Tank for Trevor?

[wcblack34]

12 minutes ago, Cearbhall said:

I am not a proponent of tanking, but I do believe you missed some of the explanation of what the original poster meant by "tanking". My understanding is that it didn't involve athletes throwing games or giving anything less than their best. He had some recommendations in the original post and clarified further that later that it does not involve asking the players to tank.

@rf54, you can correct me if I understood wrong.

Regardless, any effort by a coach or front office to intentionally lose games would be akin to point shaving or other matters. Any coach or executive found to be doing so would almost certainly be subject to discipline from the NFL. Furthermore, any obvious efforts to bench star players or to trade/cut them would almost certainly poison a locker room and alienate veteran players. 
 

The idea of "tanking" in any form is a terrible idea fraught with many potential adverse consequences. All for a player who might pan out, or might be Jamarcus Russell. 

[Cearbhall]

4 minutes ago, swede700 said:

He was saying that the owners, GM and coaches should set the team up to tank for the rest of the season (and no one else needs to know!!!).  That's a ridiculous notion.

It is arguable that the GM already is engaging in this form of tanking by going into the season with Pat Elflein and Dakota Dozier as his starting guards.

[Cearbhall]

3 minutes ago, wcblack34 said:

Regardless, any effort by a coach or front office to intentionally lose games would be akin to point shaving or other matters. Any coach or executive found to be doing so would almost certainly be subject to discipline from the NFL. Furthermore, any obvious efforts to bench star players or to trade/cut them would almost certainly poison a locker room and alienate veteran players. 
 

The idea of "tanking" in any form is a terrible idea fraught with many potential adverse consequences. All for a player who might pan out, or might be Jamarcus Russell. 

Like I said, I am not a proponent. You don't need to convince me. I was just trying to help you since it seemed to me that you didn't remember the part where it was addressed.

Fwif, if tanking is defined as the original poster defined it, I think it happens every year. Teams play younger guys to see what they have, not because they think the younger guy gives them the best chance of winning.

[vikesfan89]

2 hours ago, twslhs20 said:

I don't think anyone really thinks an NFL team would throw games. Vegas would come unglued.

This roster, as a whole, is bad enough to land in the top 5, without throwing games. I think that is where the idea becomes interesting. If you can secure the 1st overall pick,. with a little extra effort, then whats the difference? A lot of athletes will still get paid, despite being on bad teams.

If a corner were to play excellent all game, and gave up 1 big play that cost them the win, I don't think that would keep them from getting paid. It would also be very hard to prove/disprove the argument of throwing the game.

If someone told a corner to give up a TD, I don't see how that wouldn't get out

[babababa]

1 hour ago, Cearbhall said:

Like I said, I am not a proponent. You don't need to convince me. I was just trying to help you since it seemed to me that you didn't remember the part where it was addressed.

Fwif, if tanking is defined as the original poster defined it, I think it happens every year. Teams play younger guys to see what they have, not because they think the younger guy gives them the best chance of winning.

I only know of 2 instances when that happens: 

1) Your team fires the coach after the bye week. The interim coach then has to try things -- anything. This may include benching the regular starters that were put into their roles by the previous coaching staff. Look to the Lions for this sort of thing to potentially happen this year. Quin and Patricia were on the hot seat at the end of last season and the team isn't responding yet this year. Stafford could even be traded immediately after the bye, because a team may want to get the most out of him now rather than next season, while the new hire for the Lions will want to go in a new direction.

2) You're done jostling for playoff position. In this scenario you either have homefield advantage going into the playoffs and you want to rest your starters, or you cannot change your current placement in the playoff bracket. This scenario does both -- protecting your starters and seeing what younger guys and backups can offer going forward. [see Vikings wk 17 2019]

Otherwise, if a coaching staff is deciding to start a younger player over a vet it is because the staff thinks that the younger player is ready to help the team win and sees that player as better at that moment to take over the position. 

If this doesn't make sense sign me and I'll go onto the field for 500k. I'll make sure to tank for your enjoyment.

Edited September 25, 2020 by babababa

[SteelKing728]

If Trevor Lawrence were a Viking, what week would he suffer a serious injury?

Not because he's frail. Just because he's a Viking.

