Tanking Doesn't Work!

[Ranching]

Ranching--- i dont think we will have to lose on purpose....its called organically tanking

Keep making your guarantees and we'll keep losing. Lol

 

[blueblood70]

if you want to be technical?

yes use real terms that other words not really a word in sports culture, fan culture, yes..

 

[GORICO]

Keep making your guarantees and we'll keep losing. Lol

i was just getting my quadruple Plat ready

 

[texbumthelife]

yup this years draft will be AAA and we will be back on the road..

In the sporty station wagon we picked out in the first place.

 

[GORICO]

yes use real terms that other words not really a word in sports culture, fan culture, yes..

well now you are not being real....have heard it used several times..and you know exactly what it means too

 

[Runwildboys]

I doubt that any of these teams tanked. They most likely had the #1 pick because they were genuinely the worst team. That, in and of itself would be a good reason none of them went from worst to first in one year. I don't condone it, but "tanking" implies being better than your record, in which case, you'd have a much better chance of jumping up to first the following year.

 

[817Gill]

We aren’t losing on purpose.

But if you look at our schedule, we should win a few more games. The Giants and WFT are next up in line. So we should end up in the 3-5 range winning about 4 games.

Love level headed logic, so rare on this forum

 

[conner01]

The idea of going "worst to first" has ingrained itself. A team might go "worst to first" in their division but that doesn't equate to having the #1 pick.

Have a look at the last 21 years of Teams with the number 1 pick and where they ended up the following year. Most teams showed some improvement (there were no Texans in 2001 so there is nothing to improve on). Two teams the Rams and the Browns took a step back. All in all the average improvement for a team with the #1 pick is just 3.9 games. And 12 of the teams that picked #1 finished 4th in their Division the following year, two others finished 3rd. Only 4 teams in the past 21 years made the play-offs, and were out after the Wild Card game.

Year Draft Pos Team School Prior Next Change Finished
2000 Courtney Brown DE Cleveland Browns Penn St 2-14 3-13 1 6
2001 Michael Vick QB Atlanta Falcons Va.Tech 4-12 7-9 3 4
2002 David Carr QB Houston Texans Fresno St 0-0 4-12 0 4
2003 Carson Palmer QB Cincinnati Bengals USC 2-14 8-8 6 2
2004 Phillip Rivers QB San Diego Chargers NC St. 4-12 12-4 8 lost WC*
2005 Alex Smith QB San Francisco 49ers Utah 2-14 4-12 2 4
2006 Mario Williams DE Houston Texans NC St. 2-14 6-10 4 4
2007 JaMarcus Russell QB Oakland Raiders LSU 2-14 4-12 2 4
2008 Jake Long T Miami Dolphins Michigan 1-15 11-5 10 lost WC
2009 Matthew Stafford QB Detroit Lions Georgia 0-16 2-14 2 4
2010 Sam Bradford QB St. Lois Rams Oklahoma 1-15 7-9 6 2
2011 Cam Newton QB Carolina Panthers Auburn 2 -14 6-10 4 3
2012 Andrew Luck QB Indianapolis Colts Stanford 2-14 11-5 9 lost WC
2013 Eric Fisher T KC Chiefs Central Michigan 2-14 11-5 9 lost WC
2014 Jadevon Clowney DE Houston Texans South Carolina 2-14 9-7 7 2
2015 Jameis Winston QB Tampa Bay Bucs Florida St. 2-14 6-10 4 4
2016 Jared Goff QB Los Angeles Rams California 7-9 4-12 -3 3
2017 Myles Garrett DE Cleveland Browns Texas A&M 0-16 7-8-1 7 4
2018 Baker Mayfield QB Cleveland Browns Oklahoma 7-8-1 6-10 -1 4
2019 Kyler Murray QB Arizona Cardinals. Oklahoma 3-13 5-10-1 2 4
2020 Joe Burrow QB Cincinnati Bengals LSU 2-14 2-5-1 0 4

Of the 15 QBs taken #1 overall only 2, Luck and Rivers) made it to the play-offs their first year.
The Other two play-off teams took T (Fisher and Long).

Still think Tanking is for you?

* A note about Rivers. The Chargers drafted Eli Manning but swapped picks with the Giants.
​

Winning 3 games doesn’t change that at all
Most teams with the worst record are very talent poor teams
We aren’t
We’ve been killed by injuries, turnovers and no off season to adjust to a new defense
We may not go to the super bowl next year with a top 3 pick but we will be a better team by far

 

[thunderpimp91]

First, I doubt that any of these teams tanked. They most likely had the #1 pick because they were genuinely the worst team. That, in and of itself would be a good reason none of them went from worst to first in one year. I don't condone it, but "tanking" implies being better than your record, in which case, you'd have a much better chance of jumping up to first the following year.

I agree. I think tanking in the nfl is a very new thing, really can’t think of a teams besides the dolphins last year that I really think the front office managed the roster with the intent of losing games. Maybe the browns a few years back?

historically teams with top 5 picks have been there because they’ve been really poor football teams despite trying to win as many games as possible.

