Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

1yrdandacloudofdust

Denver CB Harris says Wilson is better than Luck [Merge]

Recommended Posts

This post wins the award for the most ignorance in the fewest amount of words.

 

 

Just part of the conspiracy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because a top of the second tier QB is projected to throw for over 5,200 yards and 52 TDs.

 

 

A projection. Cool. You don't see many of those in sport.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a hard time believing that professional athletes would purposely go along with "tanking" a season. I can understand fans not disapproving of it if they thought there was a reward for doing so, though.

Players all have a pretty strong ego. None of them would purposely let other players beat them and make them look mediocre or worse.

 

 

I didn't think the players were knowing party to it. Playing bad QB's, changing QB's, bad game planning, bad practices, bad play calling, bad decision making and so on. You have to love "they almost blew it" philosophy. Lets not forget how much these very same fans were loving the whole Suck for Luck campaign at the time and now they're trying to do a complete 180.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

And people can say what they like about Brady.

 

We love our fruity QB and make fun of him for that stuff too. Not sure people actually realize that outside of NE? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't think the players were knowing party to it. Playing bad QB's, changing QB's, bad game planning, bad practices, bad play calling, bad decision making and so on. You have to love "they almost blew it" philosophy. Lets not forget how much these very same fans were loving the whole Suck for Luck campaign at the time and now they're trying to do a complete 180.

So who did know about it? Just Irsay? "Hey, Polian, Caldwell, since Peyton's gone for the year, come up with the worst team you can possibly make! Oh yeah, and for forever ruining your images to the rest of the NFL, I'm gonna fire you two as well! Fun!"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your comments on Irsay's probable feelings I think are right on. He was very tired of seeing Luck being hit so often. Plus he for sure thad some pent up OL frustrations from all the Polian blunders attempts at fixing it. I think the Denver game was a result of everything being "off." The offense for sure had not jelled yet. Probably needed more pre season reps. The offensive philosophy appeared to be as you say ... in no man's land and Luck did not play his best. As far as Grigs , man tough to say. When you have that much money to spend in two years , you are going to have some bad signings for sure. Just the nature of the beast. One poster mentions the loss of Mathis . I think if you put Mathis and Arthur Jones on the field right now , you have something pretty acceptable. Although he can be faulted for not having developed a better pass rush minus a 33-34 year old guy. He has at least stopped what was the awful nightmare your team gave to us in January. Put Jones on the field and I don't think teams can cram the ball down our throats anymore.

We don't have Blount anymore either to cram the ball down your throats. I really wish Bill ponied up for him. Our O has been horrible inside the 10 and Blount was automatic from there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't think the players were knowing party to it. 

The players would need to be a part of it.  that's why I don't think it would happen.  No matter how bad a team may be, they don't go out there with the intent to lose. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We love our fruity QB and make fun of him for that stuff too. Not sure people actually realize that outside of NE? 

Brady is the GOAT and likes to hold goats. ;)

 

tom+brady+holding+a+goat+photoshoot.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a hard time believing that professional athletes would purposely go along with "tanking" a season. I can understand fans not disapproving of it if they thought there was a reward for doing so, though.

Players all have a pretty strong ego. None of them would purposely let other players beat them and make them look mediocre or worse.

 

You do realize that the NBA has a weighted lottery right? . . . and there is a reason for this . . .

 

Regarding your second paragraph, for some of the players who will be with the teams the following year that realize that finishing 8-8 and 2-14 is basically the same thing, your season ends at the end of the season, the thought of going 2-14 and the chance of having a player walk in the room that might take you personally to the promise land is more promising that seeing someone who is just a high round draft pick on the OL . . . at that point 2-14 might very well sound pleasant to some . . . sacrifice now for the future . . .  

