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!

     

JJ Jansen on tanking


Mr. Scot
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Doc Holiday said:

Dude, if the Dallas Mavericks somehow magically ending up with the top overall pick, isn’t one of the clearest signs of it being rigged that I’ve ever seen. I don’t know what is.

like nobody is actually believing this right?

Mavs had a 1.8% odds of winning the number 1 overall pick btw

In 2008, the Bulls had a 1.7% chance of winning the top pick which ended up being Chicago native, D-rose

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, SmokinwithWilly said:

The 4 countries tournament was one of the greatest sporting events I've ever seen in pro sports of any genre.

It had no bearing on the season but those guys played playoff level hockey for an exhibition.  

I'm a hockey casual and really on tune in to watch the Canes during the playoffs. But I was HOOKED on the Four Nations Tourney. We need more of that!

  • Beer 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, SurvivalSloth said:

I'm a hockey casual and really on tune in to watch the Canes during the playoffs. But I was HOOKED on the Four Nations Tourney. We need more of that!

I think it will come back but to be honest, it probably can't be every year. Eventually it will lead to injuries and then questions will arise.

As a Canes fan, I would have been FURIOUS had any of our guys gotten knocked out for the season and jeopardized our Cup chances. I care absolutely nothing about the US winning that tournament in comparison to the Canes winning the Cup. One is neat, the other is why I am a season ticket holder.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On NFL tanking, I've been saying this for years: There's too much at stake from management to coaching to players for tanking to happen. And if a team were actually caught doing it, like an actual conspiracy, then we're talking Shoeless Joe levels of condemnation.

Excuse me, what's that? They've now forgiven Shoeless Joe? What about Charlie Hustle? Him, too? Hmmm. We're living in a post-ethics world aren't we? $400 million jet from the Qatari royal family? I guess this is the new norm.

 

  • Pie 1
  • Flames 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Khyber53 said:

On NFL tanking, I've been saying this for years: There's too much at stake from management to coaching to players for tanking to happen. And if a team were actually caught doing it, like an actual conspiracy, then we're talking Shoeless Joe levels of condemnation.

Excuse me, what's that? They've now forgiven Shoeless Joe? What about Charlie Hustle? Him, too? Hmmm. We're living in a post-ethics world aren't we? $400 million jet from the Qatari royal family? I guess this is the new norm.

 

My head is spinning from a lifetime of, "If you see somebody jump off of a bridge does that mean you should do it too?" to the current, "I'M ABOUT TO SWANTON BOMB A VEHICLE ON THE INTERSTATE BELOW, LIKE AND SUBSCRIBE FOR EARLY ACCESS TO MY NEW MEMECOIN!"

  • Pie 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, kungfoodude said:

The new cap rules make it more difficult to simply outspend and create super teams, actually. 

We are in the infancy of the impacts but most observers expect there to be somewhat of a shift in league behaviors.

Still it’s unfair, the massive markets will be able to spend way more than teams like the Hornets. Lakers, Celtics, etc. have a huge advantage

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, MHS831 said:

When the Pelicans were temporarily owned by the NBA in 2019, they had a 6% chance of winning the lottery.  Remarkably, obviously an act of diving intervention, they won the lottery.  This increased the value of the Pelicans. 

 

I easily believe the lottery is rigged. Dallas trades Luka to the Lakers to keep an aging Lakers relevant and surprise, beats the 1.8% odds. San Antonio has to be one of the luckiest stories and of course they got a big man after their history of big men (Robinson and Duncan). Cleveland gets LeBron.

Sucks yet again for the Hornets losing ground on the odds to miss out on Flagg and even the easy top 3.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Khyber53 said:

On NFL tanking, I've been saying this for years: There's too much at stake from management to coaching to players for tanking to happen. And if a team were actually caught doing it, like an actual conspiracy, then we're talking Shoeless Joe levels of condemnation.

