Why We Should Tank

[Hal]

Throwing games to get better draft picks isn't particularly appealing especially if you believe any or, realistically, most teams have a "shot" at the Superbowl because you never what will happen. In all but the worst team's cases, this is true. The other winless teams I can't really explain, except for Miami who is terrible and I suppose St. Louis has had more injuries than we've had but onto my point. Here's the potential difference between having the number 1 pick and the number 2 pick:

2012 Number 1 Overall:

-Ability to draft Andrew Luck; Manning has 4 years left, would be a little long for Luck to wait and he is NFL ready but Aaron Rodgers did it so not too big of a deal. If his family pulls an Archie, we can trade him but I don't see why they would.

-Ability to trade the number one pick to...any team in need of a QB and I'm looking at Miami. They'd be near us, number 2 overall let's say, we could get them to fork over their 1st and 2nd plus 2013 picks. We could draft Matt Kalil from USC or Jonathan Martin from Standford, both of whom are projected to be better than all the tackles that came in 2011. Either would easily start at left or right tackle and since we have Castonzo, that'd make for two of the best young tackles in the league. We'd also have back to back second round picks at 2-1 and 2-2, essentially giving us 2 more first rounders. We could arguably acquire Miami's 2013 2nd or even 1st round pick as well seeing as how the owner is a little..."slow" and could be too excited to trade for Luck. This option would easily solidify many problem areas for what's left of Manning's career.

-My head might explode if Polian trades the number 1 and doesn't pick one of the tackles in round 1 but the 2 2nd rounders could easily fill voids at CB, DT, OG, and WR. I'm assuming Pierre Garcon isn't resigned as Reggie Wayne needs to be resigned.

2012 Number 2 Overall:

-Miami drafts Andrew Luck so we still get an elite tackle added to the team but not the benefit of another second round pick. Trading away the number 2 pick might net us something but I don't see anyone trading up to get anyone but Luck.

-Assuming the Rams or Vikings, but not Miami, are the worst team(s) and we're behind them, it still will likely turn out poorly. The Rams and Minnesota both have first round QBs so they'll trade the number 1 for all the profit but I don't see how either team has a worse record than ours.

[dudeman]

I want the Colts to win a few games just so they can avoid the Luck situation.

The thing is, Indy is the football town Peyton built, so I just as easily see what already happened in Green Bay with Farve. What happens when the Colts want to move on with Luck, but Peyton and his supporters aren't ready?

[ruksak]

How do you convince 53 millionaires to make themselves look bad for the good of a franchise that they might not be playing for next year?

[pacolts56]

Throwing games to get better draft picks isn't particularly appealing especially if you believe any or, realistically, most teams have a "shot" at the Superbowl because you never what will happen. In all but the worst team's cases, this is true. The other winless teams I can't really explain, except for Miami who is terrible and I suppose St. Louis has had more injuries than we've had but onto my point. Here's the potential difference between having the number 1 pick and the number 2 pick:

2012 Number 1 Overall:

-Ability to draft Andrew Luck; Manning has 4 years left, would be a little long for Luck to wait and he is NFL ready but Aaron Rodgers did it so not too big of a deal. If his family pulls an Archie, we can trade him but I don't see why they would.

-Ability to trade the number one pick to...any team in need of a QB and I'm looking at Miami. They'd be near us, number 2 overall let's say, we could get them to fork over their 1st and 2nd plus 2013 picks. We could draft Matt Kalil from USC or Jonathan Martin from Standford, both of whom are projected to be better than all the tackles that came in 2011. Either would easily start at left or right tackle and since we have Castonzo, that'd make for two of the best young tackles in the league. We'd also have back to back second round picks at 2-1 and 2-2, essentially giving us 2 more first rounders. We could arguably acquire Miami's 2013 2nd or even 1st round pick as well seeing as how the owner is a little..."slow" and could be too excited to trade for Luck. This option would easily solidify many problem areas for what's left of Manning's career.