 

In the 1983-1984 hockey season the New Jersey Devils and Pittsburgh Penguins were vying for the last place in the league and some guy named Mario Lemieux was waiting 1st overall in the upcoming draft . . . the Penguins starting goalie go a hang nail or something, I forget, but they sent him to the minors for repairs and he stated there a month while a the minor league goalie started and they ended up in last place . . . the same scenario occurred with the late 90s Spurs which allowed them to be in place to draft Tim Duncan, and in both cases the rest is history .  . .  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So who did know about it? Just Irsay? "Hey, Polian, Caldwell, since Peyton's gone for the year, come up with the worst team you can possibly make! Oh yeah, and for forever ruining your images to the rest of the NFL, I'm gonna fire you two as well! Fun!"

The job was half done by just keeping Caldwell on the sidelines. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You do realize that the NBA has a weighted lottery right? . . . and there is a reason for this . . .

 

 

The NBA draft lottery has nothing to do with the NFL.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The NBA draft lottery has nothing to do with the NFL.  

 

Yes but it has to do with your post regarding the difficulty in your belief that professional athletes tank for a reason . . . I mentioned a few things illustrating that it can happen with professional athletes, one in which a league has professional athletes and taken action to stop it, and a few others involving teams with professional athletes . . .

 

not really sure why you think my post is not relevant to yours . . .   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dear Colts fans. Stop taking the bait. These few rogue posters have no clue whether we tanked or not. They are just jealous their great run is coming to an end, and ours continues forever and ever.

Yours,

Suck for Luck Campaign Manager.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

. . . I got a question to ask of all of those that think that Andrew Luck is great and that he has all of these new players that he has to elevate to wins games . . . and the whole the revival thingie in Indy . . .

 

in 2007 the Pats went 16-0 and thereafter went 11-5 with Matt Cassel . . . they still had some players from the early part of the decade that "carried" Brady to those rings  . . .

 

. . . so 2013 comes along see, and from best recollection, only Vince Wilfork (who was injury last year), Logan Mankins (who was traded this year), Steve Gostkowski, and Tom Brady remain from that season and thus 49 members of the roster are new . . . so last year (and only one WR returning from the year prior) Tom Brady and the Pats are the #2 seed in AFC and with a 7th round converted college QB from Kent State as the #1 WR they make it all the way to the AFCCG and make it to deep in the 4th quarter looking at a 2 pt conversion attempt to make it a one score game against one of the most prolific offenses in history and our D can't stop nose bleed that day . . .  

 

. . . so if you guys could help me out with this . . . What exactly am I to conclude from Tom Brady's contribution to the 2013 team that went that far but only have 4 players from the 2007 team?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

. . . I got a question to ask of all of those that think that Andrew Luck is great and that he has all of these new players that he has to elevate to wins games . . . and the whole the revival thingie in Indy . . .

in 2007 the Pats went 16-0 and thereafter went 11-5 with Matt Cassel . . . they still had some players from the early part of the decade that "carried" Brady to those rings . . .

. . . so 2013 comes along see, and from best recollection, only Vince Wilfork (who was injury last year), Logan Mankins (who was traded this year), Steve Gostkowski, and Tom Brady remain from that season and thus 49 members of the roster are new . . . so last year (and only one WR returning from the year prior) Tom Brady and the Pats are the #2 seed in AFC and with a 7th round converted college QB from Kent State as the #1 WR they make it all the way to the AFCCG and make it to deep in the 4th quarter looking at a 2 pt conversion attempt to make it a one score game against one of the most prolific offenses in history and our D can't stop nose bleed that day . . .

. . . so if you guys could help me out with this . . . What exactly am I to conclude from Tom Brady's contribution to the 2013 team that went that far but only have 4 players from the 2007 team?

What does any of that have to do with this thread? But to answer your question, brady is an all time great. Him putting the team on his back and carrying them isn't a real surprise

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes but it has to do with your post regarding the difficulty in your belief that professional athletes tank for a reason . . . I mentioned a few things illustrating that it can happen with professional athletes, one in which a league has professional athletes and taken action to stop it, and a few others involving teams with professional athletes . . .

 

not really sure why you think my post is not relevant to yours . . .  

 

 

I touched on the weighted lottery and how the NBA was indeed tanking games. This was happening mostly when great talents like Durrant and Lebron were in the draft class. I found an article some might enjoy and have the the link below. However .. the NFL is much different than basketball for the following reasons.