 

[blueblood70]

I agree. I think tanking in the nfl is a very new thing, really can’t think of a teams besides the dolphins last year that I really think the front office managed the roster with the intent of losing games. Maybe the browns a few years back?

historically teams with top 5 picks have been there because they’ve been really poor football teams despite trying to win as many games as possible.

MIA did NOT tank either.,.ugh they kept Fitz in the entire year and finished 3-3 won the last 2 games... if they were intending on tanking they would have started rosen all year once it looked like a lost season..

the browns were like what 3-45 over 3 seasons thats not tanking that just being historically bad and in full rebuild mode..

you had it right by saying its not thing and teams that finish in the top five are bad and many can find reasons where it went wrong, ours was Injuries, a few FAs didnt live up to expectations, and new coaching staff didnt have the right pieces and time to get the new schemes implemented..

we arent this bad if our starting 22 was actually played most games..

 

[blueblood70]

Winning 3 games doesn’t change that at all
Most teams with the worst record are very talent poor teams
We aren’t
We’ve been killed by injuries, turnovers and no off season to adjust to a new defense
We may not go to the super bowl next year with a top 3 pick but we will be a better team by far

 

[garyo1954]

Reading with interest all the comments. And you won't get an argument from me whichever side you choose or however you decide to see the posted results.

They are what they are. What they say is having the #1 pick, the consensus best pick in the draft, only gives you a 20% chance of making the play-offs the following year. (Phillip Rivers didn't start in 2004 or 2005 and Luck walked into the perfect scenario so we could amend that 20% to 15% or even 10%. I didn't for the purpose of being consistent.) And if you believe in draft theory the chances go down from there.

Now if you choose, you are more than welcome to go back do the same procedure for the 2nd, 3rd, 4th picks of the draft. You're welcome to check everything I've done. There may be a mistake, but not on purpose.

Playing for the best draft position doesn't work. Its winning the losers curse. As you see 12 of those teams didn't leave the basement and 2 others only made marginal improvements in the divisional standings.

 

[Verdict]

The idea of going "worst to first" has ingrained itself. A team might go "worst to first" in their division but that doesn't equate to having the #1 pick.

Have a look at the last 21 years of Teams with the number 1 pick and where they ended up the following year. Most teams showed some improvement (there were no Texans in 2001 so there is nothing to improve on). Two teams the Rams and the Browns took a step back. All in all the average improvement for a team with the #1 pick is just 3.9 games. And 12 of the teams that picked #1 finished 4th in their Division the following year, two others finished 3rd. Only 4 teams in the past 21 years made the play-offs, and were out after the Wild Card game.

Year Draft Pos Team School Prior Next Change Finished
2000 Courtney Brown DE Cleveland Browns Penn St 2-14 3-13 1 6
2001 Michael Vick QB Atlanta Falcons Va.Tech 4-12 7-9 3 4
2002 David Carr QB Houston Texans Fresno St 0-0 4-12 0 4
2003 Carson Palmer QB Cincinnati Bengals USC 2-14 8-8 6 2
2004 Phillip Rivers QB San Diego Chargers NC St. 4-12 12-4 8 lost WC*
2005 Alex Smith QB San Francisco 49ers Utah 2-14 4-12 2 4
2006 Mario Williams DE Houston Texans NC St. 2-14 6-10 4 4
2007 JaMarcus Russell QB Oakland Raiders LSU 2-14 4-12 2 4
2008 Jake Long T Miami Dolphins Michigan 1-15 11-5 10 lost WC
2009 Matthew Stafford QB Detroit Lions Georgia 0-16 2-14 2 4
2010 Sam Bradford QB St. Lois Rams Oklahoma 1-15 7-9 6 2
2011 Cam Newton QB Carolina Panthers Auburn 2 -14 6-10 4 3
2012 Andrew Luck QB Indianapolis Colts Stanford 2-14 11-5 9 lost WC
2013 Eric Fisher T KC Chiefs Central Michigan 2-14 11-5 9 lost WC
2014 Jadevon Clowney DE Houston Texans South Carolina 2-14 9-7 7 2
2015 Jameis Winston QB Tampa Bay Bucs Florida St. 2-14 6-10 4 4
2016 Jared Goff QB Los Angeles Rams California 7-9 4-12 -3 3
2017 Myles Garrett DE Cleveland Browns Texas A&M 0-16 7-8-1 7 4
2018 Baker Mayfield QB Cleveland Browns Oklahoma 7-8-1 6-10 -1 4
2019 Kyler Murray QB Arizona Cardinals. Oklahoma 3-13 5-10-1 2 4
2020 Joe Burrow QB Cincinnati Bengals LSU 2-14 2-5-1 0 4

Of the 15 QBs taken #1 overall only 2, Luck and Rivers) made it to the play-offs their first year.
The Other two play-off teams took T (Fisher and Long).

Still think Tanking is for you?

* A note about Rivers. The Chargers drafted Eli Manning but swapped picks with the Giants.
​

Yes. Tanking is a pretty good idea. We are not your typical #1 overall pick type of team. Injuries have derailed the season.

 

[garyo1954]

Yes. Tanking is a pretty good idea. We are not your typical #1 overall pick type of team. Injuries have derailed the season.