Excuse me, what's that? They've now forgiven Shoeless Joe? What about Charlie Hustle? Him, too? Hmmm. We're living in a post-ethics world aren't we? $400 million jet from the Qatari royal family? I guess this is the new norm.

 

I don’t know why the tanking concept is not understood. Coaches and players are not involved at all. It’s always the front office. If we had actually traded players like we should have back in 2022, we would have effectively tanked and gotten a better pick than 9 so we lost all the draft picks to get Young. We traded CMC. We should have traded Burns for the haul and taken GB’s offer of a 1st for Moore. We could have easily traded anyone else.

We see it in every sport, every year. Trade deadlines where bad teams give up current assets for future assets. Unfortunately, we were stupid and decided we only wanted to trade CMC for peanuts even though we clearly had a plan to go after Young. We were dumb and there is no way you can tell me that we shouldn’t have tanked via trading away Burns, Moore and anyone else. We’d be a much better team right now had we had a fire sale and tanked the 2022 season.

Trading away your top players for future draft picks or prospects (baseball) is tanking. Shoeless Joe and the black Sox is not tanking. That’s point shaving/betting on your sport/team. Again, I just don’t get why this concept is so hard to get when MLB, NFL and NBA teams trade players for future assets every single year and usually end up with better draft slots (or at least odds since Hornets never win the lottery).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, WhoKnows said:

I don’t know why the tanking concept is not understood. Coaches and players are not involved at all. It’s always the front office. If we had actually traded players like we should have back in 2022, we would have effectively tanked and gotten a better pick than 9 so we lost all the draft picks to get Young. We traded CMC. We should have traded Burns for the haul and taken GB’s offer of a 1st for Moore. We could have easily traded anyone else.

We see it in every sport, every year. Trade deadlines where bad teams give up current assets for future assets. Unfortunately, we were stupid and decided we only wanted to trade CMC for peanuts even though we clearly had a plan to go after Young. We were dumb and there is no way you can tell me that we shouldn’t have tanked via trading away Burns, Moore and anyone else. We’d be a much better team right now had we had a fire sale and tanked the 2022 season.

Trading away your top players for future draft picks or prospects (baseball) is tanking. Shoeless Joe and the black Sox is not tanking. That’s point shaving/betting on your sport/team. Again, I just don’t get why this concept is so hard to get when MLB, NFL and NBA teams trade players for future assets every single year and usually end up with better draft slots (or at least odds since Hornets never win the lottery).

I don’t think the issue here is that your perspective isn’t being understood. It’s clear imo - you’re suggesting that the front office should intentionally weaken the roster by offloading talent in exchange for future assets. If I'm misreading that, then disregard the rest because then that puts the disconnect on my side of the court. 😛

But I believe the actual disconnect comes from the way it is being presented... as if tanking is always the optimal path forward. That framing overlooks very real consequences: financial losses from a disengaged fanbase, damage to team culture (say what you want about "culture-building" wins, but this team looks more united than it has since the Super Bowl run), and the difficulty in attracting/retaining talent when players don’t believe they’ll get a fair shot to compete during their already-limited careers.

Not every organization is in a position to go full teardown and when they gamble on the future at the expense of the present, they risk more than draft position... they risk credibility.

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

3 minutes ago, Icege said:

I don’t think the issue here is that your perspective isn’t being understood. It’s clear imo - you’re suggesting that the front office should intentionally weaken the roster by offloading talent in exchange for future assets. If I'm misreading that, then disregard the rest because then that puts the disconnect on my side of the court. 😛

But I believe the actual disconnect comes from the way it is being presented... as if tanking is always the optimal path forward. That framing overlooks very real consequences: financial losses from a disengaged fanbase, damage to team culture (say what you want about "culture-building" wins, but this team looks more united than it has since the Super Bowl run), and the difficulty in attracting/retaining talent when players don’t believe they’ll get a fair shot to compete during their already-limited careers.

