Would Mortgaging the future be worth it if it worked?

[mzkp54]

Hypothetical situtation:

Shanny and Allen decide we're all in this year. They go out, make a few huge trades, end up setting the future of our franchise back another 5-10 years. However, this year everything clicks, we make a magical run and end up winning the Superbowl (I'm not anticipating this, note hypothetical above).

However, we would be left with few draft picks for the next several years (as we're used to) and very little young talent to develop.

Would this be worth it to you as a fan? Would winning a Superbowl (especially with Mcnabb) be worth another extended period of mediocrity? Or would you prefer developing a strong change in the culture and methodology of the franchise in the interest of extended consistently better product on the field, albeit further down the line?

I know we're so fed up with the win now mentality, but maybe thats because it has never worked? And obviously we couldn't make enough trades to fill our all our needs, just wondering in theory.

Hail.

[superozman]

Yes, plain and simple.

[JohnnyUtah]

Every year the goal is the same: Win the Super Bowl. It would absolutely be worth it. You're not guaranteed anything in this league.

[Dukes and Skins]

There's no doubt about it. I think most of us would agree if mortgaging the future meant we won a super bowl then yes definitely I would do it.

[greenspandan]

you are asking whether the gamble would even be worthwhile even if it paid off. that just goes to show what a terrible choice it is. imagine a bet where if you lose, you pay dearly, and if you win, you get something you're not entirely sure you want (one super bowl followed by years of painful failure).

however, it's important to realize that the odds of achieving even this mediocre reward are extremely slim.

here is the equation that the redskins have been executing for years:

"reduce the chances of winning for multiple years to come in order to increase the chances of winning this year." and they have repeated this tactic over and over for ten years.

needless to say, they have never won this bet.

and unfortunately, each iteration has a cumulative negative effect that makes winning the bet more and more unlikely, because each successive year is feeling the burn of the previous x number of years of trying to "win right now" at the cost of the future. this is why we have so few draft picks, so little depth, and perennially one of the oldest rosters in the league.

[Frostx08]

How do you set a franchise back for 5-10 years in a few trades? ...maybe 4 years...but 5-10??

If it worked....sure. But how can we know if it works until...it works. That's almost like going for the two point conversion to win a game by 1 point. It might work...but if it fails you look like a complete idiot and it won't work over and over. Plus...once you become a champion it's hard to go back to being a loser

People keep saying we're 3 years away from being a good team and contenders after rebuilding. I disagree. I look at our roster and I see us getting a RB, a receiver or two to compliment Moss, a new corner or two....and a new Center possibly. We have more holes...but I don't think saying we're contenders next year is far fetched. In fact...if we get a running back and maybe 2 solid weapons for McNabb next year...our offense may be rolling

[MustangSteve]

This team is not a 5 year fix, if our defense would play like the last few years, we would be 3-0 right now. Yes we still need good linemen on offense and defense, as well as a few other positions, but this team right now will start winning if they get their **** together on defense.

[mzkp54]

This team is not a 5 year fix, if our defense would play like the last few years, we would be 3-0 right now. Yes we still need good linemen on offense and defense, as well as a few other positions, but this team right now will start winning if they get their **** together on defense.

I think we need to establish a running game too but yeah I agree

[SoulRebel]

As much as I would love to see the 'Skins win a Super Bowl now and think it would be worth it, it might be better to to develop a great and lasting team that will be competitive for a decade instead of going from Super Bowl champs back into embarrassing mediocrity.

[hail2skins]

Agree with SoulRebel on this. If we were to win the SB, I'd like it to be a case where we are also a dominant team at least either the season before and/or the season after we won the championship. I'd hate to go from a bad-to-mediocre team to immediately winning it and then immediately back into junk status. In short, I'd hate to be the "fluky" SB winner.

[GhostofSparta]

IF, and yes, that's a huuuuuuuuuuuge if, we won this year then yes, it would be worth it....at least until 5 years later when we're in the dregs. But hey, if we win the SB and there's a lockout next year, we're not at THAT big of a disadvantage going forward....

[frommd]

To your question, yes.

But, we've been mortgaging the future for years and have nothing to show for it.

[lowek723]

No I would perfer 5-10 years of winning season's and a good franchise with the chance of anything happening during the postseason..then "going for broke" aka the vikes...