-My head might explode if Polian trades the number 1 and doesn't pick one of the tackles in round 1 but the 2 2nd rounders could easily fill voids at CB, DT, OG, and WR. I'm assuming Pierre Garcon isn't resigned as Reggie Wayne needs to be resigned.

2012 Number 2 Overall:

-Miami drafts Andrew Luck so we still get an elite tackle added to the team but not the benefit of another second round pick. Trading away the number 2 pick might net us something but I don't see anyone trading up to get anyone but Luck.

-Assuming the Rams or Vikings, but not Miami, are the worst team(s) and we're behind them, it still will likely turn out poorly. The Rams and Minnesota both have first round QBs so they'll trade the number 1 for all the profit but I don't see how either team has a worse record than ours.

Okay.....I am absolutely against tanking anything.

Leaving aside the fact that the NFL league office would probably kill us with a penalty that involves lost draft picks.... these guys get paid to win football games and should make every effort to do so.

Having said that....we stink to death and I hope we get Andrew Luck if we're SO bad that we wind up at #1 and Peyton's situation is not fully clarified by Draft Day.

[Andy]

I want the Colts to give it everything they got week in and week out, and I hope we could win some games. Let's NOT lose games on purpose because that's not football and that's not how any team rolls, let alone the Colts. Plus, it has been assured by many players that the Colts are NOT tanking.

[mz1888]

2012 Number 1 Overall:

-Ability to draft Andrew Luck; Manning has 4 years left, would be a little long for Luck to wait and he is NFL ready but Aaron Rodgers did it so not too big of a deal. If his family pulls an Archie, we can trade him but I don't see why they would.

Aaron Rogers was a late first round pick, Andrew Luck would be the first overall pick in the draft. You can't compare the two at all. I cannot recall the last time a number one pick sat for three years before getting a chance to play. If manning comes back healthy, it's his team and if we have the number one pick we need to trade it. We can't have a number one pick sitting on the sidelines for three to four years.

[dudeman]

We can't have a number one pick sitting on the sidelines for three to four years.

Pretty much this. It's kind of like knowing your super-cool Christmas present 3 years in advance that your parents keep in their closet, but you can't really touch it. Essentially for the next four years, you're going to have a potential powder keg on our hands. If Peyton's having an off-game, do we bench him for Luck for the game? When and who determines when Peyton is done? What if those timelines don't match between Peyton and the Colts Org? How is practice time going to work? I mean, one of the reasons Peyton's been so successful is that he takes every snap in practice and just about every snap during games (though, I have a feeling this will change after this season).

On the other side of the token, no one wants to be the guy that trades a potential superstar (John Elway, anyone?). If he's there, the Colts have to take him and keep him. Just as you can't compare a late-first rounder to a #1 overall, you also can't compare a #1 of years prior to this year with the new CBA. It absolutely makes it more financially plausible to get Luck and have him bench/garbage time duty for his entire rookie contract.

This is why I'm in favor of the Colts just not being in that position at all.

[pacolts56]

Pretty much this. It's kind of like knowing your super-cool Christmas present 3 years in advance that your parents keep in their closet, but you can't really touch it. Essentially for the next four years, you're going to have a potential powder keg on our hands. If Peyton's having an off-game, do we bench him for Luck for the game? When and who determines when Peyton is done? What if those timelines don't match between Peyton and the Colts Org? How is practice time going to work? I mean, one of the reasons Peyton's been so successful is that he takes every snap in practice and just about every snap during games (though, I have a feeling this will change after this season).

On the other side of the token, no one wants to be the guy that trades a potential superstar (John Elway, anyone?). If he's there, the Colts have to take him and keep him. Just as you can't compare a late-first rounder to a #1 overall, you also can't compare a #1 of years prior to this year with the new CBA. It absolutely makes it more financially plausible to get Luck and have him bench/garbage time duty for his entire rookie contract.

This is why I'm in favor of the Colts just not being in that position at all.

LOL.... not a nice easy decision, is it?