Not every organization is in a position to go full teardown and when they gamble on the future at the expense of the present, they risk more than draft position... they risk credibility.

I’m not suggesting that tanking is the right thing to do every time. I do think that if you have guys like Burns and Moore that you will trade anyway, then you should think about tanking and getting max value, especially if you want to grab a QB that might go 1st overall. We tried to do both. Trade CMC for picks but don’t take 3 1sts and a 2nd for Burns and Moore. Instead, we won a few games and then threw in Moore on a trade because we didn’t tank and we gave Burns away for a 2nd.

Can you honestly say that fully tanking, by trading away all our best guys who weren’t in future plans, in 2022 wouldn’t have made our team better now? We wanted a rookie QB and we didn’t extend the main guy we didn’t want to trade. We were 100% in full tear down and we could have been a playoff team last year if we used the 4 extra 1sts or 3 1sts and 2 2nds (counting picks saved on Young by being pick 3 or 4 not 9) on D.

Culture building is funny. It took three coaching changes to seemingly get there. Morgan and Canales weren’t in charge when we “protected” our culture. We still traded Burns and Moore, we just lost 3 first round picks in the process.

Also, do you think the Eagles are in a bad place because of their coach clearly tanking a game for a draft pick? Remember that? It was obvious and the coach was fired. The funny thing is that this is something teams do all the time but they add their stars (like Cam in 2016, CMC, Burns, etc.) to IR or rest them in week 16/17. Pederson was just dumb and made it obvious. He could have just sat his starters to start.

Anyway, did that incident tank risk their credibility? Did Barkley decide to not sign with them? Seems like their SB win and other SB visit say they are just fine. Winning makes culture, picking the right coach makes culture, trading away guys who are on other teams in a year for top picks and keeping more picks by having a better starting pick to trade up, does not impact culture. If it helps you win, culture will be fine, ask the Eagles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, WhoKnows said:

I’m not suggesting that tanking is the right thing to do every time. I do think that if you have guys like Burns and Moore that you will trade anyway, then you should think about tanking and getting max value, especially if you want to grab a QB that might go 1st overall. We tried to do both. Trade CMC for picks but don’t take 3 1sts and a 2nd for Burns and Moore. Instead, we won a few games and then threw in Moore on a trade because we didn’t tank and we gave Burns away for a 2nd.

Can you honestly say that fully tanking, by trading away all our best guys who weren’t in future plans, in 2022 wouldn’t have made our team better now? We wanted a rookie QB and we didn’t extend the main guy we didn’t want to trade. We were 100% in full tear down and we could have been a playoff team last year if we used the 4 extra 1sts or 3 1sts and 2 2nds (counting picks saved on Young by being pick 3 or 4 not 9) on D.

Culture building is funny. It took three coaching changes to seemingly get there. Morgan and Canales weren’t in charge when we “protected” our culture. We still traded Burns and Moore, we just lost 3 first round picks in the process.

Also, do you think the Eagles are in a bad place because of their coach clearly tanking a game for a draft pick? Remember that? It was obvious and the coach was fired. The funny thing is that this is something teams do all the time but they add their stars (like Cam in 2016, CMC, Burns, etc.) to IR or rest them in week 16/17. Pederson was just dumb and made it obvious. He could have just sat his starters to start.

Anyway, did that incident tank risk their credibility? Did Barkley decide to not sign with them? Seems like their SB win and other SB visit say they are just fine. Winning makes culture, picking the right coach makes culture, trading away guys who are on other teams in a year for top picks and keeping more picks by having a better starting pick to trade up, does not impact culture. If it helps you win, culture will be fine, ask the Eagles.

Sure, there's definitely a chance that a fire sale in 2022 could've paid off but I don't think that's a certainty. It's not just about stockpiling the picks and bettering odds; it's about hitting on those picks, having a stable coaching staff to develop them, and keeping the locker room engaged. We didn't exactly have a model front office nor stable coaching staff in 2022.

