Listen up Tankers

[Lucky Colts Fan]

Take off your tin-foil hat and listen to reason for a minute.  If you really sit down and think about it, tanking makes absolutely no sense.  There are no guarantees that tanking is going to benefit the team, at all.

 

First, let's start with your best-case scenario:  Tanking the season for a top pick that turns out to be a HoF player.  I can see how having the #1 pick in a draft with someone like Manning could lift the franchise out of the basement.  (You could argue that the Colts having the #1 pick in 1998 and 2012 has kept us relevant).  I can see how teams like the Jets, Bill, or Dolphins (knowing they don't have a chance against NE right now) might be willing to tank right now, hoping they get a Manning-type player to lift their franchise out of the basement once Brady/BB retire.  But let's think about how effective this strategy is.  The Colts might be the best example of a #1 pick carrying a team to the promised land, but we only won ONE SB with Manning, and think about everything else that had to go right for the Colts to win that SB.  I think Stafford on the Lions might be the most recent example of a franchise player bringing a team out of the basement.  But has Detroit won a SB with Stafford?  No.  Who keeps winning SBs?  Good teams that tend to pick near the end of each round every year.  Teams that would never even be typed in the same sentence as the word "tank"...  No guarantees that a #1 or top-5 pick = SB.

 

Second, let's look at the worst-case scenario:  Tanking the season for a top pick that turns out to be a bust.  There are zero guarantees regarding how successful a draft pick is going to be in the NFL.  We've seen plenty of examples over the years of top-5, even #1-overall picks, that end up being busts.  You can have the top pick in every round, but if you don't draft well, the tanking was all for naught.  You're just solidifying your reputation as a BAD team.  Even if you make good draft choices at the top of every round, there are still no guarantees that these top picks = SB.

 

Lastly, let's look at the reality of the NFL.  How many "elite" players are needed on a team for them to be serious SB contenders?  At least a handful, right?  At least two on offense and at least two on defense are probably the minimum.  So let's say you need at least 4-5 elite players that you can only draft in the top-5.  That means you would have to tank 4-5 seasons in a row to get those elite players, and THEN the serious work would begin to build around those elite players and hopefully find a coach that can win a championship.  (Because you know no coach, even BB, would keep his job after being one of the 5 worst teams 4-5 years in a row)  So you're talking about being BAD, on purpose, for an extended period of time, HOPING that you can eventually become GOOD for an extended period of time.  This is the definition of instability, and all you're going to do is burn through coaches and players during the "bad" times, while earning a reputation as a "bad" team.  Good luck finding willing free agents for a bad team in the midwest with its bad winter weather...

 

Like I said, there are ZERO guarantees.  So, instead of giving up on a season before it starts, we fight, we battle, we claw our way to the top, with or without Luck, with or without Chuck, with or without the bandwagon fans, with or without support from the outside.  You don't have to be wearing expensive shoes, or any shoes at all to climb a mountain.

 

[crazycolt1]

Tanking is for losers with loser mentality.

[mikey287]

A) Wrong forum

B) In almost every case, professional teams do not tank for a variety of reasons. Most or all of which are readily apparent to those that have worked in sports at any moderately-organized level or higher. 

C) Don't worry about it. We're going to play to win, even if it doesn't look like it sometimes.

[crazycolt1]

6 minutes ago, mikey287 said:

A) Wrong forum

B) In almost every case, professional teams do not tank for a variety of reasons. Most or all of which are readily apparent to those that have worked in sports at any moderately-organized level or higher. 

C) Don't worry about it. We're going to play to win, even if it doesn't look like it sometimes.

What do you mean wrong forum? There have been those who have brought up tanking for the sake of a better draft pick. It has even been brought up with a finger at the team saying they are tanking.

[mikey287]

I assumed you were talking about the Colts...then again, I only read the first paragraph and then skimmed the rest, saw the Colts mentioned, and assumed...my apologies...

 

If your point was that tanking doesn't really exist in professional sports then you are generally correct...one noteworthy exception is the 1983 Penguins...but in general, it doesn't happen and all smart sports fans know it...

[Lucky Colts Fan]

14 minutes ago, mikey287 said:

A) Wrong forum

 

It's more than just a Colts topic right now.  Like I said, some people are saying everyone in the AFC East is tanking and stocking picks and talent for when Brady retires.  Makes sense I guess, but like @crazycolt1 said, it's a losers mentality.

