Tankathon

[40yrpatsfan]

We are what we are. Almost all losing teams say they are better than their records, that for a play here and a play there we could have be 500 now etc etc. This is just how losing teams look. You can put lipstick on a pig but its still a pig. Maybe they play better these few games, but we are 4-11 for an obvious reason.

The context of this is we were 3-11, so people started assuming we'd finish 3-14. And the reason we won't is that we're not a 3-14 team. We're not Carolina or AZ. We have a defense that keeps us in every game, a premier tactical coaching staff, and (still) a winning culture. We had been underperforming at QB, which has improved with Zappe. We were due to start playing better, and we've won 2 out of 3 on the road against pretty good teams. The Bills probably wish they were playing someone else this Sunday.

 

[Huckleberry1]

So you're saying if we all supported losing, the team would somehow lose for the sake of the next GM/Coach/Elite no-fail drafted players? Like we have super fan powers?

I'm kind of lost in your word salad, perhaps a fortune cookie would be clearer.

What we as fans want or think has no impact on what the team does or how they play. We can want them to win, but that doesn’t make a difference, and we can want them to lose so they get a higher pick and hopefully a better player in the Draft, and that doesn’t have any impact on them either. As fans we can go either route because it has no impact on what happens, we are just rooting for what we think is in the best interests of the team.

 

[Huckleberry1]

You don't know any of this. Seattle could have graded Mirer higher than Bledsoe and the Jete reportedly wanted McMilfson over Lawrence, regardless. The draft always has been and always will be nothing more than a crapshoot. Odds might be slightly better in the early rounds but pulling for your team to lose toward a roll of the dice is -- yes -- a pretty miserable pursuit.



I don't recall this ever happening. Please provide a link confirming (A) BB ordered Brady to throw a pass away to intentionally lose a game and (B) it was Brady who threw the pass. Regardless, it has nothing to do with your unfounded argument that losing games toward high draft picks guarantees subsequent success.



This has no basis in confirmed fact, it's just your hope because you quit being a fan once playoffs are out of reach. You've even admitted not watching games since the Patriots were eliminated -- that epitomizes being a fair-weather fan. So, what happens if New England drafts someone other than a quarterback next April, or a quarterback you don't like? Or if that quarterback gets hurt in training camp? Is it off to the golf course for you, not watching the games and pulling for more losses? Meanwhile, you miss out on special moments like the Denver game where you can enjoy a win and learn more about the team. That's pretty sad.

Now you are just making **** up wholesale. I’m done with you.

 

[Tunescribe]

Now you are just making **** up wholesale. I’m done with you.

No, I'm dishing facts retail and you have sticker shock.

 

[PatsfanTN]

So you're saying if we all supported losing, the team would somehow lose for the sake of the next GM/Coach/Elite no-fail drafted players? Like we have super fan powers?

I'm kind of lost in your word salad, perhaps a fortune cookie would be clearer

nah, I was pretty clear. I’m sorry it wasn’t clear enough for you to understand.

 

[BTTA]

Brady won 7 of them.

Peyton Manning picked at #1 three decades ago and won 2 SBs but only one with the team that drafted him, Eli Manning was picked #1 and won 2 SBs with a different team, Stafford picked at 1 (1 SB for another team), Mahomes (2 SBs) was taken at 10, Roethlisberger (2 SBs) was picked at 11. So yeah, other than Brady, it was a majority top picks who won SBs over the last 24 years. Rodgers and Flacco were also first rounders.

Forget who won SB’s, cause Brady defeats your argument anyway, and focus on who’s good. Almost all the successful QBs were picked at #5 or lower: Allen, Mahomes, Tua, Jackson, Watson, Herbert, Hurts, Prescott, Purdy, Wilson. Aside from Burrow, that’s your top 10 list. And many picked in the top 3 flamed out or take years to work out.

The evidence is pretty damning: picking a QB in the top 3 is a pathway to perpetual failure. Trading for one has worked a little (Eli, Stafford) but getting a guy outside of the top 4 seems to be the way. So, best to pick guys that you have rated lower.