It's worth noting that part of the reason that DJ had to be included in the trade up for #1 was because the Bears needed an immediate, proven WR1 to help Fields. It was him or another immediate first-round pick, not a future one like what was being offered for Burns (whom teams knew that things were shaky with and that they could afford to wait).

As for the Eagles, they recovered because the foundation was already in place. Pederson got flak and was ultimately fired (and was just fired again this offseason from the Jags). Their recovery was quick because the foundation was already in place: Howie Roseman and a solid roster (that included a stacked OL, a second year QB, and a veteran defense). Philly had a margin of error that just wasn't available to Carolina.

I'm not against using the draft to rebuild, but a full-on teardown comes with real consequences: fan disengagement, a fractured locker room, poor development, a losing environment... and I don't believe that we had the necessary leadership at the time to cleanly navigate it. That's a gamble that I want no part of. 

Now that we do have a staff that seems to be in complete alignment and building for the future rather than fighting for their jobs, I'm more inclined to observe their process and see where it leads rather than backseat driving with "perfect" hindsight. 

  • Pie 1
  • Beer 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

    • https://www.espn.com/nfl/draft/bestavailable
    • https://www.pff.com/news/draft-the-best-remaining-players-ahead-of-day-3
    • Per PFF: 1. CB Jermod McCoy, Tennessee Volunteers McCoy's medical evaluations will be critical, but based on his measurables and 2024 tape, he profiles as a first-round talent with shutdown potential in press-man coverage. 2. CB Keith Abney II, Arizona State Sun Devils Abney's lack of length and top-tier athleticism may limit him to zone schemes, but his competitiveness and run-defense mentality make him a valuable rotational defensive back with starter potential. 3. CB Keionte Scott, Miami (FL) Hurricanes Scott is a tone-setter in run defense with a physical mentality. His zone coverage is adequate, but man coverage limitations may restrict his role. 4. WR Skyler Bell, Connecticut Huskies Bell looked uncoverable at times against his level of competition in his final season and, despite below-average size and athleticism, produced like a top-100 prospect as a productive slot receiver. 5. WR Bryce Lance, North Dakota State Bison Lance dominated FCS competition as a versatile “X” receiver. He moves well for his size and pairs that with reliable contested-catch production, giving him a strong case as an early Day 3 pick with the potential to develop into a contributing NFL receiver. 6. ED Joshua Josephs, Tennessee Volunteers Josephs has an appealing blend of size and explosiveness but must improve his technique and anticipation to reach his potential. 7. ED Dani Dennis-Sutton, Penn State Nittany Lions Dennis-Sutton projects best as a 3-4 defensive end with some 4-3 flexibility. His length and size are clear strengths, though his agility in space is more limited. With ascending play, he could be drafted higher than his current tape suggests. 8. DI Gracen Halton, Oklahoma Sooners Halton is an undersized, versatile defensive lineman who wins with quickness, effort and movement skills. His lack of strength can be an issue, but he fits well in multiple or movement-based fronts. 9. HB Mike Washington Jr., Arkansas Razorbacks Washington brings alluring size, straight-line speed and yards-after-contact potential as a power back, but also noticeably good vision and footwork to be a potential early-down back in a committee in a man- or gap-scheme run game. 10. WR Elijah Sarratt, Indiana Hoosiers Sarratt may profile as a below-average athlete for an NFL “X” receiver, but there is still plenty to like in his game. His strong hands, coordination and determination at the catch point — combined with his constant competitiveness — give him starter potential as an outside WR2 in offenses that value jump-ball opportunities. 11. WR Deion Burks, Oklahoma Sooners Burks' size and production do not clearly point to a future NFL contributor, but his athleticism and strength make him difficult to dismiss. He offers intriguing upside as an explosive slot receiver, though he may not fit every scheme. 