Quote:
Originally Posted by FRPLG
I disagree. I am tired about hearing how Philly is a "premier" manager of the cap. They have won 0,NADA,NONE,ZIPPO,ZILCH Super Bowls. I think it is time for everyone to dispense with praising teams who supposedly manage the cap well but never seem to win the big one. Maybe they don't manage the cap so well. Maybe they just fit into the preconcieved notion of how to manage the cap. The preconceived notion that a team like say NE has disproven somewhat since they build their teams much more through FA than does Philly. And they have had a few more SBs wins than Philly.
At the end of the day who gives a flying frick if your team does a great job managing the cap if they can't win a SB?
Looks to me like Philly knows how to build a cheap team and coach them well enough to compete. Maybe if they gave Reid more tools they'd have won some SBs. So that's good cap management? Cap management is not independent of on field results.
|
I suppose it depends on how you measure success. I'd call 12-4 a successful season no matter how the postseason turns out. If you measure failure by not winning the Super Bowl, you're going to be a perpetually crushed fan.
And certainly cap management doesn't always equal success -- not spending any money and refusing to pay players what they're worth might translate into a fantastic cap situtation. But you won't win anything.
As nauseating as it is to give credit to the Eagles as an organization, you can't be delusional about it -- they are winners. You can still be a winning franchise without the rings.
As I see it, there is greatness (Super Bowl champions), there are winners (the Eagles, Chargers) and there are losers.
Super Bowl wins are a measure of greatness. After that, you're either on the right track, or you're a complete loser. What best describes the Redskins in your mind?