Nobody is saying they want a lower pick. You can't complain about red herrings and then perpetuate additional red herrings. Again, options don't equate to success. How'd those options work out for San Diego taking Rivers instead of Roethlesberger? Or every team that passed on Aaron Rogers? You only pick one player at a time; as long as there is one single great player when you draft you have the option of a great player.
To be fair, you have to ask the same question to Colts fans about the 2011 season. Better yet ... ask Cleveland Browns fans how happy they are looking back at their meaningless victory over the Colts in 2011 ... leaving them at 4-12 while Indy went 2-14 with the first pick. I'm going out on a limb here, but I'm going to bet every single Browns fan on earth wishes they lost that Colts game. You can't blame Jets fans for wishing we lost to Tennessee and Miami.
it's not about wishing, it's about rooting. If we lose we lose but how can you openly root for a loss?
Not drafting Luck didn't force them to draft Trent Richardson. There was a QB available to them that has arguably been better than Luck. Their fortunes could be much different had they drafted better.
Again, it's not a retroactive view, its a prospective issue. You're one of the more astute posters on the board. I can't imagine you'd prefer to have a lower pick than a higher pick. In every round. Saying you can find talent anywhere in the draft is childish. Of course there is talent everywhere. Having the MOST options available and being able to pick the TOP players on YOUR board as opposed to being usurped by another crappy team has to be your preference once you get to the draft. No? _
As I said, it's not an issue if preferring a lower pick. It's an issue that, at 6, a great player is still likely. The people I disagree with are arguing you can only get garbage at 6.
to worry about missing out on the top pick in the draft because you won a game is silly. I'd much rather watch the game and come away feeling great about a hard fought win. If you're team is so bad that picking 1st versus 6th makes all the difference, then your team sucks and will probably always suck. In reality, WHERE you pick is far less important than WHO you pick. It seems like every year, all 32 teams pass on a superstar at least 3 times. I'd rather be the team that picks 32nd every year. You know, stroll in off the street with 5 minutes left in the draft and drop your envelope on the commiss's desk.
Not my argument. Never was. And I never said anything about tanking. That's someone projecting their agenda on the issue. _
Why does anyone care who people root for? Oh my god, someone thinks I'm a fake fan. I should bitch and moan on the internet. If you post on a message board, you're a real fan. People shouldn't be so insecure. Also who you root for has zero impact on what actually plays out lol. I like to look at those games as win-win. If the Jets win, great. If they lose, better draft pick, great.
So would I. But I t's been over 4 decades. However at the time this thread was started we weren't close to making that leisurely stroll up to the dais with the 32nd pick. _
I made this thread mostly to have a bit of a breather from all the doom and gloom at the time. woe-is-me, my team won, now we might not pick #2 we might get #5, it felt so out of touch with the way being a fan should feel. I thought it was ridiculous mostly due to the strange misguided notion that winning was gonna screw us out of getting a valuable pick in this years draft. because we were always gonna get top notch talent from the draft, wether we were number 2 or number 10 or whatever, and honestly the team has so many needs I wasn't gonna sweat missing out on one or two guys. not to mention I took into account that a lot could happen between then and may (or even now and then,) so who knows who's really going where anyway? suddenly we got mocks with Mariota falling to us, how about that... in my own frustration with fans rooting against their supposed team I couldn't articulate it (the fake fan bit was unnecessary and childish on my part) but there really is a logical argument to calling rooting for draft position a fallacy. Its a mindset that puts one man on a pedestal as the one who will bring us wins, so losing now is simply a means of winning later. anybody else won't do the job, we NEED this man, probably a QB, to save the day. that always seemed a wee bit… naive and hopeful to me, something desperate fans do because they don't see an alternative. we draft MM or JW, theres no more assurance of them coming in and saving the day as nearly any other top prospect in a position of need, yet some acted like rooting against any positive development from this team late in the season wasn't worth doing in the face of maybe getting a savior. because all hope lies on this ONE GUY, thats the solution. THE. SOLUTION. ONE GUY. and call me one who doesn't see the big picture (a bit ironic to me as that would be) but I don't see it that way. I don't want to root for failure to attain success, nor do I think thats actually how things work. I'd rather my team eek out as much success as possible than fail hard and start over hoping one SUPER AMAZING prospect saves the day. it seems like we get lost in our belief that theres a simple answer to a complex set of problems, theres not really, even if we really hope there is. I'm looking at our options at #6 and feeling fine no matter who we pick. turns out winning hasn't screwed us, looks like we have just as much chance at getting a good one as we would with winning
As long as I'm spending my afternoon in front of the TV, I want my favorite team to prevail. End of story. Whether that's ultimately good or bad for the franchise long term, I frankly don't give a fuck. If I'm investing my time in rooting for the team, I want that team to win. Come what may.