12. DI Darrell Jackson Jr., Florida State Seminoles Jackson is a massive, powerful defensive tackle with imposing physical traits. When his hand usage is right, he can be dominant, but inconsistency in technique and processing limits his impact. He remains a high-upside prospect. 13. C Connor Lew, Auburn Tigers Lew is a technically sound center with excellent leverage, balance and posture. His consistent fundamentals allow him to win positioning battles, though he can struggle against top-end power due to his lighter build. His upside is high given his age and technique. 14. LB Kyle Louis, Pittsburgh Panthers Louis is an undersized linebacker who projects best as a versatile space defender. In the right role, he can be an impact nickel player thanks to his explosiveness and coverage ability. 15. S Kamari Ramsey, USC Trojans Ramsey provides versatility with the ability to play both safety spots and the slot, particularly in two-high looks. His lighter build and good — but not elite — athleticism cap his ceiling. 16. CB Chandler Rivers, Duke Blue Devils Rivers logged 3,186 defensive snaps across four seasons at Duke and allowed just one touchdown in coverage in 2025, with a sub-85.0 passer rating when targeted for the third straight year. He earned a 90.7 PFF grade in 2024 before taking a step back in 2025. Over the past three seasons, he has been flagged just four times while playing more than 70% of his snaps on the outside. 17. C Sam Hecht, Kansas State Wildcats Hecht delivered a strong 2025 campaign, earning an 80.3 PFF overall grade that ranked fourth among centers. He brings a balanced profile, ranking 10th in PFF run-blocking grade (77.7) while holding up adequately in pass protection. Across 759 snaps, he allowed just seven pressures, with zero sacks and zero quarterback hits, and committed no penalties. 18. CB Devin Moore, Florida Gators Moore is an appealing Day 2 prospect with a strong blend of length, speed and ball skills for press-man coverage, though his injury history could impact his draft position. 19. G Jalen Farmer, Kentucky Wildcats Farmer put together a solid but unspectacular 2025 season, earning a 69.8 PFF overall grade that ranked 93rd among guards. His best work came in pass protection, where his 72.4 PFF pass-blocking grade ranked 256th, while his 67.4 run-blocking grade ranked 113th. Across 818 snaps, he allowed 14 pressures, including three sacks and no quarterback hits, and committed one penalty. 20. ED LT Overton, Alabama Crimson Tide Overton fits best as a 3-4 defensive end with inside-out versatility. He can contribute in a 4-3 as a power end, but his lack of bend and stride length limits his ability to consistently threaten the edge. 21. QB Garrett Nussmeier, LSU Tigers Nussmeier brings NFL bloodlines and a polished, foundational approach to the position, traits that fuel his confidence as a vertical pocket passer. However, his average arm strength and below-average stature could create challenges for his aggressive, gunslinging style at the next level. 22. DI Rayshaun Benny, Michigan Wolverines Benny earned a 79.3 PFF grade in 2025, ranking 62nd among 887 qualifying interior defenders. He posted a 68.5 pass-rush grade (161st) and an 83.5 run-defense grade (35th). His production leaned toward run defense, with a clear disparity between phases. 23. S Genesis Smith, Arizona Wildcats Smith has intriguing size and athletic traits for a single-high role, but inconsistency with physicality and play strength limits his reliability. 24. HB Jonah Coleman, Washington Huskies Coleman may not have the flashy athleticism of a fan-favorite RB1, but his game is efficient, powerful and translatable to NFL success, specifically behind zone-blocking schemes where he can gain momentum and one-cut into rushing lanes. He also brings plus third-down reliability as a receiver and pass protector. 25. LB Keyshaun Elliott, Arizona State Sun Devils Elliott has shown flashes as a downhill player, with effectiveness as a run defender and blitzer, but his below-average frame helps explain his limitations in coverage. He earned PFF grades of 67.8 in 2024 and 67.5 in 2025, which reflect a steady but unspectacular profile. His struggles in coverage may limit his role at the next level, though he still offers some starting upside in the right situation. 