 

The Jets, Bills and Dolphins should do us all a favor and try their best to beat the crud out of Brady until he does retire. 

 

But the Colts tanking makes even less sense in my opinion. 

[JimJaime]

The Dolphins were a playoff team last year and are predicted be one again this year.  So I don't see them tanking.

 

the Jets well ya they are poised to tank.

 

the Bills have yet again another HC and GM and seem be trying instill yet another new culture over there. They have some legit good players but McCoy will be injured by mid season as they have no WR and a mediocre QB. (A good D so they probably end up 8-8)

 

and why would the colts Tank? Are you guys that bad this year? I would think any team with Luck at QB has a good chance win a weak division.

[Lucky Colts Fan]

9 minutes ago, mikey287 said:

one noteworthy exception is the 1983 Penguins

 

Tanking in the NBA or NHL might make more sense, but there's a lottery in the NBA, so there are still no guarantees.

 

That's basically my point.  There are no guarantees in sports, especially a league with as much parity as the NFL, so why not try to pull off a "miracle" season as perpetual underdogs?

[Lucky Colts Fan]

4 minutes ago, JimJaime said:

and why would the colts Tank? Are you guys that bad this year? I would think any team with Luck at QB has a good chance win a weak division.

 

Injuries have driven down the hope in this forum.  It also doesn't help that the "experts" in the media seem to be in agreement that the Colts are the 3rd best team in the AFC South.

 

Fans of the Colts, Jets, Bills, etc. are doing one of two things:  throwing in the towel and hoping for a high draft pick next year, or developing a chip on their shoulder.

 

There are also some who are actually remaining calm until the season actually starts to develop.  I just take issue with any fan wanting to tank a season before it even begins.  It might be different if it was week 15 and we were one of three or four teams that might get the top pick, but still... nobody should want to lose, especially since we haven't even lost a single game yet.

[Lucky Colts Fan]

*Mods - Now that I think about it, this probably should be in the Colts section.

[-JJ-]

Lol- this always comes up as if it's possible.

 

You cannot tank in the NFL. There are huge fines for it.

Nor do players want to- they are competitive.

[jameszeigler834]

2 hours ago, Lucky Colts Fan said:

Take off your tin-foil hat and listen to reason for a minute.  If you really sit down and think about it, tanking makes absolutely no sense.  There are no guarantees that tanking is going to benefit the team, at all.

 

First, let's start with your best-case scenario:  Tanking the season for a top pick that turns out to be a HoF player.  I can see how having the #1 pick in a draft with someone like Manning could lift the franchise out of the basement.  (You could argue that the Colts having the #1 pick in 1998 and 2012 has kept us relevant).  I can see how teams like the Jets, Bill, or Dolphins (knowing they don't have a chance against NE right now) might be willing to tank right now, hoping they get a Manning-type player to lift their franchise out of the basement once Brady/BB retire.  But let's think about how effective this strategy is.  The Colts might be the best example of a #1 pick carrying a team to the promised land, but we only won ONE SB with Manning, and think about everything else that had to go right for the Colts to win that SB.  I think Stafford on the Lions might be the most recent example of a franchise player bringing a team out of the basement.  But has Detroit won a SB with Stafford?  No.  Who keeps winning SBs?  Good teams that tend to pick near the end of each round every year.  Teams that would never even be typed in the same sentence as the word "tank"...  No guarantees that a #1 or top-5 pick = SB.

 

Second, let's look at the worst-case scenario:  Tanking the season for a top pick that turns out to be a bust.  There are zero guarantees regarding how successful a draft pick is going to be in the NFL.  We've seen plenty of examples over the years of top-5, even #1-overall picks, that end up being busts.  You can have the top pick in every round, but if you don't draft well, the tanking was all for naught.  You're just solidifying your reputation as a BAD team.  Even if you make good draft choices at the top of every round, there are still no guarantees that these top picks = SB.

 

Lastly, let's look at the reality of the NFL.  How many "elite" players are needed on a team for them to be serious SB contenders?  At least a handful, right?  At least two on offense and at least two on defense are probably the minimum.  So let's say you need at least 4-5 elite players that you can only draft in the top-5.  That means you would have to tank 4-5 seasons in a row to get those elite players, and THEN the serious work would begin to build around those elite players and hopefully find a coach that can win a championship.  (Because you know no coach, even BB, would keep his job after being one of the 5 worst teams 4-5 years in a row)  So you're talking about being BAD, on purpose, for an extended period of time, HOPING that you can eventually become GOOD for an extended period of time.  This is the definition of instability, and all you're going to do is burn through coaches and players during the "bad" times, while earning a reputation as a "bad" team.  Good luck finding willing free agents for a bad team in the midwest with its bad winter weather...