Whether we are a typical #1 pick team or not is open to debate. We could run around the mulberry bush for days on end on that one. And you know, we'd never find an answer.

 

[Runwildboys]

Whether we are a typical #1 pick team or not is open to debate. We could run around the mulberry bush for days on end on that one. And you know, we'd never find an answer.

Well, unless we tanked, got great picks, then won it all next season.

 

[garyo1954]

Well, unless we tanked, got great picks, then won it all next season.

Nobody would be happier than me to be wrong! Hell, I'd be wrong all the time if it gets us a Super Bowl!

 

[thunderpimp91]

MIA did NOT tank either.,.ugh they kept Fitz in the entire year and finished 3-3 won the last 2 games... if they were intending on tanking they would have started rosen all year once it looked like a lost season..

the browns were like what 3-45 over 3 seasons thats not tanking that just being historically bad and in full rebuild mode..

you had it right by saying its not thing and teams that finish in the top five are bad and many can find reasons where it went wrong, ours was Injuries, a few FAs didnt live up to expectations, and new coaching staff didnt have the right pieces and time to get the new schemes implemented..

we arent this bad if our starting 22 was actually played most games..

Well let me clarify by saying that you will never have a coaching staff or players who are openly trying to lose games. When I think of tanking it’s the front office trying to put out a sub par roster while maximizing draft capitol. I think Miami fits that when you look at it’s offseason moves moving guys like tunsil. It was clear their front office had no intentions of trying to make the post season.

 

[75boyz]

Reading with interest all the comments. And you won't get an argument from me whichever side you choose or however you decide to see the posted results.

They are what they are. What they say is having the #1 pick, the consensus best pick in the draft, only gives you a 20% chance of making the play-offs the following year. (Phillip Rivers didn't start in 2004 or 2005 and Luck walked into the perfect scenario so we could amend that 20% to 15% or even 10%. I didn't for the purpose of being consistent.) And if you believe in draft theory the chances go down from there.

Now if you choose, you are more than welcome to go back do the same procedure for the 2nd, 3rd, 4th picks of the draft. You're welcome to check everything I've done. There may be a mistake, but not on purpose.

Playing for the best draft position doesn't work. Its winning the losers curse. As you see 12 of those teams didn't leave the basement and 2 others only made marginal improvements in the divisional standings.

If talking tanking intentionally for one specific year I recall the Suck for Luck campaign.

If you are talking losing a couple or several years and picking high from "organically/unintentionally" tanking then a couple of teams come to mind.

Vermeil's Rams lost several years in a row but gained both HOF free agents(Warner/Faulk) and HOF draft picks as well(Pace/Holt) from all the losing they did leading up to gaiing all those high picks. They parlayed some more recent losing into drafting the likes
of Gurley, Donald and Goff who were major contributors towards a SB appearance.

2 not so recently as successful examples are these Cowboys and their 2016 haul for one year of sucking but also the Niners several down years and high picks and subsequent SB appearance last year.

The Lions and Browns would be examples of franchises unable to ever capitalize by picking high every year.

The Belicheck/Brady duo would represent the lone outlier of being able to draft low every single year but still be a championship contender.

So to me,
It's all in the details of how you qualify each teams losing. Being bad for a couple or more years has benefited some through drafted teambuilding and done nothing for others.

The 90, 91 drafts of the Cowboys were made off the 1-15 tank /non tank of '89 nd paved the way for that run of SB ssuccess.

The 2015 non tank produced a lot of core players on this current team.

Count me in on the tank/organically tank or Lose for the Greater Good side.

 

[blueblood70]

Well let me clarify by saying that you will never have a coaching staff or players who are openly trying to lose games. When I think of tanking it’s the front office trying to put out a sub par roster while maximizing draft capitol. I think Miami fits that when you look at it’s offseason moves moving guys like tunsil. It was clear their front office had no intentions of trying to make the post season.

still not tanking or the GM would have forced a guy like Fitz off the field and played rosen.,.they simply traded layers they knew they might not afford or have hard time signing..it actually worked out they improved to finish the season, started this season well with Tua on the bench and now moving in the right direction..

Maybe if Jones decided to do the same 2 years ago and not signed some of these players to huge deals we could be in better lace but one never knows...theres no blueprint..

Cleveland has had what 5-6 years of horrible ball that got them 2 first round picks five straight years and just now player better, didnt few years they has 3 first rounders, i mean jeez how many times do you tank in a row before you get to .500 LOL?..and yet is their QB a true lock for the HOF after all that they still have just a solid qb no better then Dak?

tanking or flat being horrible gets you a ton of draft picks but like the OP posted and like we see , its not an automatics into greatness or even immediate improvement..

 

[Proof]

no its called organically losing.. that word is not real in a owner, Gms, players or coaches vocabulary's. Its fan narrative and really doesnt truly exist..

its seem to take on a life if it own for fans ..

of course. If I were a player, I wouldn’t quit. Same as I would negotiate for the biggest salary. As a fan, I’m looking towards the draft earlier than usual and hope we get guys on team friendly deals lol. the positions are absolutely at odds and I think you’re coming from a much different background and perspective.