ok... here we go... i agree with you. although at times you will miss out on a great talent its sad to be rooting for losses. AND you are correct. if you draft well you will be successful. i said it in another thread. i am not worried about the 6, i am worried about the 2nd, 3rd and 4th rounds. THAT is where great teams are made. nobody really has a great grasp on the draft, i know i sure as hell dont. there are tons of guys i watch in college and think they will make a great pro and they end up out of the league in a year or cut in camp. i will say its an overhyped media ploy by the nfl, and its smart of them. there are folks all fired up because of the draft and they are that way for a month or two before it. yet none of them really have any clue. even the guys in the draft thread who i give a ton of credit to for knowing there stuff are still essentially guessing whether a guy will be good or great. AND top draft picks are NOT killers anymore with the rookie cap. once upon a time if you missed on a top 5 qb you were completely fucked for 5 years. you were so deep in to that guy that you were forced to try and make it work. now its much easier to say ahh yeah we completely blew it with that pick and are going to move forward. in the past it just wasnt possible.
To put this argument to rest, here are the last 20 Super Bowl winners and how many top ten picks they had in the 10 years preceding their Super Bowls. Of course, the source of the argument in this thread is that a top 10 pick isn't good enough because the 6th pick isn't good enough, and our long term success was dependent on getting the first or second pick. Only five of twenty winners had the number 1 pick in the ten preceding years, and Drew Bledsoe counts for two of them for the 01 and 03 Patriots, which his relevance is the obvious fact that the best thing that ever happened to them was that he didn't play. So that leaves 3 out of 20 as true indicators of the value of drafting in that slot. The other four are Peyton Manning, Orlando Pace, Troy Aikman and Russel Maryland (both for the 1995 Cowboys). The idea of the number one pick QB (or even the top 5 QB) being a necessity to win is the fluke, not the lower drafted QB. of the past 20 years, only two QB's picked number one have won Super Bowls(Peyton and Aikman), and only one other QB drafted in the top 5 has won Super Bowls - Eli Manning. This is a fact and there is no way to spin it to the contrary. There simply is no empirical evidence that you need one of the top picks in the draft (top pick being higher than 6th since it is apparently not good enough) to win the Super Bowl. You simply need to draft well at whatever position you are in. Steelers won two Super Bowls and their highest pick was 9th preceding their Super Bowls. The Giants drafted 4th, but he is a good but not great QB and the team was built on players at other position drafted outside the top 10. New England hit on their picks at 4 and 6 for meaningful players, they didn't need to lose a few more games to move up from any one of those, and their highest pick at 1 was the pick that didn't play any relevance to their subsequent championships. For fuck's sake, the perineal losers the Tampa Bay Buccaneers won a Super Bowl and they didn't draft higher than 6th the ten years preceding. Someone please explain to me why losing games to get the top pick is so important when very few Super Bowl winners were built that way. 2014 - New England: 10th (Jerod Mayo- 2008) 2013 - Seattle: 4th (Aaron Curry - 2009), 6 (Russell Okung - 2010) 2012 - Baltimore: 10th (Terrel Suggs - 2003) 2011 - N.Y. Giants: 4th (Phillip Rivers/Eli Manning - 2004) 2010 - Green Bay: 5th (A.J. Hawk - 2006), 9th (B. J. Raji - 2009) 2009 - New Orleans: 2nd (Reggie Bush - 2006), 6th (Johnathan Sullivan - 2003) 2008 - Pittsburgh: 8th (Plaxico Burress - 2000) 2007 - N.Y. Giants: 4th (Phillip Rivers/Eli Manning - 2004) 2006 - Indianapolis: 1st (Manning - 1998), 4th (Edgerin James - 1999) 2005 - Pittsburgh: 8th (Plaxico Burress - 2000), 2004 - New England: 4th (Willie McGinest - 1994), 6th (Richard Seymour - 2001), 2003 - New England: 1st (Drew Bledsoe - 1993), 4th (Willie McGinest - 1994), 6th (Richard Seymour - 2001) 2002 - Tampa Bay: 6th (Trent Dilfer - 1994), 6th (Eric Curry - 1993) 2001 - New England: 1st (Drew Bledsoe - 1993), 4th (Willie McGinest - 1994), 6th (Richard Seymour - 2001) 2000 - Baltimore: 4th (Peter Boulware - 1997), 4th (Jonathan Ogden - 1997), 5th (Jamal Lewis - 2000) 1999 - St. Louis: 1st (Orlando Pace - 1997), 2nd (Todd Lyght -- 1991), 3rd (Sean Gilbert - 1992), 6th (Tory Holt - 1999), 6th (Grant Wistom - 1998), 6th (Lawrence Philips - 1996), 6th (Kevin Carter (1995) 1998 - Denver: 4th (Mike Croel - 1991) 1997 - Denver: 4th (Mike Croel - 1991) 1996 - Green Bay: 2nd (Tony Mandarich - 1989), 4th (Brent Fullwood - 1987), 5th (Terrel Buckley - 1992), 7th (Sterling Sharp -1988) 1995 - Dallas: 1st (Russel Maryland - 1991), 1st (Troy Aikman - 1989)
Nothing you've said there addresses anything I've said here and certainly, for me, doesn't put the argument to rest. _
