How Many Games Do Wolf And Mayo Want To Win?

[Brotherblues]

How many posters, last year and this, suggested that the team should try to win fewer games so that their draft picks would be better?

Who has suggested that for this season? Might be stretching what people say.

 

[Force Zero Boomer]

A top 5 pick is one player, 1 time, the importance of this player, if not a QB, is not that high.

A top 5 pick can be parlayed into a handful of quality picks that could transform a team from average into a contender.

I think if you look at history having a top 5 pick is not a secret sauce to become a top team, so it is rather meaningless to guys like Wolfe and Mayo since they have the QB already.

A top 5 pick next year would be gold for a rebuilding team like the Patriots. They don't need a QB, so they can trade the pick.

However, as a fan the idea of teaming Maye, a top 5 QB IMO, with a true #1 WR or top 5 tackle accelerates the process. Year 2 they become probable playoff contenders.

Then trade the pick. You don't need the 5th pick to get a #1 WR or a top 5 tackle.

 

[Clonamery]

It’s important we teach out young players how to lose… it’s a life skill they can carry with them the rest of their careers.

Productivity theater where some employees are spending up to half a week on trying to look busy instead of actually doing any work. Certainly could translate that skill to the NFL.

 

[Steve102]

It’s important we teach out young players how to lose… it’s a life skill they can carry with them the rest of their careers.

 

[Clonamery]

Sarcasm.

 

[KCSVEN]

A top 5 pick can be parlayed into a handful of quality picks that could transform a team from average into a contender.


A top 5 pick next year would be gold for a rebuilding team like the Patriots. They don't need a QB, so they can trade the pick.


Then trade the pick. You don't need the 5th pick to get a #1 WR or a top 5 tackle.

Of course, and for fans, I can see some wanting to maximize the future draft capital. But the question that was asked was what MAYO AND WOLFE are thinking.
You don't get to be head coach/GM in the NFL for the first time and think you want to lose to get a top 5 pick. You also know top 5 picks and draft picks bust all the time so you're not counting on losing, getting a top 5 pick and it being meaningful to your future, there is no way that's what they are thinking which was what I was answering.
Look at all the years teams lost the better draft pick by winning a meaningless game in the last week, that's how NFL head coaches and GM's approach things, unless you are the Colts and sucking for luck. Again, that was for a QB. Pats don't need a QB so won't be purposely sucking.

 

[Brick27]

All the games

 

[Hyped]

20-0, baby!

Let's gooooooooo!!!

 

[billdog3484]

Obviously?

How many posters, last year and this, suggested that the team should try to win fewer games so that their draft picks would be better?

100% obvious. The question was how many games wolf and mayo want to win, not us. It better be 20. Come on

 

[Force Zero Boomer]

Of course, and for fans, I can see some wanting to maximize the future draft capital. But the question that was asked was what MAYO AND WOLFE are thinking.
You don't get to be head coach/GM in the NFL for the first time and think you want to lose to get a top 5 pick.

Sometimes teams mortgage the future to win now. But if you want to be in contention for longer stretches, you are more strategic.

For example, you don’t extend Judon because he probably has less in the tank than he thinks. That move could sacrifice wins now (or win shares) because either he holds out and you start a lesser player, or he doesn’t play as hard. There are many decisions like that, and most won’t be optimized to win the most games NOW, because you really want to line things up for Maye’s ascendancy.

The coaches and players are trying to win every game. But roster construction is a long game, and you can’t sell the farm to win in the near term without sacrificing the future. You could trade 4 future 1st rounders for a #1 wideout for this season. You’d certainly win more games. Should they? No, because even with that player, they aren’t a playoff contender, and Drake isn’t ready.

You also know top 5 picks and draft picks bust all the time so you're not counting on losing, getting a top 5 pick and it being meaningful to your future, there is no way that's what they are thinking which was what I was answering.
Look at all the years teams lost the better draft pick by winning a meaningless game in the last week, that's how NFL head coaches and GM's approach things, unless you are the Colts and sucking for luck. Again, that was for a QB. Pats don't need a QB so won't be purposely sucking.