We can speculate that a trade-down will bring a wealth of draft picks which turn into 4-5 future Pro Bowlers.... but that's every bit and more of a gamble, IMO, than drafting Luck would be. Especially in light of almost all of our recent late 1st round draft picks.

If we, by some miracle. win 2-3 games then you're right.... we're off the hook. And if Luck does wind up being the hotshot he's being billed as.... at least he'll probably be tormenting teams in another division.

[swflacoltsfans]

Have you seen us play? What makes you think we need to take a dive to lose?

[Smitto]

In the words or herman edwards "you play to win"... nuff said.

[basketballsteve]

If by tank you mean play the bottom 1/3 of the roster to the max to find out what we have and don't worry about the score then I agree but I don't think it's a black/white decision. How you "tank" is of importance it has to be in a manner that can potentially strengthen the team down the road. And it has to be a consistent decision done for every game to the end of the season.

[CR91]

i just dont see the fins giving up there whole draft just for luck. i can see them just as happy with landry jones

[The Fish]

How do you convince 53 millionaires to make themselves look bad for the good of a franchise that they might not be playing for next year?

You don't convince them, you step aside and see if they can go the distance.

[CR91]

we wouldnt even have to tank. if we couldnt handle the easier half of our schedule theres no way we can get a single win. we still have to the pats, ravens, falcons, cam and the panthers, and 5 divisional games

Edited October 29, 2011 by coltsrule91

[Gonzo]

Have you seen us play? What makes you think we need to take a dive to lose?

Seriously. If we tanked, who would know?

[ruksak]

You don't convince them, you step aside and see if they can go the distance.

Could you elaborate? I'm not sure if I understand what you're saying.

[Captain Americolt]

i just dont see the fins giving up there whole draft just for luck. i can see them just as happy with landry jones

Luck is a trillion times better than Landry Jones.

[oldunclemark]

Oh, Yeah..lets turn an embarassing season into a disgraceful one by throwing games..

Call Vegas first...make sure they know..

[CR91]

Luck is a trillion times better than Landry Jones.

true, but is he worth giving up your whole draft when you can still get a very good qb in jones

Edited October 29, 2011 by coltsrule91

[Captain Americolt]

true, but is he worth giving up your whole draft when you can still get a very good qb in jones

No. Landy Jones is a good QB too. But luck is so much better that it's enough for a team to give up alot of draft picks just to move up. And I never said to give away your whole draft. No ones pulling a mike ditka here

[BIGugly]

Tanking is Unethical, Immoral, and probably Illegal. Costs you all credibility for the rest of your tenure as an NFL franchise. Can't beleive it is even considered. The downside loss of credibility is far too serious a price to pay. Ask Art Schlister.

It's like virginity, once it is gone, you can never get it back.

[Bowlingguy300]

watching the Stanford/USC game I dont see how LUCK is our answer. he isnt looking that impressive to me against a unranked team too.

[Jason_]

LOL.... not a nice easy decision, is it?

We can speculate that a trade-down will bring a wealth of draft picks which turn into 4-5 future Pro Bowlers.... but that's every bit and more of a gamble, IMO, than drafting Luck would be. Especially in light of almost all of our recent late 1st round draft picks.

If we, by some miracle. win 2-3 games then you're right.... we're off the hook. And if Luck does wind up being the hotshot he's being billed as.... at least he'll probably be tormenting teams in another division.

Very good points and I agree it's certainly not an easy decision but I'll add these 2 points...1) you said our history with late round picks. Overall I think most of us "trade down" folks agree that we wouldn't want to trade down past the 10-15 area at the most. 2) The last draft, Chris Polian's first, was was pretty good assuming guys stay healthy but that's not something you can predict unless the player had an injury history in school.

i just dont see the fins giving up there whole draft just for luck. i can see them just as happy with landry jones

That's assuming Landry Jones and/or Barkley come out in the draft. They're both Juniors and I don't think either of them will be graduating early like Luck and that's the primary reason people think that Luck is much less likely to stay in school. If Barkley or Jones stay in school it could drive the price of that first pick way up.

