A contrarian point of view, lacking hypocrisy, on tanking

[Ring 6]

1) When the Colts did their "Suck for Luck" tank job, I lambasted them. Most here did. We said that they were Coltist turds, asserted that they lacked integrity, should be punished, and suspected that we would be above that sort of thing.
2) Here we were, in a similar spot
3) I wanted the Pats to play backups, try their best to win, and hopefully come up short
4) Trouble is, the Bills didn't want to win either.

So, my contrarian thought is that I am very disappointed in the pick downgrade, but not disappointed that the organization tried to win. We are not Coltish turds.

That, it seems to me, is a fine line to walk, admittedly, but avoids the stench of hypocrisy.

I’d distinguish between losing the final meaningless game of the season and tanking an entire season though.

 

[denverpatsfan]

You are giving Mayo too much credit. He did try to lose the game. He failed to do that just like everything else he attempted this season.

 

[Betterthanmost]

So moral loss?

 

[mgteich]

1) When the Colts did their "Suck for Luck" tank job, I lambasted them. Most here did. We said that they were Coltist turds, asserted that they lacked integrity, should be punished, and suspected that we would be above that sort of thing.
2) Here we were, in a similar spot
3) I wanted the Pats to play backups, try their best to win, and hopefully come up short
4) Trouble is, the Bills didn't want to win either.

So, my contrarian thought is that I am very disappointed in the pick downgrade, but not disappointed that the organization tried to win. We are not Coltish turds.

That, it seems to me, is a fine line to walk, admittedly, but avoids the stench of hypocrisy.

Buffalo didn't want the patriots to get the 1st pick in the draft. They had several goals for the game. No injuries to veterans was their #1 goal, losing was likely their #2 goal. Their were a couple of player goals that were there and met in the first couple of series.
==========
The GM and coaching staff decided who was available for the game and that Maye shouldn't play much. Then it was up to the coaches and players, understanding that backups and 3rd stringers should get lots of play.

Let's be clear. We played our #3 QB, #2 RB, #2 TE and essentially sat out our only veteran WR.

On Defense, we played our #25 Defense without Gonzo and others, and hired scrubs to play lots of reps. Battle as a corner? Who?

 

[FortressX]

#2 RB according to who ?

Gibson should not have been playing yesterday.

 

[everlong]

The main difference is the Colts tanked an entire season. Lots of teams have tanked a game or even a handful of games at the end for draft position.

It was really tough watching yesterday because I loved what I saw from Milton, even if it was against the 3rd string, but kept having to temper that with wanting to lose. I was hoping they would put Jacoby in, fumble......whatever it took.

It cannot be underestimate what that cost them. I think the bare minimum is an extra first next year and a second this year. And I think that's probably too conservative. The reboot would have been greatly expedited.

 

[h0c2000]

I said this in another thread. It’s one thing to tank 17 games. Another to tank the 17th game. The Colts did the former. 10-6 to 2-14. Yes that deserves derision.

Now if Robert spends some of that cap space the difference between one and four won’t be so dramatic. We shall see.

 

[Palm Beach Pats Fan]

I agree on the observation that the Colts tank job extended not just over one game but was a campaign over many months. So I'm not equating the LEVEL of Coltish turdiness displayed, if we had not tried to win. But in a small way, to be consistent, I think the effort with many backups in there reflects well on the organization. Too bad the Bills were not trying.

 

[archstanton543]

I said this in another thread. It’s one thing to tank 17 games. Another to tank the 17th game. The Colts did the former. 10-6 to 2-14. Yes that deserves derision.

Now if Robert spends some of that cap space the difference between one and four won’t be so dramatic. We shall see.

Sure it will. Teams get better long term through the draft. You can fill holes short term with FA's. Losing out on the boatload of picks they would have gotten for the #1 pick will hurt this team for years to come.

 

[p8ryts]

What did they do that was a sleaze bag move?

laid down

 

[XLIX]

laid down

Nothing sleazy about that at all. Buffalo doesn't owe New England ****. If this was 10 years ago and the positions were reversed, we'd all be laughing our asses off (not to mention the usual folks talking about how "brilliant" Belichick is for laying down).

 

[FortressX]

Nothing sleazy about that at all. Buffalo doesn't owe New England ****. If this was 10 years ago and the positions were reversed, we'd all be laughing our asses off (not to mention the usual folks talking about how "brilliant" Belichick is for laying down).

Did BB ever do that ?
I don't remember.

I think there is a difference between losing to get a weaker first round opponent and total tanking just to screw over another team

 

[p8ryts]

Did BB ever do that ?
I don't remember.

I think there is a difference between losing to get a weaker first round opponent and total tanking just to screw over another team

BB did some maneuver to avoid a first-round opponent one year, I don't remember the particulars.

 

[XLIX]

Did BB ever do that ?
I don't remember.

I think there is a difference between losing to get a weaker first round opponent and total tanking just to screw over another team

No, there really isn't. Tanking is tanking. In both cases, you lose because it is in your team's best interests to lose. Neither situation is any more noble than the other.

 

[XLIX]

BB did some maneuver to avoid a first-round opponent one year, I don't remember the particulars.

It was 2005. By losing that game, NE got the first round match against Jax instead of Pittsburgh. Despite having the better record, Jax was seen as the weaker team. NE would beat Jax then lose to Denver in the Ben Watson-Champ Bailey game. Pittsburgh would go on to win the Super Bowl.

 

[reflexblue]

What did they do that was a sleaze bag move?

How about not trying to win the game, to be competative, Going for a 4th and 9 at mid field mid way through the game, or punting instead of going for a field goal, or not covering our receivers, even baker got a catch. it was obvious to everyone but you that the bills were trying to lose.

 

[XLIX]

How about not trying to win the game, to be competative, Going for a 4th and 9 at mid field mid way through the game, or punting instead of going for a field goal, or not covering our receivers, even baker got a catch. it was obvious to everyone but you that the bills were trying to lose.

The Patriots have only themselves to blame. Buffalo had a 16-14 lead in the 3rd quarter. That is when NE should have shut it down 100%.

You look pathetic blaming Buffalo for NE's own incompetence. Buffalo doesn't owe NE anything. And like I said before, if the situations were reversed, this entire forum would be laughing and talking about how brilliant the coach was to deliberately lose a meaningless game.

 

[reflexblue]

The Patriots have only themselves to blame. Buffalo had a 16-14 lead in the 3rd quarter. That is when NE should have shut it down 100%.

You look pathetic blaming Buffalo for NE's own incompetence. Buffalo doesn't owe NE anything. And like I said before, if the situations were reversed, this entire forum would be laughing and talking about how brilliant the coach was to deliberately lose a meaningless game.

Bla bla bla gfy

 

[Family]

Did BB ever do that ?
I don't remember.

I remember Doug Flutie drop kicking an extra point.

 

[XLIX]

Bla bla bla gfy

LOL!! At least I am not a whiny little ***** like you complaining about how mean the other teams are treating New England.