 

1) It's a 16 game schedule and not 82 like the NBA. Teams have just 8 home games rather than 41 . So way more important to put a good product on the field. Can you imagine paying huge money for 50 yard line seats and seeing your team bench say A. Rodgers and playing a old broke down clipboard holder ? Much different if you are suffering through a long dismal season and probably not going to the empty arena anyway.

 

2) Way easier to just insert your "second five " and give you starters a rest at the perfect times. Nothing much ca be said if the Celtics pulled Paul Pierce out of a bunch of late season games saying that after that long year he's wearing down. How would it look if the Giants pulled Eli Manning and Cruz out and said " these guys getting a little tired after playing those first 8 games." Just can't do the same thing in football. This is pretty much the only way you can legit tank games . Put guys in that are less talented than your starters. Very easy to do in pro basketball as older guys have reduced minutes to begin with and it is a long season. 

 

3) Along the same lines but a little different. You state that you need to take a look at some younger players to see if they can help going forward or should just be cut. Here again , you can't really go nuts with this in the NFL . You just don't bench a solid starter to look at a back up. In the NBA , it's easier to get these guys on the floor without being as obvious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What does any of that have to do with this thread? But to answer your question, brady is an all time great. Him putting the team on his back and carrying them isn't a real surprise

 

Earlier in the thread there we a lot of people stating that Luck is better than Wilson because what he has to work with and that there are not a lot of players left from the earlier team (and thus some can not make the argument that part of the team that always won have some carry over players) . . . and that one can make an argument that Luck is the reason for the recent success and not his teammates and an attempt was made to support this point by saying everyone around Luck is new . . . I was just making a point that other teams have new players too, like NE, and Seattle, and although the QB is great, one still needs to recognize that teammates help even though they may not have an apparent resume behind them . . . that is all . . .  

 

I understand you all love Luck and his is great and very likely will still be great for years to come and has the pedigree to do so . . . but he, and other young QBs, still need to prove this over time, roster roll over, roster changes due to QB prime career contracts and so on . . . we see what the next few years bring . . . but the revival talk was a bit over the top . . .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Earlier in the thread there we a lot of people stating that Luck is better than Wilson because what he has to work with and that there are not a lot of players left from the earlier team (and thus some can not make the argument that part of the team that always won have some carry over players) . . . and that one can make an argument that Luck is the reason for the recent success and not his teammates and an attempt was made to support this point by saying everyone around Luck is new . . . I was just making a point that other teams have new players too, like NE, and Seattle, and although the QB is great, one still needs to recognize that teammates help even though they may not have an apparent resume behind them . . . that is all . . .

I understand you all love Luck and his is great and very likely will still be great for years to come and has the pedigree to do so . . . but he, and other young QBs, still need to prove this over time, roster roll over, roster changes due to QB prime career contracts and so on . . . we see what the next few years bring . . . but the revival talk was a bit over the top . . .

Not many teams have been as fortunate to replace an all time great and make the playoffs back to back years afterwards

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes but it has to do with your post regarding the difficulty in your belief that professional athletes tank for a reason . . . I mentioned a few things illustrating that it can happen with professional athletes, one in which a league has professional athletes and taken action to stop it, and a few others involving teams with professional athletes . . .

 

not really sure why you think my post is not relevant to yours . . .

I think there's a difference in a sport with non guaranteed contracts and a sixteen game season and a league with 100% guaranteed contracts with a season that's more than 100 games long.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Earlier in the thread there we a lot of people stating that Luck is better than Wilson because what he has to work with and that there are not a lot of players left from the earlier team (and thus some can not make the argument that part of the team that always won have some carry over players) . . . and that one can make an argument that Luck is the reason for the recent success and not his teammates and an attempt was made to support this point by saying everyone around Luck is new . . . I was just making a point that other teams have new players too, like NE, and Seattle, and although the QB is great, one still needs to recognize that teammates help even though they may not have an apparent resume behind them . . . that is all . . .  

 

I understand you all love Luck and his is great and very likely will still be great for years to come and has the pedigree to do so . . . but he, and other young QBs, still need to prove this over time, roster roll over, roster changes due to QB prime career contracts and so on . . . we see what the next few years bring . . . but the revival talk was a bit over the top . . .