Again, you trade the pick and get a handful of premium picks in return. You trust your GM not to whiff on them. There are no guarantees, but premium picks build a winning roster, if the guy doing the picking is good.

Look, you can’t tell me they don’t have a realistic expectation of where this team is going to finish. Barring some miracle, the Pats finish near the bottom of the league again. They aren’t tanking, but they aren’t pretending they are contenders either. If a surprise happens, sure the strategy changes, but they’d be fools if they are gearing up for a playoff run.

So, the roster is constructed with an eye toward sustained contention, and Mayo tries to win every game with what he has.

 

[Toofy]

A top 5 pick can be parlayed into a handful of quality picks that could transform a team from average into a contender.


A top 5 pick next year would be gold for a rebuilding team like the Patriots. They don't need a QB, so they can trade the pick.


Then trade the pick. You don't need the 5th pick to get a #1 WR or a top 5 tackle.

Why not the number 1 so that you get 4 + picks and start to contend from 2025 itself.

I know losing is bad , but I wouldn't be adverse if we lose a lot of close games like the lions lost in 2022 season.

On a side note second tier wide receivers are available by the dozen and don't cost much . So if QB can elevate receivers decently then all you need are stud linemen. We might be borrowing from packers playbook of wr building.

NFL teams don’t need a No. 1 receiver and here’s why

Packers, Chiefs, and more NFL teams are moving away from alpha dogs in the receiver room.

www.sbnation.com

 

[Kasmir]

Sometimes teams mortgage the future to win now. But if you want to be in contention for longer stretches, you are more strategic.

For example, you don’t extend Judon because he probably has less in the tank than he thinks. That move could sacrifice wins now (or win shares) because either he holds out and you start a lesser player, or he doesn’t play as hard. There are many decisions like that, and most won’t be optimized to win the most games NOW, because you really want to line things up for Maye’s ascendancy.

The coaches and players are trying to win every game. But roster construction is a long game, and you can’t sell the farm to win in the near term without sacrificing the future. You could trade 4 future 1st rounders for a #1 wideout for this season. You’d certainly win more games. Should they? No, because even with that player, they aren’t a playoff contender, and Drake isn’t ready.


Again, you trade the pick and get a handful of premium picks in return. You trust your GM not to whiff on them. There are no guarantees, but premium picks build a winning roster, if the guy doing the picking is good.

Look, you can’t tell me they don’t have a realistic expectation of where this team is going to finish. Barring some miracle, the Pats finish near the bottom of the league again. They aren’t tanking, but they aren’t pretending they are contenders either. If a surprise happens, sure the strategy changes, but they’d be fools if they are gearing up for a playoff run.

So, the roster is constructed with an eye toward sustained contention, and Mayo tries to win every game with what he has.

I'd be happy to sell you birds in the bush all day long! You effin need to discount the present value of future draft picks.

They need to field a competitive team now or they will start to bleed fans to more interesting entertainment. Just based on the pessimism here I've already decided not to renew NFL+ this year (I'm out of market) on the assumption that the Pats won't be worth the time to watch in replay

It's effin fatuous to tank a team for a promise of eventual success. That's Loser Think. Trading Judon helps eliminate any chance of serendipity shining our way again.

It was either Dr Z or Joel Buschbaum that said in 2001 that the Pats had the worst roster in the NFL. Sometimes you get lucky, but you got to show up and do your best as well or it's pointless.

I'm hoping for a competitive team this year.

If they actually try to lose games I'm out for good.

 

[scott99]

They WANT to win ALL of them, all the way to another SB victory. It’s just not gonna happen.

 

[vicspats]

A top 5 pick is one player, 1 time, the importance of this player, if not a QB, is not that high.

I think if you look at history having a top 5 pick is not a secret sauce to become a top team, so it is rather meaningless to guys like Wolfe and Mayo since they have the QB already.