 

[jmt57]

Who to Root For, Week 17 Edition

Carolina to win at Jacksonville

Catching the Panthers/Bears is virtually impossible, but there's still a Lloyd-Mary chance.​

Arizona to win lose at Philadelphia

Very doubtful the Cardinals can win, but the Eagles have played like crap over the last four weeks.​

On the other hand a Philly win helps Washington's SOS (they play each other twice; Pats only play them once); catching the Cardinals is far less likely than getting than getting ahead of Washington, so I'm changing this one.​

Washington to win at home vs 49ers

Again very doubtful, unless Brock Purdy somehow throws five more picks.​

Giants win at home vs Rams

Let the resurrection of Tyrod Taylor begin.​

Chargers to win at Denver

Now we get into some more believable scenarios.​

Titans to win at Houston

Texans have not looked sharp, losing three of their last five. They barely beat Tennessee in OT two weeks ago.​

That takes care of the teams that could realistcally pass the Patriots and get an earlier pick than the Pats, as well as the clubs that are currently ahead of New England in the draft order. There's not much help to be hand in terms of Strength of Schedule because most teams are playing division opponents now. For example if one AFCE team wins, another loses - so I wouldn't expect much SOS change, with the exception of the three at-large teams each team has on their schedule (as well as Arizona-Philadelphia).

​

​

 

[PATSYLICIOUS]

Who to Root For, Week 17 Edition

Carolina to win at Jacksonville

Catching the Panthers/Bears is virtually impossible, but there's still a Lloyd-Mary chance.​

Arizona to win lose at Philadelphia

Very doubtful the Cardinals can win, but the Eagles have played like crap over the last four weeks.​

On the other hand a Philly win helps Washington's SOS (they play each other twice; Pats only play them once); catching the Cardinals is far less likely than getting than getting ahead of Washington, so I'm changing this one.​

Washington to win at home vs 49ers

Again very doubtful, unless Brock Purdy somehow throws five more picks.​

Giants win at home vs Rams

Let the resurrection of Tyrod Taylor begin.​

Chargers to win at Denver

Now we get into some more believable scenarios.​

Titans to win at Houston

Texans have not looked sharp, losing three of their last five. They barely beat Tennessee in OT two weeks ago.​

That takes care of the teams that could realistcally pass the Patriots and get an earlier pick than the Pats, as well as the clubs that are currently ahead of New England in the draft order. There's not much help to be hand in terms of Strength of Schedule because most teams are playing division opponents now. For example if one AFCE team wins, another loses - so I wouldn't expect much SOS change, with the exception of the three at-large teams each team has on their schedule (as well as Arizona-Philadelphia).

​

​

If the giants lose it still helps somewhat as itll lower our sos for breaking ties with other teams. But yes still safer to want them to win and get to 6 wins.

 

[JayNM]

Buuuh to all the tankers

Buuuuuuuuuuhhhh

 

[PatsfanTN]

Just curious, to the ”wanna win out” crowd, who do you see as the QB next year that helps make this team more competitive than the last 4 years?

 

[PatsfanTN]

Bruuuuh to all the tankers

Bruuuughhhh

Bruh. Fixed it for you.

 

[LightSkinSmurf]

So you're saying if we all supported losing, the team would somehow lose for the sake of the next GM/Coach/Elite no-fail drafted players? Like we have super fan powers?

I'm kind of lost in your word salad, perhaps a fortune cookie would be clearer.

Idk who you think you're making fun of by so obviously misinterpreting and not comprehending what he said but I promise you the joke is not on him.

 

[*ChungFu*]

Just curious, to the ”wanna win out” crowd, who do you see as the QB next year that helps make this team more competitive than the last 4 years?

Same as if we lose out.
None of those highly ranked QBs is coming in and making an immediate impact. The bridge Vet/FA is still necessary with any one of them.

 

[PatsfanTN]

Same as if we lose out.
None of those highly ranked QBs is coming in and making an immediate impact. The bridge Vet/FA is still necessary with any one of them.

yeah, I don’t disagree with that. I was just curious to see who those folks envision at QB next year, if they are satisfied with Zappe and Co.

 

[Tunescribe]

I respectfully disagree. There entire objective to be competitive, to have a team that can compete and possibly win a Championship. A meaningless win is just that, meaningless. What did beating DEN or PIT get you? Zero. Thats extremely short sighted thinking. I wouldn’t have nearly as much of an issue with winning these games if the talent on the offensive side of this team wasn’t so bad. It’s BAD to non existent. We NEEDED a higher draft pick to start repairing what your boy BB, the GM, did to this Team. We NEED some elite talent or at least a shot at some. Like I said, it’s extremely short sided not to think of the future of this team.