How does that relate to whether or not the Colts intentionally tanked a season?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't read the whole thread.

 

Luck is far more better than Wilson.

 

First year - played most of the season with no head coach - 11 games won

2nd year-  lots of players injured, no Reggie Wayne - 11 games won

 

No defense, a blah running game. Luck is carrying the team on his back and did so for the last 2 years

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think there's a difference in a sport with non guaranteed contracts and a sixteen game season and a league with 100% guaranteed contracts with a season that's more than 100 games long.

On point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The players would need to be a part of it.  that's why I don't think it would happen.  No matter how bad a team may be, they don't go out there with the intent to lose. 

 

I think there's a difference in a sport with non guaranteed contracts and a sixteen game season and a league with 100% guaranteed contracts with a season that's more than 100 games long.

 

I give you grief when I think you're being ridiculous, so I'll give you credit when I think you're on point. Good posts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hear yah . . . I was not advocating necessarily that Wilson has past Luck, but just have been making points of why the original article may not be off base and that there may be some, perhaps not the majority, that think one QB's resume to date is better than another's QBs . . . who knows maybe in a few years Dalton will be the head of the class . . .I am kind of rooting for Tannehill, you know AFC East pride thingy . . . but it happens, it what makes for good discussion . . . kind of like power rankings, kind of do not mean anything, but folks like to talk about them . . . I am not a big power rankings guy, but I go enjoy a good round of who does one think is the better RB, QB and so on . . .

 

The trouble that I have when looking at the pedigree of the 2011 team, is that from what is see, and you guys can correct me if I am wrong, is the roster of the team was closer to the 2010 team that went 10-6 with a lot of injuries, so I use that team as a basis . . . I know Manning was hurt, but I am not sure what other injuries or players leaving between the two years '10 and '11, so if you understand you need to factor in that '10 had injuries, the 10-6 team roster was a tad stronger than that . . . so you take your starting QB out, drop 3-5 wins and you are down to 6-8 wins (if you drop down from 12 had they been health the year prior) . . . so that is where I get my figure . . .

 

I understand what all you are saying about the roster roll over . . . but it two sided coin . . . if some players left, what players replace them . . .is the player better or worse . . . look at Denver, they lost Decker but gain Sanders, so its kind of a wash, , we can not say they lost Decker to they are weaker . . . and second, you guys mentioned that Seattle has gotten better players around Wilson, and that is why he contributes less . .. but can not the same be said of Luck, that the additions to the Colts have helped that team and it is those additions, along with Luck, that has them close to the same level of 2010 and before . . . if one is going to praise a young player for team A, then the same could be said for Team B

 

Its kind of like the 2001 Pats and the history that followed . . . they were 5-11 they year prior and 0-2 in 2001 and remember a friend of mine saying they were done once Bledsoe went done and just done in general not really going anywhere . . . they ended up going 11-3 the rest of the way and won the SB.  Surely Brady had a lot to do with it and should be given credit, but we did get some players in FA and draft, Seymour, Vrabel, Cox, etc . .  than helped in the cause . . . so I can not give all the credit of the turn around to Brady . .  some sure but not all . . .

In regard to your third paragraph, I agree that the Colts have made additions to the theam that have helped Luck. Their Oline and Dline are better than they were two years ago, IMO. However, I do not believe that they are as good as the Seahawks, you may disagree and that is fine. Also, I do not believe that the Colts have the depth that the Seahawks have. Most of this is due to the lack of talent level in Indy at the end of the Polian era. As I have said before, I think that the differences in talent levels is decreasing but the Seahawks still have an overall stronger team.

I think I understand where you are coming from with regard to Luck vs Wilson. I do not mind if someone thinks Wilson is a little better than Luck or vice versa, but when a poster is trying to say that one is vastly superior to the other......well I do not believe there is any rational case for that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How does that relate to whether or not the Colts intentionally tanked a season?