 

Like I said, there are ZERO guarantees.  So, instead of giving up on a season before it starts, we fight, we battle, we claw our way to the top, with or without Luck, with or without Chuck, with or without the bandwagon fans, with or without support from the outside.  You don't have to be wearing expensive shoes, or any shoes at all to climb a mountain.

 

If we did get a say first overall pick since we don't need a QB we could trade out of the pick get a so called kings ransom from it like the titans and the browns did.

[Synthetic]

2 hours ago, -JJ- said:

Lol- this always comes up as if it's possible.

 

You cannot tank in the NFL. There are huge fines for it.

Nor do players want to- they are competitive.

 

True here. You can tank in the NBA, but it's harder in the NFL. 

[PrincetonTiger]

3 minutes ago, Synthetic said:

 

True here. You can tank in the NBA, but it's harder in the NFL. 

Because of the The Lottery system the NBA uses tanking is not feasible 

[Synthetic]

12 minutes ago, PrincetonTiger said:

Because of the The Lottery system the NBA uses tanking is not feasible 

 

And yet teams still tank in there. Right now, the Atlanta Hawks are setting themselves up for full tank. The Lakers were doing it a few years ago, San Antonio had the most blatant one back in the 90's when they tanked to get Duncan. 

[PrincetonTiger]

2 minutes ago, Synthetic said:

 

And yet teams still tank in there. Right now, the Atlanta Hawks are setting themselves up for full tank. The Lakers were doing it a few years ago, San Antonio had the most blatant one back in the 90's when they tanked to get Duncan. 

Hasn't worked for the 76ers or maybe it was the terrible drafting 

[Synthetic]

4 minutes ago, PrincetonTiger said:

Hasn't worked for the 76ers or maybe it was the terrible drafting 

 

The Sixers are pretty hyped up right now with all their first round picks, so it might go their way. It definitely helped San Antonio when they got Duncan. 

[PrincetonTiger]

4 minutes ago, Synthetic said:

 

The Sixers are pretty hyped up right now with all their first round picks, so it might go their way. It definitely helped San Antonio when they got Duncan. 

It might but when you draft 3 C(2 coming of severe injuries) in 3 straight drafts their is a problem

[Jules]

17 minutes ago, Synthetic said:

 

And yet teams still tank in there. Right now, the Atlanta Hawks are setting themselves up for full tank. The Lakers were doing it a few years ago, San Antonio had the most blatant one back in the 90's when they tanked to get Duncan. 

 

In the NBA you can tank half the regular season and still win the East. Just ask Lebron how to do it.  

[PrincetonTiger]

3 minutes ago, Jules said:

 

In the NBA you can tank half the regular season and still win the East. Just ask Lebron how to do it.  

Ouch

[Jules]

On topic with this thread, I am kind of a fan at times of a good well done tank job that isn't too overly blatant looking but done with the right amount of flair and "woe is me we really suck" attitude.

 

A good tank job once in a while never hurt no one.  

 

I think the Suns this year were trying to tank too but ended up with the 4th pick. When they got the lottery ball for the 4th pick you heard some sighs and groans coming from the Suns people.  

[AZColt11]

Nobody will be tanking.  It just might be hard to tell at times.

[2006Coltsbestever]

10 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

Tanking is for losers with loser mentality.

I agree, I have been a since 1984 and there was only 1 time that I didn't care if we won and that was in 2011 once we got to 0-6. That is because Luck was there waiting. In 1997 I wasn't even rooting for tanking until late in the season with Manning there. Tanking makes 0 sense IMO because unless you have a franchise QB waiting at #1 like a Manning or Luck, the Draft is a crapshoot anyway.

[Jackie Daytona]

I thought this thread was going to be about the Pacers.....

[2006Coltsbestever]

9 hours ago, JimJaime said:

The Dolphins were a playoff team last year and are predicted be one again this year.  So I don't see them tanking.

 

the Jets well ya they are poised to tank.