[Oldfan]

you are asking whether the gamble would even be worthwhile even if it paid off. that just goes to show what a terrible choice it is. imagine a bet where if you lose, you pay dearly, and if you win, you get something you're not entirely sure you want (one super bowl followed by years of painful failure).

however, it's important to realize that the odds of achieving even this mediocre reward are extremely slim.

here is the equation that the redskins have been executing for years:

"reduce the chances of winning for multiple years to come in order to increase the chances of winning this year." and they have repeated this tactic over and over for ten years.

needless to say, they have never won this bet.

and unfortunately, each iteration has a cumulative negative effect that makes winning the bet more and more unlikely, because each successive year is feeling the burn of the previous x number of years of trying to "win right now" at the cost of the future. this is why we have so few draft picks, so little depth, and perennially one of the oldest rosters in the league.

Let me add this to your excellent analysis of this question:

The two coaches in NFL history most associated with win-now plans are George Allen, who won 71% of the games he coached, but had a losing record (2-7) in the playoffs, and Marty, who won 61% of his games and also had a losing playoff record (5-13). George and Marty coached a combined 33 years and neither earned a Super Bowl ring.

[GoDeep81]

In a nutshell, your asking would take a SB this season, even if it meant setting back the team for a few years?? Sure, I'll take my chance with that! A Superbowl is a Superbowl.. I wouldnt ever turn down that prize!

[Redskinloyal_17]

This is a ridiculous thread no 4 or 5 trades would put this franchise in the superbowl this year. We could only get to the superbowl this year if Superman was real and joined the team. We are lucky we haven't played a real defense like pittsburgh, jets, or even a good offense like the patriots or colts yet. We would get killed and it is coming soon!!!

[Warhead36]

I'd take the Super Bowl, but after about 2-3 years of painful losing post Super Bowl I think we'd all regret it.

[Capt Rich Fla]

yeah it would be worth it, but we mortgage it and lose anyway.

[TheGreatBuzz]

Me?.....No.

As stupid as it may sound, I would rather have a long term good team that doesn't win a Superbowl then a trophey and suck for a long term span. That's just me.

But it's all hypothetical. I can't really say how I would react. I've also never seen our team be "good" for a number of seasons and not get a trophey.

Maybe we should ask some philly fans.

[bulldog]

You never turn down a championship because you never know if or when your team might make it back. Here we have been waiting since January 1992 to be in the discussion again as the NFL's top team.

That's the answer to the pie in the sky question.

The real truth is the Redskins are 12-15 players away from being a Super Bowl team.

And moving back to a 4-3 might reduce that number by 3 or 4 players.

[redshirtguy#45]

sure... given that 5-10 years of fail follow. considering we have gone near 20 years with very little promise after the last title...

[9_to_42_td]

My as well bring back Colt and save some $$$. We lose with Jason, we lose with McNabb, so what is the difference. Losing is losing.

[HailGreen28]

LOL. If you went to Vegas, and gambled everything thing you own: Your house, your car, your boat, everything you own, and you won a million dollars...... it would be worth it.

But the odds aren't in favor of that working, if you try it.

Same way with "mortgaging the future".

For over ten years we've tried "mortgaging the future". And aside from two so-so playoff shots under great coaching by Gibbs II, we have NOTHING to show for it. In fact at the end of the Spurrier debacle, and the end of the Cerrato/Zorn debacle, we have been a laughing stock of the league, right down there with the current Raiders and Lions (who beat us last season).

We need to stop mortgaging the future, if we're EVER going to build a SB team before McNabb has to call it quits.

[TheGreatBuzz]

Just to be clear.....

I don't think the OP is asking if it is possible. I think he/she is asking if we were guaranteed a SB this year, would you mortgage the next 5-10 years. Kind of a "Deal with the Devil" kind of question. I'm surprised by the number of people saying yes. I would rather wait and get us to a place to win several SB trophys in several years then just one this year.

[mzkp54]

Just to be clear.....

I don't think the OP is asking if it is possible. I think he/she is asking if we were guaranteed a SB this year, would you mortgage the next 5-10 years. Kind of a "Deal with the Devil" kind of question. I'm surprised by the number of people saying yes. I would rather wait and get us to a place to win several SB trophys in several years then just one this year.

Exactly. I didnt see it as such an obvious question when i posted it...