Some key differences here:
* I consider "meaningless win" an oxymoron.
* What did beating Denver and Pittsburgh get me? Happy.
* I have no idea why you would call BB "your boy."

You build for the future by winning as often as possible with what you've got. Unfortunately, only two teams compete for a championship at the end of the day, but this doesn't mean winning short of that is insignificant.

Just curious, to the ”wanna win out” crowd, who do you see as the QB next year that helps make this team more competitive than the last 4 years?

I'm more concerned who the tackles are going to be, which will improve quarterback performance whoever it is.

 

[*ChungFu*]

I'm more concerned who the tackles are going to be, which will improve quarterback performance whoever it is.

I think it's much easier to identify QB Studs & Duds behind solid Oline play.
Also could help a guy that needs a little time to develop by keeping him upright and providing a running game.

 

[Tunescribe]

I think it's much easier to identify QB Studs & Duds behind solid Oline play.
Also could help a guy that needs a little time to develop by keeping him upright and providing a running game.

That's why a good argument can be made for building an offense first, then plugging in the quarterback. Drafting a prospective "star" rookie QB when he has no weapons to work with or solid protection in front of him is courting disaster.

 

[Joey007]

I’m looking at remaining SOS , and we should be in a good spot for the top 5 if we don’t finish with more than 5 wins.

We have the easiest of anyone in the top 7, and the Titans and Chargers already have tougher %’s than we do. That’s even assuming the three 5 win teams win at least one more.

We may even have a shot at a top 3 pick at 5 wins if Washington faces a Dallas team resting starters in week 18.

 

[LightSkinSmurf]

I never said anything about tanking for a draft pick, in fact I have said repeatedly that players and coaches don’t tank for draft spots, because their performance and records are what get them paid. What I said is that there is nothing wrong with fans wanting their team to lose once they are out of the playoff race because they can get better players in the draft, and get back to contention faster, especially when you’re talking about a shot at the best QB’s in the draft. And I haven’t given anyone **** about rooting for them to win, because I have no problem with that. What I was responding to was another poster giving me **** because I want the higher pick instead of the win, because the higher pick might get them the QB they need, and the win doesn’t get us anything, except a lower draft pick. I had no Problem with Belichick having Brady throw the ball into the stands so they would lose and get Jacksonville at home in the playoffs, imo that was the right move, even though it cost them that game. In both instances I think the loss helps more than the win, so ultimately I think that’s the better outcome. Most fans root for a higher draft pick once their team is toast for that season, and other than a few holier than thou fans most don’t have any problem with that.

^ This so perfectly sums up my exact stance on this. I'll add just a little to this.

I have no issue with people cheering on the team to win even when losing puts us in better draft position. That is why I've never quoted anyone rooting for the team to win and gave them **** for it. I think it's extremely short sighted and any argument that winning these last few games helps more than a higher draft pick is laughable, BUT, I do get it. In real life some people have a hard time doing things that are best for them in the long run because they are so addicted and reliant on instant gratification. This is just the sports version of that to me.

There's a minority of people in this already minority group though that tries to pretend to not get why fans would care about having a higher draft pick over winning regular season games that mean nothing anymore in the grand scheme of things. These people are, quite frankly, either very stupid, or very disingenuous.. Those really are the only options.. Because the logic and stance behind wanting a higher draft pick over going 6-11 instead of 4-13 is not that hard to grasp. Even if you disagree with it.

Both sides of this fence make sense for different reasons.

 

[palialka]

Brady won 7 of them.

Peyton Manning picked at #1 and won 2 SBs, Eli Manning was picked #1 and won 2 SBs, Stafford picked at 1 (1 SB), Mahomes (2 SBs) was taken at 10, Roethlisberger (2 SBs) was picked at 11. So yeah, other than Brady, it was a majority top picks who won SBs over the last 24 years. Rodgers and Flacco were also first rounders.

You’re kind of proving his point though… Manning is the only one drafted in the top 5 that won a SB with the team that drafted him.

Everyone one else you mentioned either won it all with a different team or was drafted later in the 1st round.

So this notion that we HAVE to grab one of the top 2 QBs at 4, 5 or wherever we end up isn’t supported by the last 25 years of NFL drafting.

If anything this shows that we ought to trade down below pick 10 and get one of the 2nd tier QBs.