 

It relates to the defense that you were presenting that professional athletes/teams do not want to tank . . . my point was illustrating how it happens in professional sports and since it has happened it could happen again . . . and when one take an honest look at the 2011 colts season with the backdrop of events, the historical likelihood of that events occurring around the season, it is not a stretch for one to have an opinion that the colts tanked in 2011 . . . and those who have the opinion are not going to by the defense that athletes do not tank when they have tanked . . . and at least one league, the NBA, has taken actions to curb the impact of teams racing for the #1 seed . . .  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I touched on the weighted lottery and how the NBA was indeed tanking games. This was happening mostly when great talents like Durrant and Lebron were in the draft class. I found an article some might enjoy and have the the link below. However .. the NFL is much different than basketball for the following reasons.

 

1) It's a 16 game schedule and not 82 like the NBA. Teams have just 8 home games rather than 41 . So way more important to put a good product on the field. Can you imagine paying huge money for 50 yard line seats and seeing your team bench say A. Rodgers and playing a old broke down clipboard holder ? Much different if you are suffering through a long dismal season and probably not going to the empty arena anyway.

 

2) Way easier to just insert your "second five " and give you starters a rest at the perfect times. Nothing much ca be said if the Celtics pulled Paul Pierce out of a bunch of late season games saying that after that long year he's wearing down. How would it look if the Giants pulled Eli Manning and Cruz out and said " these guys getting a little tired after playing those first 8 games." Just can't do the same thing in football. This is pretty much the only way you can legit tank games . Put guys in that are less talented than your starters. Very easy to do in pro basketball as older guys have reduced minutes to begin with and it is a long season. 

 

3) Along the same lines but a little different. You state that you need to take a look at some younger players to see if they can help going forward or should just be cut. Here again , you can't really go nuts with this in the NFL . You just don't bench a solid starter to look at a back up. In the NBA , it's easier to get these guys on the floor without being as obvious.

 

I am not sure what the sport has to do with difficulty of tanking or not . . . or the effect on the fans . . . in the end of the day one still needs be in the race for last place . . . and it does not have to happen at the start of the season, although some start at the beginning of the season . . . if I recall the Spurs benched there players early in the season . . .

 

with respect to fans being upset of they pay a lot to money for tickets, I not really sure what the difference is between the amount of games . . . when a team is heading to the bottom of the barrel does it really matter of you pay $2000 to see 8 games or $2000 to see 41 games? . . . I think the respective fan basis will be equally upset . . .

 

The NBA lottery came in a long time before James, but you point is correct, an effort to get the good talent . . . I did not see the article, perhaps you forgot to post it . . . no worries . . .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In regard to your third paragraph, I agree that the Colts have made additions to the theam that have helped Luck. Their Oline and Dline are better than they were two years ago, IMO. However, I do not believe that they are as good as the Seahawks, you may disagree and that is fine. Also, I do not believe that the Colts have the depth that the Seahawks have. Most of this is due to the lack of talent level in Indy at the end of the Polian era. As I have said before, I think that the differences in talent levels is decreasing but the Seahawks still have an overall stronger team.

I think I understand where you are coming from with regard to Luck vs Wilson. I do not mind if someone thinks Wilson is a little better than Luck or vice versa, but when a poster is trying to say that one is vastly superior to the other......well I do not believe there is any rational case for that.

 

no clearly one can not make a case that either is vastly stronger than the other . . . I hear yah on your sentiment that the Seahawks have a stronger team around Wilson . . . I think time will tell after each gets their prime year contracts and the lost of players via salary cap issues or retirement and how it effects their teams and if they can keep on winning . . . as it stands now Flacco is going through this phase and it is his turn to see what he can do with the team around him as Brady and Manning have had to do . . .

 

but we will get more data points once Luck and Wilson have more years under their belts and have gone through roster turnovers . . .

 

the great news for you guys is that you have the potential of having a QB who will be in the top 5 of their class for a good 10-12 years from now and must be a great feeling . . . :thmup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not sure what the sport has to do with difficulty of tanking or not . . . or the effect on the fans . . . in the end of the day one still needs be in the race for last place . . . and it does not have to happen at the start of the season, although some start at the beginning of the season . . . if I recall the Spurs benched there players early in the season . . .