Luck is a trillion times better than Landry Jones.

Well, I'd say Luck is definitely better but you might be exaggerating just a tad lol

Tanking is Unethical, Immoral, and probably Illegal. Costs you all credibility for the rest of your tenure as an NFL franchise. Can't beleive it is even considered. The downside loss of credibility is far too serious a price to pay. Ask Art Schlister.

It's like virginity, once it is gone, you can never get it back.

Could not agree more. IMO any team that intentionally loses just to improve their draft pick should be stripped of the first round pick and possibly even worse...maybe even a sanction to keep the team from playoff contention for a year like they did to USC

[Jason_]

watching the Stanford/USC game I dont see how LUCK is our answer. he isnt looking that impressive to me against a unranked team too.

Well to be fair, I believe USC is unranked due to the sanctions against them from their championship year. I know they are not eligible for any Bowls but I'm not sure if that's keeping them out of the rankings...it would make sense to not include them in the BCS rankings but not sure if it applies to the coaches and media polls or not. Regardless though they do have a good team.

[Malakai432]

watching the Stanford/USC game I dont see how LUCK is our answer. he isnt looking that impressive to me against a unranked team too.

He sure as heck is looking impressive now...

[shaunzo]

watching the Stanford/USC game I dont see how LUCK is our answer

Wow good thing you're not evaluating talent professionally, because he's a STUD. However, who even says he's going to come out after his junior year? There's no guarantee that he won't go back for his senior year and graduate, so the whole idea of tanking to get him is ludicrous. Plus, the Colts suck so bad, that if they 'tried' to lose, they'd probably end up winning a game or two.

[ruksak]

watching the Stanford/USC game I dont see how LUCK is our answer. he isnt looking that impressive to me against a unranked team too.

lol......is it opposite day in your part of the country?

[hawkeyes]

SICK of seeing all these dang Luck threads! LUCK = LEAF !!!

Easy to shine when your strength of schedule is that bad ... heck even Boise States schedule is 3x tougher than Stanfords!

[manning04]

Yes USC is unranked because they can not play in bowl games this season. Luck will come out cause he will graduate academically this year. I don't think we are tanking... but we sure as heck are not doing anything to improve so i am not sure what you want to call that. I feel if we get Luck, Peyton is playing 2 more years with us no matter if he is healthy passed that or not.

[coltfily]

Looking at today games we are the only winless team that actually played like a winless team, both Miami and St Louis gave great effort today. The Colts don't need to tank as long as we have Painter as a QB and Caldwell as coach. We will earn our top pick honestly.

[hawkeyes]

Looking at today games we are the only winless team that actually played like a winless team, both Miami and St Louis gave great effort today. The Colts don't need to tank as long as we have Painter as a QB and Caldwell as coach. We will earn our top pick honestly.

Right, because Painter has been horrible this season! ROFL!!!

[PreManningColtsFan]

Throwing games to get better draft picks isn't particularly appealing especially if you believe any or, realistically, most teams have a "shot" at the Superbowl because you never what will happen. In all but the worst team's cases, this is true. The other winless teams I can't really explain, except for Miami who is terrible and I suppose St. Louis has had more injuries than we've had but onto my point. Here's the potential difference between having the number 1 pick and the number 2 pick:

2012 Number 1 Overall:

-Ability to draft Andrew Luck; Manning has 4 years left, would be a little long for Luck to wait and he is NFL ready but Aaron Rodgers did it so not too big of a deal. If his family pulls an Archie, we can trade him but I don't see why they would.

