Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

FMIA: Tanking shouldn’t be a dirty word


NAS
 Share

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, NAS said:

It’s not about trying to lose, it’s about prioritizing the future which Panthers have already done by trading CMC. Knowing that we need to draft a QB in the top portion of the draft, I would rather they don’t win a game or two so they don’t end up needlessly trading away picks to move up.

This is a fan’s and perhaps even a GM’s perspective. A head coach or players always want to win and they should try their best. My hope is that they will do enough to keep hopes for the future but not too much where the future is another 6-11 or 7-10 season in perpetuity because we didn’t tank when it mattered to draft a future franchise QB.

Today’s victory was sweet and team is still in it but let’s be realistic. PJ Walker isn’t a franchise QB and hopefully that means we’re in good positions to draft one in April.

I thought it was against NFL rules to tank.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I  don't know, but if the NFL has fully gotten into bed with sports betting (and believe me they have) then the idea of a team, or teams, actually throwing games for draft positioning is very problematic.

Like 1919 Chicago White Sox (Black Sox) scandal level.

Like Pete Rose level.

Yeah, to get caught tanking would implicate the team, the owner, the coaches and every player who made it to the field on any of the given Sundays.

If you love the game, then you want the competition to stay true. 

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Khyber53 said:

I  don't know, but if the NFL has fully gotten into bed with sports betting (and believe me they have) then the idea of a team, or teams, actually throwing games for draft positioning is very problematic.

Like 1919 Chicago White Sox (Black Sox) scandal level.

Like Pete Rose level.

Yeah, to get caught tanking would implicate the team, the owner, the coaches and every player who made it to the field on any of the given Sundays.

If you love the game, then you want the competition to stay true. 

wow yeah no I really don’t care at all about what the gambling addicts in Nevada feel

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, trueblade said:

I don't care if you can guarantee me whichever QB we take at one will be an MVP type of guy. I can't root for us to lose to Atlanta. I just can't do it.

but you actually are rooting for them to lose to Atlanta by obsessing over this pointless game

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Don't forget the young TEs, Coker, Etienne, and Jimmy Horn Jr! 😮 I'm amped to see how the team develops over the course of this upcoming season.
    • She must be doing tricks on that thang for Bill 
    • No, the casual fan gets sucked into THIS^^^ kind of thinking, and it's so woefully incorrect that it's almost sad. The first is what I've said numerous times, NOTHING about non guaranteed contracts save the billionaire owners a single penny, because they still have to spend their cap floor, and the only reason teams ever don't spend the full limit, is to then roll it over into the next season to be able to spend more that year. But in the end, owners pay the same amount of money no matter what. The reverse is also the same, that the players in totality make the same amount of money as well, because in your example of Clowney not getting that money this year, it will go to another player, as the cap needs to be spent. And you say how we just cut Clowney after we gave him the 2 year contract, but everyone including Clowney's agent and himself, knew when it was signed, that it was more likely to be a 1 year contract than a 2 with how it was structured.  The 2nd year was just to be able to spread out the cap hit and he was always most likely going to end up getting traded or cut. It's why agents and players don't care about the total money in a contract, it's always and only been about the guaranteed money, as the years and overall value are meaningless, always have been, always will be.
×
×
  • Create New...