No there is a 3rd alternative you are missing. That alternative to live within your means on the salary cap and then time your moment. In general because we have been living outside our means utilizing more 'next year' money' to fund 'current year' roster than any other team in the league, it would take a 1-2 year reset to get back to living within our means. But once that reset is done we could field a very similar roster just paying with 'current year' dollars more and 'next year' dollars less. The Falcons and Panthers had the same record as us last year, but funded their rosters more in the current year and less on future dollars. But the great thing about living within your means is that when you do get very close, when you win a playoff game but can't get all the way, and your already playoff caliber team is funded with current year dollars that you didn't already blow in previous years, then you can spend the future year dollars on back-loaded deals for new stars to get you over the top. Thats what the Rams did to win a ring. Thats what the Bucs did (though they started from 7-9, but added the GOAT and had amongst the most cap room in the league to bring in other talent with him). Essentially the goal is to get to a point where your record is better than expected for what you are spending, and then to go on a spending spree that pushed you over the top, unless you have a young QB who is so elite you will be at the top every year for 5-10 years. The Rams did it. The Bucs did it. Now they are both rebuilding. The Chiefs are the other model, playing the long steady game because your QB is too amazing to need a boost that requires leveraging the cap to win and too young to saddle with the rebuilding that leveraging now will force later. There is no model for a .500-ish team to stay highly leveraged forever with a middle aged league average QB and win a ring.

I'm not an accountant but Guido makes some good points too. Why can't we take and blend both together?