 

with respect to fans being upset of they pay a lot to money for tickets, I not really sure what the difference is between the amount of games . . . when a team is heading to the bottom of the barrel does it really matter of you pay $2000 to see 8 games or $2000 to see 41 games? . . . I think the respective fan basis will be equally upset . . .

 

The NBA lottery came in a long time before James, but you point is correct, an effort to get the good talent . . . I did not see the article, perhaps you forgot to post it . . . no worries . . .

 

 

I did know that the weighted lottery was well before Labron , but there was talk of Cleveland tanking regardless of that. I found the aricle....

 

 

http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/40780/when-tankers-tell-the-truth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

. . . I got a question to ask of all of those that think that Andrew Luck is great and that he has all of these new players that he has to elevate to wins games . . . and the whole the revival thingie in Indy . . .

 

in 2007 the Pats went 16-0 and thereafter went 11-5 with Matt Cassel . . . they still had some players from the early part of the decade that "carried" Brady to those rings  . . .

 

. . . so 2013 comes along see, and from best recollection, only Vince Wilfork (who was injury last year), Logan Mankins (who was traded this year), Steve Gostkowski, and Tom Brady remain from that season and thus 49 members of the roster are new . . . so last year (and only one WR returning from the year prior) Tom Brady and the Pats are the #2 seed in AFC and with a 7th round converted college QB from Kent State as the #1 WR they make it all the way to the AFCCG and make it to deep in the 4th quarter looking at a 2 pt conversion attempt to make it a one score game against one of the most prolific offenses in history and our D can't stop nose bleed that day . . .  

 

. . . so if you guys could help me out with this . . . What exactly am I to conclude from Tom Brady's contribution to the 2013 team that went that far but only have 4 players from the 2007 team?

What does any of that have to do with this thread? But to answer your question, brady is an all time great. Him putting the team on his back and carrying them isn't a real surprise

What does any of that have to do with this thread? But to answer your question, brady is an all time great. Him putting the team on his back and carrying them isn't a real surprise

Actually, neither one of those posts has anything to do with the topic of this thread. The thread was about what a Denver CB said about Wilson and Luck. Brady wasn't in the conversation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I did know that the weighted lottery was well before Labron , but there was talk of Cleveland tanking regardless of that. I found the aricle....

 

 

http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/40780/when-tankers-tell-the-truth

Again, there's a big difference in the NBA and the NFL. If the NFL had, 12 to 15 players on each team and had guaranteed contracts for players and played a 120 game season, I could see a team tanking a season. NFL teams don't intentionally lose. Players don't play to lose and coaches don't coach to lose. It's not in their economic best interests to tank a season and lose.

A coach needs to consistently coach poorly to lose and players need to consistently play poorly, or make mistakes in critical times to lose. It's not in anyone's best interests to lose. Intentionally or otherwise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, neither one of those posts has anything to do with the topic of this thread. The thread was about what a Denver CB said about Wilson and Luck. Brady wasn't in the conversation.

 

I just brought Brady into the discussion as an example of how perhaps we may not be able to credit everything to a single person and we need to give more credit to his teammates for the overall success of the team . . . one effective way that I find to help others see things in a certain light is to present them with a fact pattern in which they see that light . . . earlier in this thread there was more than one poster that was giving a great deal of credit to the colts success to Luck and trying to support this by saying he has all new players around him that he has to lift up and so on . . . a very QB centric argument . . .

 

As I think some colts fans will tend to give some of Brady's success to his team justifiably so, I just wanted to make a point that Brady has a whole new set of teammates and that both I and the most of poster here will agree that the pats recent success (13-3 last year) has to due with Brady but also has a lot to due with new teammates . . .  as such, once we view Luck and Wilson in a QB discussion we need to view them in the same manner as we view other QBs . . . and before we set up a revival meeting for Luck we must remember that we have earlier view QBs in light of their teammates . . .  