[VikeManDan]

4 minutes ago, SteelKing728 said:

If Trevor Lawrence were a Viking, what week would he suffer a serious injury?

Not because he's frail. Just because he's a Viking.

Stop.

[rf54]

On 9/25/2020 at 12:20 PM, Cearbhall said:

I am not a proponent of tanking, but I do believe you missed some of the explanation of what the original poster meant by "tanking". My understanding is that it didn't involve athletes throwing games or giving anything less than their best. He had some recommendations in the original post and clarified further that later that it does not involve asking the players to tank.

@rf54, you can correct me if I understood wrong.

Thank you!!!  You actually read the posts and understand what I was saying.  They don't have to tell anyone to play poor, they just have some holes in the roster that make it hard to win games.  I have seen this coming since March and we lost all 3 starting CBs.  The margin in the NFL is so thin it does not take much to put your team at a real disadvantage.

[whitehops]

"tanking" in professional sports almost never happens in the way some think. players never intentionally lose, coaches never tell players to make mistakes, etc. tanking is essentially "preparing for the future - now". that means personnel moves (like going with an entire corner group of guys under 24) and especially later in the season giving more snaps to guys like james lynch than jaleel johnson. 

 

another way which the vikings haven't done is to trade vets for draft picks. the vikings trading rudolph or reiff before the trade deadline would be examples of tanking, even though the coaches would still gameplan and coach to win, and the remaining players would still play to win. the team would just not be as likely to win, even when trying. 

[Cearbhall]

14 minutes ago, whitehops said:

"tanking" in professional sports almost never happens in the way some think. players never intentionally lose, coaches never tell players to make mistakes, etc. tanking is essentially "preparing for the future - now". that means personnel moves (like going with an entire corner group of guys under 24) and especially later in the season giving more snaps to guys like james lynch than jaleel johnson. 

 

another way which the vikings haven't done is to trade vets for draft picks. the vikings trading rudolph or reiff before the trade deadline would be examples of tanking, even though the coaches would still gameplan and coach to win, and the remaining players would still play to win. the team would just not be as likely to win, even when trying. 

I agree with all of this. I think that there needs to be a better marketing effort than calling it tanking. That word gives people some of the ideas that we see opponents of the concept talking about here, even though none of the things those opponents were talking about was ever said. Things like throwing the game or telling players to make a bad play or intentionally lose is what comes to mind when the word tanking is used. 

It sounds better to say that you think the team ought to do what they can to prepare for the future.

[Uncle Buck]

On 9/24/2020 at 2:00 AM, babababa said:

Pretend the Lions played "extremely well" even though they have barely ever played moderately well? I can't pretend that they "should have won" that game against the Bears. The Bears should have won that game and did because the Lions choked just like they did opening game in AZ the year before and at home against the Jets the year before that. You choke because you aren't good at football.

The Lions are a team that's REALLY ready to fire the GM & Head Coach along with shipping Stafford out of town. Stafford has had a long erratic career and I couldn't figure out why they didn't draft Tua to groom him when they had the chance. Just pretend if the Vikings were that bad last year and Cousins was injured for over half the year, and then the Vikings decided to pass on Tua.

The Eagles, meanwhile, didn't pass on Hurts. Yeah the Eagles, who you also mentioned, who aren't too pleased with Wentz right now.

Neither Wentz nor Stafford has won a post-season game.

Cousins did...and he won the game on the road with his throws in OT.

Now people -- just months removed -- pretend that didn't happen? 

Pretend away.

 

 

As you can probably surmise by my avatar pic, I am hoping the Vikings lose every game this year.  I really want us to get one of the top two quarterbacks.  Not because Cousins isn't good.  He is.  It's just that I think both of them have a higher ceiling than Kirk has, and we could have them for five years for considerably less money.  I would love to see us get a great rookie QB and rebuild this team for the future. 

I'm not one of those people who pretend Cousins didn't win a playoff game.  Then again, I'm also one of the very few who think Tim Tebow should have been given a chance too after leading an 0-4 team to the playoffs AND a playoff win in his first year as a starter.