 

the Bills have yet again another HC and GM and seem be trying instill yet another new culture over there. They have some legit good players but McCoy will be injured by mid season as they have no WR and a mediocre QB. (A good D so they probably end up 8-8)

 

and why would the colts Tank? Are you guys that bad this year? I would think any team with Luck at QB has a good chance win a weak division.

We aren't that bad if Luck is healthy. Luck's health just has everyone worried. We cant be any worse than last season and we still went 8-8. Our schedule is even easier this season on paper. Luck needs to gets healthy by week 3 or so, then I think people will calm down. There are some people in here though that want us to tank anyway because winning the SB is all that matters to them and we are very long shot to do so. I just hate tanking because I would rather set a winning culture. By the way unless you have the #1 pick and it's Manning or Luck or Elway for example, it is who you pick not where you pick in the Draft.

[2006Coltsbestever]

5 hours ago, Jules said:

On topic with this thread, I am kind of a fan at times of a good well done tank job that isn't too overly blatant looking but done with the right amount of flair and "woe is me we really suck" attitude.

 

A good tank job once in a while never hurt no one.  

 

I think the Suns this year were trying to tank too but ended up with the 4th pick. When they got the lottery ball for the 4th pick you heard some sighs and groans coming from the Suns people.  

I am not even 100% sure we tanked in 2011. We were an aging team and Peyton was out. Peyton carried our team for years and we looked lost without him. Painter was just awful.

[Jules]

2 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I am not even 100% sure we tanked in 2011. We were an aging team and Peyton was out. Peyton carried our team for years and we looked lost without him. Painter was just awful.

 

Yeah our teams were entirely dependent on Manning. So it kinda just was what it was back then. People acted like we had this awesome team that just "tanked". But even in 2010 the cracks showed IMO despite winning the division.

[2006Coltsbestever]

1 minute ago, Jules said:

 

Yeah our teams were entirely dependent on Manning. So it kinda just was what it was back then. People acted like we had this awesome team that just "tanked". But even in 2010 the cracks showed IMO despite winning the division.

Yeah I thought in 2009 we peaked as a team with that core (the Saints SB was our last chance at getting #2), after that players like Clark, Brackett, Saturday couldn't stay healthy. We won the Division in 2010 but like you said you could tell we wasn't even close to how we were in 2009.

[King Colt]

 " You don't have to be wearing expensive shoes, or any shoes at all to climb a mountain."

Oh yes you do!

[throwing BBZ]

How many days had you been up LCF?
In reality, a non issue. Go Colts!
 

[21isSuperman]

As someone who advocates tanking at times, I'll chime in here...

 

Regarding your best case scenario, I'd say your logic was flawed.  Your argument was essentially that since the Colts only won 1 Super Bowl with Manning, there's no point.  If that were the case, the number one pick wouldn't have the fanfare it does.  Number one picks can change organizations; that doesn't mean they will.  Tanking and getting the number one pick is simply a means of acquiring more talent for your team.  You still need coaches to develop that talent, you still need a GM who can build the roster, etc.  In a real "best case scenario" where everything goes perfectly, you tank and get a franchise QB.  Not only does that QB stabilize your team, but there are also other positive impacts, like big name free agents wanting to play with him, and maybe even taking a discount to do so.

 

Let's consider an alternative scenario where a team with a franchise QB (let's say the Colts, since some were saying the Colts should have done last year) decides to tank.  When draft time comes around and we have the number one overall pick, we can listen to any of the offers on the table.  In 2016, the Rams gave the Titans the 15th, 43rd, 45th, 76th picks, as well as the 5th and 100th picks in the 2017 draft in exchange for the 1st, 113th, and 177th picks in the 2016 draft.  Maybe a team would give us an offer like that.  If you already have your franchise QB and you still own the number one overall pick, you have tons of options to bring more talent to your team.

 

At the end of the day, tanking isn't a perfect strategy, but it can help you get up the future of your franchise and bring in a lot of talent.

[Lucky Colts Fan]

On 9/6/2017 at 3:48 PM, 21isSuperman said:

As someone who advocates tanking at times, I'll chime in here...