However, as a fan the idea of teaming Maye, a top 5 QB IMO, with a true #1 WR or top 5 tackle accelerates the process. Year 2 they become probable playoff contenders.

Exactly.. Check out the Jetes success

 

[Tunescribe]

I understand that many posters would like to see us win 3-5 games and get a top 5 pick.

Ban them all.

 

[PatsFanInVa]

Here's my thought on tanking.

Every year, somebody gets the number 1 pick. They are, or traded with, the worst team in the league.

To really wow me with a turnaround, I'd like to see cases of worst to playoffs in 1 year (regardless of the position they drafted.) But let's let that first-round-drafting team -- whether they trade the pick or keep it -- have 2 years.

Going back to, let's say, the beginning of the salary cap/free agency era...

Does somebody have the time to determine worst-to-playoffs turnarounds correlated with every year's #1 pick holder? That would establish the 2-year turnaround wow factor you can expect. In 3 years, it's tough to really believe in the causality (at that point, random chance would get you to the playoffs pretty often once in 3 years.)

I mean, who agrees that 2 years is a good period to judge whether tanking is a good idea -- that past 2 years it's hard to objectively judge the value of a tank?

I could go by a 3 year measurement if folks think it's germane; you could measure possible tanks versus the average case, etc.

What do you guys think? Is there a good objective historical case to be made for the concept of tanking?

 

[Force Zero Boomer]

I'd be happy to sell you birds in the bush all day long! You effin need to discount the present value of future draft picks.

The argument was that a top 5 pick wasn’t worth much to the Pats because we already have a QB. I said trade the pick. And I’m not going to discount future picks, because the draft is how a team gets built. If picks in 2025 are the two birds, what is your bird in the hand?

They need to field a competitive team now or they will start to bleed fans to more interesting entertainment. Just based on the pessimism here I've already decided not to renew NFL+ this year (I'm out of market) on the assumption that the Pats won't be worth the time to watch in replay

You’re projecting your own pessimism onto the rest of the fan base. I am excited: new era, new coach, new QB of the future. I hope they are competitive, in every game, but I won’t mind if they lose a bunch of close games, as long as they are playing hard and moving in the right direction.

It's effin fatuous to tank a team for a promise of eventual success. That's Loser Think. Trading Judon helps eliminate any chance of serendipity shining our way again.

I didn’t say they should tank. The coach and players should try to win every game, and the GM should construct and maintain the roster with the goal of sustained competitiveness in mind, not win NOW, future be damned.

It was either Dr Z or Joel Buschbaum that said in 2001 that the Pats had the worst roster in the NFL. Sometimes you get lucky, but you got to show up and do your best as well or it's pointless.

You are arguing with a straw man. I’ve said repeatedly they should try and win every game. Go look at my comments.

I'm hoping for a competitive team this year.

If they actually try to lose games I'm out for good.

They will compete. I’m not sure if Mayo will be a good coach, but he was a hard nosed competitor. Win? Maybe not so much. And, I don’t think anyone suggested tanking.

 

[Force Zero Boomer]

Why not the number 1 so that you get 4 + picks and start to contend from 2025 itself.

I know losing is bad , but I wouldn't be adverse if we lose a lot of close games like the lions lost in 2022 season.

I don’t mind them losing a lot this season. This is a massive transition season. If they are playing hard but still end up with a top pick, that will be a good outcome, especially if Wolf’s 2024 draft class looks strong.

On a side note second tier wide receivers are available by the dozen and don't cost much . So if QB can elevate receivers decently then all you need are stud linemen. We might be borrowing from packers playbook of wr building.

Interesting point. Brady did that for a lot of his career, but we all remember what he did when he had an elite #1.

 

[Real fan 02]

This ^

You play to win.

Agreed. Loosing does nothing for you! How many top 5 picks did Buffalo, Miami, NY, have each year.. whether or not it happens mayo will coach to win every game.

 

[Tunescribe]

I don’t mind them losing a lot this season.