Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Think About it...If you were the coach, would you rather go 16-0 or win the superbow?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Going 16-0 and not winning the super bowl would make the undefeated season irrelevant, plain and simple.



    The sickest Sig ever. Created by Snk16.

    Comment


    • #17
      Superbowl by far. It would be nice to go 19-0 and win the Superbowl as well. The way I made my decision is that sure 16-0 would be a great accomplishment, but then you are expected to win the Superbowl if you don't then it will be considered an "upset" or couldn't get the job done even though you had a perfect season

      Comment


      • #18
        Although I expected a blowout, superbowl to perfect season, I kind of thought think about it meant think about the personal glory. Sure you'd be remembered as the perfect team that didn't win the superbowl. But imagine if 30 years from today, no NFL team has ever had a perfect record besides your team. People WOULD remember that. Chances are, in 30 years, you might have another shot, and win the super bowl. Maybe even more than once!

        The point is, people can look up who won superbowls. But they wouldn't need to look up who had a perfect season, 1 is easier to remember than 40, 50, 60. I think today people would go for personal glory, and rememberence. People remember about the '72 Dolphins, and still talk about them. They only played a 14 game regular season.


        The real question is, IF you are in the position, do you go for the pride of the fans with the superbowl, or the personal pride, where you know your name won't be forgotten, as the perfect season team.
        Administrator

        sigpic

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by lordtrychon
          Name of the thread is - "Think About it...If you were the coach, would you rather go 16-0 or win the superbowl?"

          Sounds kinda either/or to me.
          But was it intentional or a faux pas?

          I don't think ANY coach would want to be known as having an undefeated team through the regular season that got knocked off in the playoffs. It would seem rather shallow, wouldn't it?
          That's like saying you just lost your virginity.....to an ugly woman.

          I would rather have a team that went 19-0 with the SB win.
          "It does not take a majority to prevail, but rather an irate,
          tireless minority keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of
          men."

          -- Samuel Adams

          sigpicJacks RULE!!!!!!

          Comment


          • #20
            my opinion

            16-0 would be nice but a Super Bowl victory is what really counts. That's what you play for; football's grandest prize.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by lordtrychon
              Sorry... didn't mean to be TOO condescending...

              Really, I think the question at hand is that if you were the coach and you felt that resting a few people for the second half of the last game would give them fresher legs and a better chance at the superbowl, would you do it?

              If you had to give up the 16-0 to have a better shot at the Superbowl, is it worth it?

              I say yes.
              Honestly, I hope Shanny & co. DON'T rest their starters in the last game, regardless of them needing it or not.
              If they get the #2 seed and a first round bye, then that should suffice.

              Any more than that, complacency and rust can seep in.

              I guarantee there'll be no more chance of an injury in the last game than there is in any of the other 15 games.
              "It does not take a majority to prevail, but rather an irate,
              tireless minority keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of
              men."

              -- Samuel Adams

              sigpicJacks RULE!!!!!!

              Comment


              • #22
                Sure the SuperBowl is the ultimate prize, but no matter if the Colts are 16-0 or 15-1 or 14-2, they still are the odds on favorites to win it all this year. From about week 6 or 7 on this has been the case. Anything less will be a Monumental Choke Job. So let's just put that "16-0 won't mean anything without the SuperBowl" talk to rest..the entire year will be a failure to the Colts if they don't win, regardless of their final record.

                So, that being said...you have to go for the undefeated season while persuing the SuperBowl. That's history, that's immortality and I think the players know that, no matter what Dungy tries to spin to the media. The 72 Dolphins have had 33 years of glory. Their team is mentioned every week that there still is an undefeated NFL team left. You don't get that from winning a Superbowl, there is a SuperBowl winner every year.

                There are three weeks left. Frankly, the Colts could field their practice squad and give Arizona a run for their money so I'm not even going to concede that sitting the starters for the last game will mean an Indy loss. The question becomes, against SD and Seattle, what guys are currently playing with injuries that could use an extra week to heal? Would taking them out cause Indy to lose? Without EJ running the ball 25-30 times, does Indy lose to either team? How about if Manning only plays one half? Seattle has clinched the NFC stuff, so they will probably be thinking of playing backups as well. Are Seattle's backups better or worse than Indy's?

                The more I think of it, the more I come to the conclusion that if Indy beats the Bolts, they'll go undefeated regardless of who the decide to rest. And since you can't really start resting people with a month to go before your first playoff game, I think Indy will be ready to rock against SD.

                Comment


                • #23
                  You play to win, but you actually play to win the CHAMPIONSHIP , so I will take winning the Superbowl.
                  sigpic

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by selyoink
                    Why would anyone vote for going 16-0?
                    That is a good question. Dungy himself said that they are focusing on the Super Bowl and if a perfect season just so happens to accompany that, then fine....but he also said that he is leaving it up to the players whether they will be (probably more like how much) sitting out they will do in the last couple of games.

                    He needs to be careful however and not let the team take control. He is still the coach.

                    If they do in fact go 16-0, the pressure level with multiply by factor 10 and the media will be all over them perhaps distracting them.

                    I think that the Colts would be better off losing a game before post season. That pressure would be off and then they could focus on the big prize. Naaah. Let the pressure eat at them!
                    :usa: *** God Bless Our Military Men And Women*** :usa:

                    sigpic

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Well, if a team is scheduled to play somebody that they concievably could play in the SB, do they play their starters and try to win?

                      Didn't Indy play Denver last year, and really not care about the outcome because they 'knew' they'd meet again in the playoffs?

                      Of course, its purely speculation about the two in Detroit, but ..........
                      "It does not take a majority to prevail, but rather an irate,
                      tireless minority keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of
                      men."

                      -- Samuel Adams

                      sigpicJacks RULE!!!!!!

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Super Bowl!!!!

                        how about both?

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by rcsodak
                          Well, if a team is scheduled to play somebody that they concievably could play in the SB, do they play their starters and try to win?

                          Didn't Indy play Denver last year, and really not care about the outcome because they 'knew' they'd meet again in the playoffs?

                          Of course, its purely speculation about the two in Detroit, but ..........
                          This was discussed last year in the media. How both teams knew they would face each other again and they didn't "show their hands" so to speak. No trickery. They both just sorta went through the motions IMO.

                          Resting starters is not always a good thing anyway. I remember the Broncos sitting the starters in Green Bay. We know what happened next.
                          :usa: *** God Bless Our Military Men And Women*** :usa:

                          sigpic

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Just because you go 16-0 doesn't mean you are going to lose the superbowl, how many teams have gone undefeated in the regular season and not win the superbowl? I say, 16-0 should be a goal, a step to come closer to winning the superbowl. You say before you win the superbowl you win the division, well going 16-0 is a step towards the right direction, and a step before winning the game, didn't a coach say you play to win the game?.
                            A wise man once said "Remember to be yourself, or you might find yourself by yourself, and that aint cool. Any fool can learn from his or her mistakes, but it takes a wise person to learn from mistakes made by others. Persistance always overcomes resistance."

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Huh??

                              Originally posted by Tatum26Bell
                              Nearly everyone says going undefeated is second to winning the super bowl, but if you were the coach, what would you rather have?

                              A super bowl is nice, but there have been 39 superbowls. Can you remember without looking up the winning of superbowl 12?

                              But everyone can remember the 1972 Dolphins, and how they went undefeated--but with less games in the season.

                              Everyone would remember your team if you went undefeated, and even if you didn't win the superbowl, you'd likely be remembered 25 years from now.

                              Or would you rather have all the temporary pride of winning the superbowl?

                              What would you rather have if you were the head coach?


                              -----

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X