 

I am trying to be brief . . . how am I going? :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again, there's a big difference in the NBA and the NFL. If the NFL had, 12 to 15 players on each team and had guaranteed contracts for players and played a 120 game season, I could see a team tanking a season. NFL teams don't intentionally lose. Players don't play to lose and coaches don't coach to lose. It's not in their economic best interests to tank a season and lose.

A coach needs to consistently coach poorly to lose and players need to consistently play poorly, or make mistakes in critical times to lose. It's not in anyone's best interests to lose. Intentionally or otherwise.

 

I hear yah . . . but for the most part any tanking idea comes from the team . . . I don't think any coach or player will decide on their own to tank . . . they would be just following orders . . . and as such there would be less of a fear, if any, that they would be fired or cut as it the team telling them to do it . . .  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again, there's a big difference in the NBA and the NFL. If the NFL had, 12 to 15 players on each team and had guaranteed contracts for players and played a 120 game season, I could see a team tanking a season. NFL teams don't intentionally lose. Players don't play to lose and coaches don't coach to lose. It's not in their economic best interests to tank a season and lose.

A coach needs to consistently coach poorly to lose and players need to consistently play poorly, or make mistakes in critical times to lose. It's not in anyone's best interests to lose. Intentionally or otherwise.

 

 

 

Huge difference between the two. So much easier in the NBA to tank . You just put the second team in at the wrong time and leave them a bit long. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Huge difference between the two. So much easier in the NBA to tank . You just put the second team in at the wrong time and leave them a bit long. 

Are you saying tanking has never happened in other pro sports?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you saying tanking has never happened in other pro sports?

 

Probably not in baseball , yes in hockey , bowling no , golf no ... does that cover them all ? My point is very easy to do in basketball because you have 12 guys on a team and there is a huge difference in talent between the first 3 guys and the last 3 guys. When you sub packages in and out of the game , it gives you tremendous leverage to tank a game. In football , if you pulled your QB and put the backup in when the game was still winnable , you would be hung by your groin. Just saying very hard to tank multiple games in football. Has there ever been a team that did subtle things in the last 3-4 games to improve their draft position ? Probably... But very difficult in pro football to tank say the last 7-8 games. Reason I say that is you pretty much have to play your best guys in football and these guys are not going to jeopardize their future by playing poorly . Yeah .. I guess you can't put a bad game plan in , but wouldn't one of those 10-12 coaches on the staff say something like "coach Jack really seemed to get stupid the last 6 weeks of the season." 

 

Bottom line . Was very easy to do in hoops and was done. Football.. not so easily done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Probably not in baseball , yes in hockey , bowling no , golf no ... does that cover them all ? My point is very easy to do in basketball because you have 12 guys on a team and there is a huge difference in talent between the first 3 guys and the last 3 guys. When you sub packages in and out of the game , it gives you tremendous leverage to tank a game. In football , if you pulled your QB and put the backup in when the game was still winnable , you would be hung by your groin. Just saying very hard to tank multiple games in football. Has there ever been a team that did subtle things in the last 3-4 games to improve their draft position ? Probably... But very difficult in pro football to tank say the last 7-8 games. Reason I say that is you pretty much have to play your best guys in football and these guys are not going to jeopardize their future by playing poorly . Yeah .. I guess you can't put a bad game plan in , but wouldn't one of those 10-12 coaches on the staff say something like "coach Jack really seemed to get stupid the last 6 weeks of the season."

Bottom line . Was very easy to do in hoops and was done. Football.. not so easily done.

especially considering the entire staff was fired at seasons end

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

especially considering the entire staff was fired at seasons end

 

 

Yeah , as far as the Colts tanking , it's hard for anyone to say anything but "they tanked." Then the say (only thing they can come up with) it was done by Polian not benching the only guy (his guy besides) that knew the offense and staring some Russian stiff a couple games earlier. He was rewarded for this by Irsay kicking him to the curb. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Probably not in baseball , yes in hockey , bowling no , golf no ... does that cover them all ? My point is very easy to do in basketball because you have 12 guys on a team and there is a huge difference in talent between the first 3 guys and the last 3 guys. When you sub packages in and out of the game , it gives you tremendous leverage to tank a game. In football , if you pulled your QB and put the backup in when the game was still winnable , you would be hung by your groin. Just saying very hard to tank multiple games in football. Has there ever been a team that did subtle things in the last 3-4 games to improve their draft position ? Probably... But very difficult in pro football to tank say the last 7-8 games. Reason I say that is you pretty much have to play your best guys in football and these guys are not going to jeopardize their future by playing poorly . Yeah .. I guess you can't put a bad game plan in , but wouldn't one of those 10-12 coaches on the staff say something like "coach Jack really seemed to get stupid the last 6 weeks of the season." 

