CP3MVP Posted February 14, 2021 Share Posted February 14, 2021 In the wake of the Bucs Super Bowl championship I see a lot of teams can see getting angry at the idea that they’re team isn’t “going all in” like tampa allegedly did. Seahawks Packers Ravens fans for example have been saying “we need to go all in for our QB” and stop playing it safe. The thing with Tampa is, it’s not like they mortgaged their future for this title like other teams we associate “going all in” with. They didn’t trade all their first round picks for years like the rams, they have cap space, they don’t have any Vets on terrible immovable contracts. They have an “old” QB surrounded by a young talented team. The old QB is also has 1 year left on his deal being paid below market value for how good he still is. The “all in” moves were -Signing LF off the scrap heap after he was released by the worst team in football for peanuts. He was a below average back the whole season and turned it on in January. -Trading a 4th round pick for retired Rob Gronkowski off his couch. Took him about 6-8 games to really get it going and he effectively was just a blocker in the playoffs until the Superbowl. -Signing AB 8 games into the season off his couch for peanuts to be a role player playing 50% or less of the snaps. I would argue other than Brady the biggest acquisition for Tampa this year was the drafting of Wirfs at RT who was a stud. But who considers drafting a rookie RT to be an “all in” move? So I’m interested in people’s opinions on this, what does “going all in” mean for you? Has your team ever done it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iknowcool Posted February 14, 2021 Share Posted February 14, 2021 (edited) I don't think you need to mortgage your future to be all-in. It can just be a mentality thing or a combination of a lot of factors. Anything less than a Super Bowl would have been a MASSIVE disappointment for the Bucs, even relative to other playoff contenders like the Seahawks or Rams. In that sense, they were all-in. And I think the coaches, front office, and players shared the same mentality too. I'd say bringing a guy like Gronk out of retirement or signing a risky player like AB are signs of going all-in. They carry a lot of risk (Gronk - Injury; AB - Off-Field) and don't have a lot of long-term value but come with a lot of immediate upside. I don't think a team that doesn't have a championship-or-bust mentality signs Brown. At least not midseason. But those are the moves you have to make sometimes. Even signing Brady could be considered a risky, short-term move, because it really only works out if you make it to an NFC Championship game or a Super Bowl in 2-3 years. I mean, yeah, a couple of playoff appearances for a franchise that needed it would have been cool. But when you have a 43-year old QB, you either gotta be in a Championship game of some sorts within 2-3 years or it is a bust. Because that is all you are getting until it is time to start again with another QB. So there are different ways to go all-in. Bucs definitely went all-in and had an all-in mentality. But they didn't mortgage their future to do so. They did an amazing job. Edited February 14, 2021 by iknowcool Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvilenFroggen Posted February 14, 2021 Share Posted February 14, 2021 It looks like the Rams to me. Granted, like you said about the Bucs, you already need a solid foundation. You can only add so many additional pieces with a “first round picks are lava” management style. But when you use that style this many times, you’re going all in. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TecmoSuperJoe Posted February 14, 2021 Share Posted February 14, 2021 (edited) 1994 49ers. Maybe the best example with all the free agent signings they did, with Deion Sanders being at the top of the list. It was a while ago though, and that was the first season of the salary cap I believe. Denver did it a few years ago I think after that Super Bowl beatdown. BTW, this thread makes me chuckle now that I think of it. I'm suddently reminded of the Redskins in the early 2000s handing out big contracts to guys like Adam Archuleta, or the Raiders seemingly every year signing has-beens that were on their last legs. Edited February 14, 2021 by TecmoSuperJoe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danger Posted February 14, 2021 Share Posted February 14, 2021 1 hour ago, iknowcool said: I don't think you need to mortgage your future to be all-in. Unless we have very different interpretations of "all-in" then I really think you do. All-in is essentially putting all of your chips on the table, not holding them for later. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hunter2_1 Posted February 14, 2021 Share Posted February 14, 2021 Kicking first round picks down the road in favour of tried and tested veterans/FAs. In a nutshell, for me. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HolmesPriest Posted February 14, 2021 Share Posted February 14, 2021 The 49rs giving up 4 first round picks for Deshaun Watson. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forge Posted February 14, 2021 Share Posted February 14, 2021 Philadelphia's dream team 😆 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bucsfan333 Posted February 14, 2021 Share Posted February 14, 2021 I mean. Going "all in" this season was the mentality the whole time. But we didn't mortgage the future or anything. We don't have a bunch of bad contracts and we still have all our draft picks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
y*so*blu Posted February 14, 2021 Share Posted February 14, 2021 Moreover, what exactly is the difference between a team "going all in" and "going all out"? 🤨 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nightmare Posted February 14, 2021 Share Posted February 14, 2021 (edited) 11 minutes ago, y*so*blu said: Moreover, what exactly is the difference between a team "going all in" and "going all out"? 🤨 Jaguars last year and the current Texans situation would surely count as “all out”? But I get your point. Technically either phrase works! Edited February 14, 2021 by Nightmare Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forge Posted February 14, 2021 Share Posted February 14, 2021 1 hour ago, HolmesPriest said: The 49rs giving up 4 first round picks for Deshaun Watson. I'm in. The niners sadly are not Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ravishingone Posted February 14, 2021 Share Posted February 14, 2021 I believe the 02 SB Champs Bucs were the definition of "All In". A few years earlier, they traded 2 1st rds. for Keyshawn Johnson. Then the Jon Gruden was a massive mortgaging of the future considering the age of the starting 22- 2 1sts and 2nds was a very high price. It worked fortunately. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
britishovertheborder Posted February 14, 2021 Share Posted February 14, 2021 To me, I would say going all in is basically just spending all the money you have on players you believe will win championships, at the risk of being in a bad place if that doesn't work. I seem to see that as being uncalculated, although I suppose it could be a very good move also. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebestever6 Posted February 14, 2021 Share Posted February 14, 2021 I would say eagles are recent examples fall in love with Veteran players peter's , Alshon , Desean. In hopes of a win now mentality. They also offered ertz a top 3 contract last year would of been bad lol. When you dish out the money like that in hopes of extending a window to guys who have peaked and are injury prone that screams all in to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.