-Ability to trade the number one pick to...any team in need of a QB and I'm looking at Miami. They'd be near us, number 2 overall let's say, we could get them to fork over their 1st and 2nd plus 2013 picks. We could draft Matt Kalil from USC or Jonathan Martin from Standford, both of whom are projected to be better than all the tackles that came in 2011. Either would easily start at left or right tackle and since we have Castonzo, that'd make for two of the best young tackles in the league. We'd also have back to back second round picks at 2-1 and 2-2, essentially giving us 2 more first rounders. We could arguably acquire Miami's 2013 2nd or even 1st round pick as well seeing as how the owner is a little..."slow" and could be too excited to trade for Luck. This option would easily solidify many problem areas for what's left of Manning's career.

-My head might explode if Polian trades the number 1 and doesn't pick one of the tackles in round 1 but the 2 2nd rounders could easily fill voids at CB, DT, OG, and WR. I'm assuming Pierre Garcon isn't resigned as Reggie Wayne needs to be resigned.

2012 Number 2 Overall:

-Miami drafts Andrew Luck so we still get an elite tackle added to the team but not the benefit of another second round pick. Trading away the number 2 pick might net us something but I don't see anyone trading up to get anyone but Luck.

-Assuming the Rams or Vikings, but not Miami, are the worst team(s) and we're behind them, it still will likely turn out poorly. The Rams and Minnesota both have first round QBs so they'll trade the number 1 for all the profit but I don't see how either team has a worse record than ours.

We are 0-8 while not tanking. What's the purpose of your thread? The results of tanking won't make us lose more games when we are winless when trying to win a game.

[Captain Americolt]

St. louis won today. That leaves miami as our lone competitor........

[manning04]

St. louis won today. That leaves miami as our lone competitor........

Sadly STL was the team we really did not have to worry about. we could of traded with them if in fact they ended up with the #1 and we want Luck. Miami not so much

[oldunclemark]

With our 'D'...we cant afford to draft a QB...

we need 5 new starting defensive players......

[Jason_]

Sadly STL was the team we really did not have to worry about. we could of traded with them if in fact they ended up with the #1 and we want Luck. Miami not so much

If we wind up with the #1 pick and draft Luck that's one thing....but it would be a HUGE mistake to trade up for Luck. IF that were to happen then that would be the proof, imo, that Manning is done.

[Port Adelaide]

The way we've been playing we won't have to tank.

[unitaswestand]

I disagree with the idea of drafting a tackle, though. Castonzo and Ijalana are both tackles and expected to be the starters. i honestly think with a pick that high, they will go after another skill position, probably WR. Reggie is nearing the end and we need another Marvin Harrison type player. Garcon is good but inconsistent. Unless there is a Suh type DT, I just don't see it happening.

[Thewholefnshow28]

How do you convince 53 millionaires to make themselves look bad for the good of a franchise that they might not be playing for next year?

This is the problem with tanking in the NFL. You are not going to get them on board because of how quickly rosters can change in the NFL. How are you going to get Mathis or Wayne to tank when they are in a contract year? If you try to put them on IR they would go nuts and the NFLPA would investigate.

You just cannot tank like you can in the NBA.

In the long run losing is for the best, but you are not going to get players to tank. It looks like we really do not need to tank. Now if we are sitting at 0-14, Miami is 0-14, and Peyton is ready to come back then I probably say oh Peyton take the rest of the season off.

[BIGugly]

This is the problem with tanking in the NFL. You are not going to get them on board because of how quickly rosters can change in the NFL. How are you going to get Mathis or Wayne to tank when they are in a contract year? If you try to put them on IR they would go nuts and the NFLPA would investigate.

You just cannot tank like you can in the NBA.

In the long run losing is for the best, but you are not going to get players to tank. It looks like we really do not need to tank. Now if we are sitting at 0-14, Miami is 0-14, and Peyton is ready to come back then I probably say oh Peyton take the rest of the season off.

Exactly. Leave this coacing staff intact, act "baffled" by all the losses, fire them in February, and do what you will with your number one draft pick, and the "fault" for all this is now gone.

And Irsay and Polian are smart enough to do it, and think we are dumb enough not to see it.

Tanking (baffling) by any other name, is still tanking.

Edited October 31, 2011 by BIGugly