 

Bottom line . Was very easy to do in hoops and was done. Football.. not so easily done.

Gotcha. But still there is the possibility to do it in football or any other sport. I actually think it goes on far more than we realize. Owners and GMs are smart people. They know how much "the guy" will not only help them win but also be a marketing gold mind especially in a sport like football which is the most popular.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Thread of the Week

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • I still have a hard time believing this. Rest in peace Kobe. Prayers for Kobe's and the other victim's families of this awful tragedy.
    • Any one else catch the parts about Chad Kelly. About how he has to show them they can trust him off the field? I’m not pushing for Chad Kelly as our next Qb, but I found that part interesting. Almost makes me wonder IF he’s not gonna get his shot at the starting job regardless of FA or the Draft results.
    • Burrow was not thought of this highly early(when Ballard was rumored to like Herbert and Love). It was kind of an avalanche that was gaining more and more mass and power the more games got played. I don't think it was until November-December that people started talking about Burrow as a no. 1 pick. He just never had that body of work before this year and a lot of his most impressive games and against best opponents were at the end of the year.        I've heard Brady thrown around, but no idea if there is anything real behind those rumors. The rumors say that they are having hard time attracting any fans to their games and their owners think getting a legend like Brady to play for several years for them might jump start their new fanbase in LA. No idea whether to believe this or not. 
    • To me being a boom or bust is kind of a plus for a QB, because the worst you can be is mediocre once that rookie contract comes to an end. I would prefer for whoever we draft to be either great or horrible and for us to know relatively quickly so we can either invest in him or move on quickly. This is part of the appeal with Love for me. The things he needs to improve are heavily coaching based and I think we will have a good idea of where on the spectrum he will end up pretty quickly. For example - if you draft him and he's not ready to start by year 2, this is a red flag and you might start looking for another one. If 2 off-seasons and 1 in-season period are not enough for your coaching staff to get him ready you either have made a mistake with the draft pick or with your coaching staff and I do have good trust in the coaching staff so... 
    • For me the tiers are more important the the specific ranking... I rank players within a tier very similarly and even though I would have preferences within them, I don't feel strongly enough to argue one over the other.    Tier 1(sell the farm for him - i.e. multiple 1sts, multiple day 2 picks, etc) Burrow   Tier 2 (trade a significant asset for him - i.e. a future 1st round pick) Tua(if I have medical guarantees he'd be alright health-wise)   Tier 3 (trade a medium level asset for him(i.e. a second, a third...) or take him at #13) Love Herbert Tua(if our medical staff cannot give you any guarantees whatsoever either way -for example, there were some reports that it might be too early before the draft to tell whether he will be good or not)   Tier 4 (second round) Eason Fromm     Tier 5 (third-fourth round) Gordon(have to do more work on him, might change his ranking) Hurts   Tier 6 (round 5-7) Tua(if the medicals come bad and there is high risk of reinjury/retirement/not full recovery/etc.) Tyler Huntley Nate Stanley     I'm still watching some QBs so that's not my final ranking. 
  • Members

    • MikeCurtis

      MikeCurtis 1,742

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • bWild

      bWild 57

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Nickster

      Nickster 329

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • pacolts56

      pacolts56 3,713

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Fluke_33

      Fluke_33 1,047

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • mirobi48

      mirobi48 34

      New Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Colt.45

      Colt.45 87

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Kirie89

      Kirie89 22

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • indykmj

      indykmj 1

      Rookie
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • stitches

      stitches 6,920

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
×
×
  • Create New...