Lebron came & went so what if they won a Championship they Suck now & The Browns since last season are relevant for the first time in decades . They have sand bagged & now its paying off but is it really ? Unless they when a Lombardi there still a Joke IMO . 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A Superbowl win every 5 years?     Sign me up.   

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/14/2019 at 1:16 AM, CheezyColt said:

Always the super bowl. But that's not a realistic premise. Going all in and super agressive in Free Agency in no way guarantees anything. Nowhere close.

 

100% correct. If being aggressive in free agency every year guaranteed a Super Bowl, the Redskins would be a dynasty by now.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...