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!

     

Tanking as a strategy


NAS
 Share

Recommended Posts

Just now, TheBigKat said:

we were supposed to do that last year after the CMC trade and even failed on that.... Then the Hershel from Gastonia's on here with their F-150s got all riled up on the notion of tanking. So we got our pointless wins, ruined our draft status and are in a perpetual hell cycle

If we are being honest we should have traded cmc Moore to the packers and of course burns to la.  Knowing what we know right now no reasonable fan could argue against this.   

  • Pie 5
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Thorrez said:

Other than the Christan Painter led colts, can you please give a couple of example in which tanking really built a consistence winner?

Meanwhile the 49ers looks like the super bowl favorite with Mr. Irrelevant at the helm.

I'll argue, ironic enough, that the colts in 1997 was the last time this philosophy led to a Super bowl ring. 

There are plenty of roads to Rome, and even if we are not on one now shouting does not make the tanking one an obvious can't fail option.

I mean the Eagles tanked their last game a few years ago to “see what a third stringer had” and the players called out the coach for it, the coach got fired, and the Eagles had been consistently good after that. 

  • Pie 2
  • Beer 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, 45catfan said:

The problem with teams tanking this year is they can't lose worse than us and Chicago is laughing all the way.  Sean Peyton would LOVE some Caleb Williams, but the Bears (thanks to us) has a firm grasp on that #1 pick.

Which means our trade to the Bears is about to get even worse. They either get the top QB in the upcoming class or they flip our pick for even more assets. 

  • Pie 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I definitely hear where you're coming from on this. But the problem with the notion of actually legitimately tanking the last few years is Fitterer can't draft to save his life.

It always goes back to Tepper. He hires the worst people.

Edited by frankw
  • Pie 1
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Varking said:

Yeah we would still have DJ and this years first rounder. I think we could definitely be using both. 

Losing DJ was the worst part.  The way we've been drafting lately, only losing the other first rounder hurts. Our second rounders play, but don't have much of an impact.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, NAS said:

Look at the Broncos. 5 games in, they know they have to rebuild. They’re releasing and trading away assets in order to get the highest picks and best new players possible 

Even Vikings are doing the same knowing they need to move on from Cousins and start over.

Only dumb Tepper thinks he can have his cake and eat it too. Never embraced the strategy to go through one terrible season instead of 6 or 7.  Never hit the reset properly, and what do we have to show for it?

So many on this forum pooed on those of us who wanted to lose last year so we could get the best pick possible without trading away our future. Where are you now?

Same as before.  Thanks for your undying support. 🙄

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah I mean you’re going to take L’s when you’re trying to build. 
You can either take them all at once or try to space them all out like we’ve done.

lot of people are having a difficult time right now because their expectations were so unreasonable, I get the feeling it’s the same people who were so anti-tank last season.

this would be a much better ball club had they simply accepted where they were at objectively last season and pulled the band aid.

Edited by Growl
  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, BrisbanePanther said:

Yes, how many who pooed the tankers are also angry with what was given up in the trade to go to #1?

Yeah you have a “show me the baby” contingent here who never want anything to be done, they just want the wins to roll in with the scraps the team has

Its why they were so endeared to Wilks. Beating up on bad teams? Losing meaningful games? An unsustainable philosophy? Doesn’t matter. For that short window-he gave them hope that it could work.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, TheBigKat said:

we were supposed to do that last year after the CMC trade and even failed on that.... Then the Hershel from Gastonia's on here with their F-150s got all riled up on the notion of tanking. So we got our pointless wins, ruined our draft status and are in a perpetual hell cycle

But but but ..the culture!

  • Pie 1
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

    • That new home page looking sexy and thicc
    • Serious question:  Why LG and not RG?  There may be something I do not know, but Hunt's contract is huge and he could be let go after this season (post june 1 cut) and it would save the Panthers a ton of money.  Extending him would be paying a G who is in his mid 30s guaranteed money (and I do not see that as a terrible thing).  So if we release him at age 31, we save $19m.  I like him, but at 31, will he be worth the mega contract?   LG Damien Lewis has actually outperformed Hunt and he is a year younger.  He would also save less vs. the cap and leave less in the dead cap pool.  While his current contract expires after the 2027 season, he is a better prospect (IMO) to extend because only 50% of his current contract was guaranteed.  Here are his contract numbers.   Now, getting to Ickey--he could want LT money if he is offered a second contract.  If we pay him LT money to play either G positions, we are likely overpaying.  Secondly, the injury he suffered could be one that limits his productivity.  Ickey was improving, but he was an average LT.  The only way I re-sign Ickey is to have him accept a G contract and make a lot of it incentive based.     I feel like I am missing something, but in my mind, Ickey was always a guard if you consider the fact that he is an average OT and would be a great G.  Is that still the case (injury)?
    • Supplemental draft uses picks from next year. So a team were to draft him in the 1st, their upcoming 1st next draft would no longer be available. There have been some notable players that were obtained in the supplemental draft, such as Kosar. It doesn't necessarily happen every year either, and is more on a as needed basis. The gambling trouble is a big red flag for teams, and maybe pushes him down to a 4th? Not sure a team would use a 1st on him.
×
×
  • Create New...