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

    • We've never seen them outside of the structure of two very well ran organizations I'll give you that. And yes they are long in the tooth. I do think they are more than capable of getting a franchise turned around in short term capacity though. They are by no means a long term solution.
    • You're not making a good-faith argument by blaming literally everything on the quarterback when the defense gave him a fat 38 seconds to overcome its ineptitude, but it seems you're dead-set on blaming him for any problem the team encounters. In this case, it's not warranted. Sometimes it is. But he had no time to throw (pressured on 46% of all dropbacks, an insane amount) and that's simply not all his fault -- particularly when they rush 4 or less and are in the backfield in 1.5s or less. Should we have gotten more than 0 yards? Sure! But he hit a WR in the hands on fourth down and it was dropped. Not his fault. He missed one throw on second down but I attribute first down to a bad play call and third down to poor pass protection. I would've called some quick slants, personally, but it really seems you're saying: - playcalling: Bryce's fault - poor pass protection: Bryce's fault - defensive choking away a lead: Bryce's fault, not the defense - Horn dropping a pass: Bryce's fault It's a great way to garner support on here, because when it comes to Bryce, logic takes such a backseat to context that it's not even in the same vehicle. Plenty of games can be attributed to him. Can't take anyone seriously who solely blames him for that one. 
    • I don't see how you can logically make that argument when the team beat two of the top teams in the entire league during the regular season.  Now imagine the additional games we would have won against absolute tip top competitors like SF and SEA had we had a professional QB.  You can throw any random stat at the problem you want, but the proof is in the pudding.  We all watched it live.  This roster would have produced 13 wins (wins against SF and SEA, two wins against NO, and would have swept the Bucs) and (almost certainly) a #1 seed with a remotely competent QB.  Those were not games where we needed an all star performance to win.  Those were games where a very, very modest stat line would have netted us an easy win. Nearly every measurable aspect of the team would have been significantly improved with a competent QB.
×
×
  • Create New...