 

Regarding your best case scenario, I'd say your logic was flawed.  Your argument was essentially that since the Colts only won 1 Super Bowl with Manning, there's no point.  If that were the case, the number one pick wouldn't have the fanfare it does.  Number one picks can change organizations; that doesn't mean they will.  Tanking and getting the number one pick is simply a means of acquiring more talent for your team.  You still need coaches to develop that talent, you still need a GM who can build the roster, etc.  In a real "best case scenario" where everything goes perfectly, you tank and get a franchise QB.  Not only does that QB stabilize your team, but there are also other positive impacts, like big name free agents wanting to play with him, and maybe even taking a discount to do so.

 

Let's consider an alternative scenario where a team with a franchise QB (let's say the Colts, since some were saying the Colts should have done last year) decides to tank.  When draft time comes around and we have the number one overall pick, we can listen to any of the offers on the table.  In 2016, the Rams gave the Titans the 15th, 43rd, 45th, 76th picks, as well as the 5th and 100th picks in the 2017 draft in exchange for the 1st, 113th, and 177th picks in the 2016 draft.  Maybe a team would give us an offer like that.  If you already have your franchise QB and you still own the number one overall pick, you have tons of options to bring more talent to your team.

 

At the end of the day, tanking isn't a perfect strategy, but it can help you get up the future of your franchise and bring in a lot of talent.

 

I like the idea of extra draft-capital for Ballard to work with since we already have our franchise QB, but that's a conversation for when our SB hopes are officially done and we only have next off-season to look forward to.  Some fans are already calling for a tank-job before we've even lost a game yet.

 

We've seen crazy things happen in the NFL so any tank-talk right now is way too premature.

[Lucky Colts Fan]

There are probably Pats fans that are already calling for tanking the season.

 

"19-0 is out the window and this team has been bit by the injury-bug.  Season over.  Time to tank, steal #1 pick from Jets, acquire draft-capital and build Super Team around Brady.  19-0 in 2018!"

 

[gspdx]

On 9/5/2017 at 10:41 AM, JimJaime said:

and why would the colts Tank? Are you guys that bad this year? I would think any team with Luck at QB has a good chance win a weak division.

 

The Colts are going through a rebuilding.  Pretty major roster turnover this year and probably again next year.  Winning a weak division isn't the goal, so I think some people believe trying to get higher draft picks in the answer.

 

But as was mentioned many of the teams the pick near the top continue to do so year after year.  Not a great strategy to improve a team.  Once a loser mentality is instilled it is hard to get rid of.  Play hard, do your best, and let the draft take care of itself.

[OffensivelyPC]

"Tanking" and "Rebuilding" are coterminous in some people's minds.  But the bottom line is, when you have an average roster and no franchise QB, you've got literally no chance to win a super bowl.  Next year's draft class has several QBs that are likely high first round picks - no matter what the analysts say, I think teams unloading aging talent or even young talent and stocking up on draft pciks is clear evidence they believe that.  It's not often people are accusing multiple teams of tanking in a single season.

 

But to me, call it what you want, tanking, rebuilding, reloading, whatever.  They are putting them selves in an even less likely chance to win than they were 2 months ago.

[BlueShoe]

On 9/5/2017 at 0:01 PM, Lucky Colts Fan said:

Take off your tin-foil hat and listen to reason for a minute.  If you really sit down and think about it, tanking makes absolutely no sense.  There are no guarantees that tanking is going to benefit the team, at all.

 

I cannot believe anyone is taking this nonsense seriously. 

 

No NFL team tanks a season. Having this conversation is absolutely ridiculous. What you're arguing about is a fabrication of the sports media and team fan bases. You're debating mythical fire-breathing dragons born from a beautiful woman. This isn't Game of Thrones. There is no magic ring to put on that makes anyone 200 years younger.

 

This is the NFL, and tanking seasons ain't happening.

[21isSuperman]

22 hours ago, Lucky Colts Fan said:

 

I like the idea of extra draft-capital for Ballard to work with since we already have our franchise QB, but that's a conversation for when our SB hopes are officially done and we only have next off-season to look forward to.  Some fans are already calling for a tank-job before we've even lost a game yet.

 

We've seen crazy things happen in the NFL so any tank-talk right now is way too premature.

I'm not saying this is the case, but one could make the case that our SB hopes are done for this year already.  Does this team have what it takes to keep up with teams like the Pats, Chiefs, Steelers, and Raiders?  We haven't had any games yet (which is why I'm not advocating for tanking just yet), but all of those rosters and coaching staffs are way ahead of ours.  As you said, crazy things happen every year, but one could make the case things are looking good for the Colts right now.