26. S Zakee Wheatley, Penn State Nittany Lions Wheatley is a long, springy athlete best suited for single-high roles. His slender build can be exposed in the box, but he offers strong range and coverage ability in space. 27. CB Malik Muhammad, Texas Longhorns Muhammad is a decorated cornerback from one of the nation's best secondaries, and his size and pedigree point to starting potential at the next level, particularly in a zone-oriented scheme. He earned PFF grades of 78.5 in 2023, 71.7 in 2024 and 70.8 in 2025. His lighter frame and limited disruptiveness remain concerns and may factor into evaluations despite the overall profile. 28. TE Michael Trigg, Baylor Bears Trigg may have one of the widest ranges of outcomes in the 2026 class. At his best, his vertical athleticism and contested-catch ability suggest top-50 potential, but inconsistencies with technique and focus create volatility in his projection. 29. DI Dontay Corleone, Cincinnati Bearcats Corleone, known as “The Godfather,” was one of the most dominant run defenders in 2022, using his size and strength to control the line of scrimmage. His performance has declined in recent seasons, and his 2024 medical history adds some concern. He offers rare quickness for a nose tackle and can control blockers despite shorter arms, though his pass-rush impact remains limited. He projects as a traditional 3-4 nose tackle. 30. T Dametrious Crownover, Texas A&M Aggies Crownover stands out for his massive frame at 6-foot-7 and 319 pounds with over 35-inch arms, which should earn him a look at the next level. However, he must translate those physical traits more consistently in pass protection to reach his potential. He earned a 58.4 pass-blocking grade in 2025 and allowed two sacks, two hits and 23 hurries across 428 pass-blocking snaps. 31. ED Anthony Lucas, USC Trojans Lucas has an NFL-ready frame and good overall athleticism for his size, but he does not consistently win quickly enough to project as a full-time edge rusher. His length and strength give him versatility across the front in odd schemes. 32. LB Deontae Lawson, Alabama Crimson Tide Lawson is undersized but experienced and quick. He projects as a rotational linebacker with some starting potential. 33. DI Kaleb Proctor, Southeastern Louisiana Lions Proctor, No. 111 on PFF’s Big Board, offers an unusual profile given his size and level of competition, but his explosiveness and pass-rushing ability stand out. His 2025 production supports that evaluation, as he earned an 86.5 PFF grade and generated 39 pressures, including nine sacks, four hits and 26 hurries. His performance against LSU in particular highlights his upside and reinforces his case as a potential late-round value. 34. CB Will Lee III, Texas A&M Aggies Lee, No. 114 on PFF’s Big Board, offers an intriguing developmental profile, as his size, length and leaping ability translate to strong ball skills. He earned a 66.5 PFF grade in 2025 after a stronger 76.2 mark in 2023, and he recorded eight pass breakups in each of the past two seasons. His run defense, tackling and penalty discipline remain areas for improvement, but the physical tools and ball production point to late-round value. 35. G Billy Schrauth, Notre Dame Fighting Irish Schrauth’s career included injury setbacks, but his play on the field showed a high level of performance for Notre Dame. He earned an 82.7 pass-blocking grade and a 73.1 run-blocking grade in 2025, and he did not allow a sack or a hit while surrendering just two hurries across 213 pass-blocking snaps. His game features strong pad level, a firm anchor in pass protection and good grip strength, though balance and foot speed present some limitations. The overall profile supports projection as a starting-caliber interior lineman. 36. WR Brenen Thompson, Mississippi State Bulldogs Thompson’s elite speed and big-play ability will draw interest, but his below-average size and inconsistent contested-catch rate complicate his projection. He ran a 4.26 40-yard dash, which ranks in the 100th percentile at the position, along with a 2.53-second 20-yard split in the 93rd percentile. In 2025, he caught 57 of 87 targets for 1,054 yards and six touchdowns, averaging 2.77 yards per route run and 4.3 yards after the catch per reception
×
×
  • Create New...