I only agree when a sure fire number player is on the line. Football example: Andrew Luck. Current hockey example: Connor McDavid, i am a Leafs fan who was cheering for them to get better odds in the draft lottery. This years NFL draft does not have that sure fire #1 guy and as many have already pointed out "all draft picks" are gambles.
If you go to the draft history web site, you can find a list of all the picks sorted by round taken. If you look at the list of #6 picks over the years there are as many really good players as there are #1 picks, #2 picks etc. There are also as many busts in higher slots than at #6. So to tank without a predictably better result makes no sense. The statistics say unless there is an obviously great pick at the top, it is still a crap shoot.
If teams start to blatantly tank, it would be best if the league gave the top 10 worst teams a lottery system so no team could intentionally tank for the top pick and at best they could tank for a chance at a top ten pick. Nothing worse for the NFL than teams purposefully tanking. What's the point of watching if teams aren't really competing? Tanking is no different in my book than deflating balls.
I guess that's why they have the lottery in the NBA: to eliminate tanking. Even though I hate it that the team with the worst record doesn't usually get the first overall pick which means the Knicks probably won't get Okafor-it's a good policy. A league just can't allow that kind of stuff to go on for a number of reasons starting with integrity of the league. I don't even like it when a team sits starters (to avoid injury not to tank the game) even though because of that the Jets made the playoffs in 2009. So let's stop being so short sighted and at the same time glued to numbers on draft day. Guys like J.J. Watt weren't top ten picks but they are top ten players.
Tanking is currently a big issue in the NHL. Also, the NBA if you are a Knicks fan you know they are tanking big time. But for some reason it is always harder to land the #1 pick in the NBA if you have the worst record
Draft order is predicated on how good a team is at WINNING. Not on how good a team is at losing. Although when the Raiders and Jets were in the Bush sweepstakes and played each other late in the season, the Raiders did pull their starting QB in a honest effort to lose the game, which they did.
disagree for the most part. you NEVER want your place to be in a spot where they arent going 110% to win every single game. if you want to tank, you do it at the GM level. you throw out a garbage roster and let the team take their lumps. but you never let the midset set in as a coacht o your plays that losing is ok or good. once you get that losing attitude it is extremely hard to shake. the way to go is to strip the roster and then have the coaches and players adapt an "us against the world mentality" play hard but just lack the talent to win. then you get the high pick without the loser mentality. which is basically what we did. those 2 "meaningless wins" were well worth the team not turning into quitters
it should be predicated on how good a team is at winning but it is not. If they decided tomorrow they wanted to flip the draft order based on standings the other way- from top to bottom, I would be okay with that. edit- okay maybe wait until next year when NE isn't the reign champ before making that change
Weren't there like 5 different threads about tanking during the season? Now we get to hear about it 4+ months later? Isn't this just trolling? Come on.
The NHL IS changing its draft lottery next year though to be pretty much exactly like the NBA's. There's tanking this year cause it's the perfect storm, the season before the new rules go into effect there are two supposed generational talents available. And Idzik pretty much DID tank last season enough to get Rex fired...of course it backfired and he got put on the griddle himself after his infamous midseason press conference.
I see nothing wrong with revisiting this topic now that we are able to look back on the season rather than while it was ongoing. Further the closer we get to the actual draft the more clear it is to me at least that having a lower pick than 6 really doesn't make too much different to me. Maybe Mariota is there at 6 maybe not. Maybe we should take him maybe not. Maybe we should go for OLB or wait maybe WR but wait, which OLB and which WR. No matter what there will be a very good player available for us at 6 and for me it's easier to see that now then it was during the season. During the season I was ....well I can't see tanking per se but if we lose it's not so bad. Now though the idea that players and coaches aren't about to tank, ever, resonates more than before. So, for many reasons the discussion to tank or not to tank is moot. Probably pulling your starters is the closest you can come in the NFL.
Agreed on the original post. Not sure how you "coach" guys to get their butts kicked though. The HC should rest his starters, play the 2nd and 3rd stringers. That should get it done.
Well we beat Oakland week 1 (shouldn't have done that) and I'm sure the titans were really looking to win against us late in the season . . .
Don't feel bad about it. I saw one of the worst movies of all time in movie theaters, a movie called The Happening, about plants sending messages to humans to kill themselves. I was only 11 when Waterworld came out ... but I feel your pain.