[babababa]

28 minutes ago, Uncle Buck said:

As you can probably surmise by my avatar pic, I am hoping the Vikings lose every game this year.  I really want us to get one of the top two quarterbacks.  Not because Cousins isn't good.  He is.  It's just that I think both of them have a higher ceiling than Kirk has, and we could have them for five years for considerably less money.  I would love to see us get a great rookie QB and rebuild this team for the future. 

I'm not one of those people who pretend Cousins didn't win a playoff game.  Then again, I'm also one of the very few who think Tim Tebow should have been given a chance too after leading an 0-4 team to the playoffs AND a playoff win in his first year as a starter.

I look forward to Sunday football because I want to sit down and watch the team I root for win.

 

[Uncle Buck]

34 minutes ago, babababa said:

I look forward to Sunday football because I want to sit down and watch the team I root for win.

 

Nothing wrong with that.  i certainly don't look down on you for feeling that way. 

[SemperFeist]

Michael Vick, David Carr, Joey Harrington, Carson Palmer, Eli Manning, Philip Rivers, Alex Smith, Vince Young, JaMarcus Russell, Matt Ryan, Matthew Stafford, Mark Sanchez, Sam Bradford, Cam Newton, Andrew Luck, Robert Griffin III, Blake Bortles, Jameis Winston, Marcus Mariota, Jared Goff, Carson Wentz, Mitchell Trubisly, Baker Mayfield, Sam Darnold, and Kyler Murray

Every top 5 QB taken this century. Look at all those names, all of those “franchise” quarterbacks who were going to change the fortunes of their franchises. 

Only 4 of the 25 got their team to a Super Bowl. Only 1 of the 25 won a Super Bowl. 8 never, or have yet, played in a playoff game. 

But, sure, tanking is a good idea. 

[Uncle Buck]

34 minutes ago, SemperFeist said:

Michael Vick, David Carr, Joey Harrington, Carson Palmer, Eli Manning, Philip Rivers, Alex Smith, Vince Young, JaMarcus Russell, Matt Ryan, Matthew Stafford, Mark Sanchez, Sam Bradford, Cam Newton, Andrew Luck, Robert Griffin III, Blake Bortles, Jameis Winston, Marcus Mariota, Jared Goff, Carson Wentz, Mitchell Trubisly, Baker Mayfield, Sam Darnold, and Kyler Murray

Every top 5 QB taken this century. Look at all those names, all of those “franchise” quarterbacks who were going to change the fortunes of their franchises. 

Only 4 of the 25 got their team to a Super Bowl. Only 1 of the 25 won a Super Bowl. 8 never, or have yet, played in a playoff game. 

But, sure, tanking is a good idea. 

How many Super Bowls have we been to this century doing it our way?  Now, I know you weren't trying to sell me on the virtues of going with a 4th round QB, so its is not all that great of a comparison, but I decided to look at all of them just to see what I found.  I found the list very sobering.  Here they are:

Chris Wienke, Sage Rosenfels, David Garrard, Rohan Davey, Seneca Wallace, Luke McCown, Kyle Orton, Stefan LeFors, Brad Smith, Isiah Stanback, Isiah Stanback, Stephen McGee, Mike Kafka, KIRK COU$IN$, Matt Barkley, Ryan Nassib, Tyler Wilson, Landry Jones, Logan Thomas, Tom Savage, Bryce Petty, Connor Cook, Dak Prescott, Cardale Jones, Joshua Dobbs, Kyle Lauletta, Ryan Finley, Jarrett Stidham, Jacob Eason, and James Morgan.

We think our guy Kirk is at least in the "pretty good" range, but based on the above list, what would make us think Kirk is going to elevate himself that far above his contemporaries in the 4th round?  He's a good QB, but I just don't see him leading us through the gauntlet that is the NFL playoffs and a Super Bowl game. 

My point is that we have tried many retreads over the years, and now we have something else with Kirk.  I like the guy.  He is a good person, has a nice arm, and usually won't lose the game for you with too many stupid mistakes.  I'm just at the point where I think we need to try and do what it takes to bring in a potentially great QB and then make some major changes in the makeup of our team.  It's really early at this point.  The Vikings will more than likely find a way to win 3-5 games so it will be a moot point.  We will have to see..

Edited September 27, 2020 by Uncle Buck