Saints Which would you rather have? (1 Viewer)

Which would you rather have?

  • A good Saints team that is in yearly Playoff Contention but not a legit Superbowl Contender?

    Votes: 33 51.6%
  • A team that is in rebuild with the hopes of landing young talented players and a young promising QB.

    Votes: 31 48.4%

  • Total voters
    64
I don't know that we are one or a few pieces away. I think we're more like one or a few plays away. The two best teams were in this last Superbowl, and arguably, the best team won it. The year before? The best two teams lost (got hosed) two weeks before the superbowl.

2018 Eagles had a deep rotation on the D-line and not much else. They were not the best team in the league that year.
2016 / 2017 It tastes bad, but honestly, the Falcons and Panthers were the best teams and neither won the superbowl.
2015 Seattle was the best team but lost a close one on a boneheaded play in the SB.
2014 Denver was the best team and got demolished in the Superbowl.

Heck, even when we won the superbowl, the Colts were thought to be the best team.

A lot is said about filling this hole or that hole, upgrading weaknesses, adding depth where we're thin, etc... All of that is true, but to win a Superbowl, a lot of things have to go your way. Like it or not, luck plays a huge role in any team's superbowl run. All you can do is put the best team you can put together on the field and play the games. Get to the playoffs and hope the funny shaped ball bounces your way and the refs don't butt in.

We have a roster that can win the SB. For much of the year, we were considered the most talented roster in the league. Key injuries hit us in week 16, we got no help from other games (and refs) in week 17, and we didn't play our best game in the wildcard. Even with all that, we were right there.

The Eagles just got hot in the playoffs, as did the Giants both times they won. Which adds some credibility to the assertion that there's no such thing as a "perennial playoff contender" that isn't in Super Bowl contention. If you make the playoffs, you have a chance.
 
The Eagles just got hot in the playoffs, as did the Giants both times they won. Which adds some credibility to the assertion that there's no such thing as a "perennial playoff contender" that isn't in Super Bowl contention. If you make the playoffs, you have a chance.

Exactly. It's all about making it to the playoffs and then, it is how healthy, lucky and hot you are once you get there.
 
The Eagles just got hot in the playoffs, as did the Giants both times they won. Which adds some credibility to the assertion that there's no such thing as a "perennial playoff contender" that isn't in Super Bowl contention. If you make the playoffs, you have a chance.

I do not believe teams set out to be "superbowl contenders". I believe the term "superbowl contenders" is just something made up by fans and the media.

IMO, teams set out to win their division, then make the playoffs with as high a seed as possible, and they hope they're healthy in January/February. Once they're in the playoffs, it's win this week to play next week. Some teams are better than others of course, but not so much so that they get a pass. Sometimes a better team loses for dumb reasons. Sometimes the better team loses because they don't match up well against the team they're paired with. It's not round-robin. If Baltimore played Houston and KC played Tennessee, it very well could've been Baltimore vs KC in the AFCCG, where Baltimore might have won and went on to play SF in the Superbowl.
 
I do not believe teams set out to be "superbowl contenders". I believe the term "superbowl contenders" is just something made up by fans and the media.

IMO, teams set out to win their division, then make the playoffs with as high a seed as possible, and they hope they're healthy in January/February. Once they're in the playoffs, it's win this week to play next week. Some teams are better than others of course, but not so much so that they get a pass. Sometimes a better team loses for dumb reasons. Sometimes the better team loses because they don't match up well against the team they're paired with. It's not round-robin. If Baltimore played Houston and KC played Tennessee, it very well could've been Baltimore vs KC in the AFCCG, where Baltimore might have won and went on to play SF in the Superbowl.

Yep. I mean everyone forgets that Kansas City got home field in the last week of the season via the Dolphins beating New England. Had that not happened, things could have gone a lot differently. KC could have lost to a hot Tennessee team in round 1. If they got by that game, they'd have to go to Foxboro directly after playing a physical Titans team, and face a rested Pats team with two weeks to prepare.

Championships are won on a razor's edge. First step is just getting there.
 
What changes do we need to make to win the Super Bowl? And if we make those changes, are we going to win the Super Bowl?

If we’re keeping Drew u obviously gotta draft OL high n make the strongest commitment to the running game you’ve ever made. I mean irritate MT kinda commitment. Sign a wr n maybe another LB in FA

How can I tell u who’d win the SB? ?
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Users who are viewing this thread

    Back
    Top Bottom