Jump to content

Has there ever been a more transparent tank job?


Recommended Posts

The other issue is NFL is a contact league and there's much greater risk to players on any given play than in the NBA.  It would become a rabbit hole if the NFL front office tried to force teams to play certain players.  The best you could reasonably do is create a draft lottery (but that doesn't stop tanking in the NBA).

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, JAF-N72EX said:

And what good would that have done to keep Jalen in there?  So what....take him down the same path as they did with Wentz???  For what?  A meaningless game?  Now THAT doesn't make any sense. 

Then why play him in the first place?  Why wait until it was a 3-point game at the top of the 4th quarter?

A team doesn't bench the QB who gives them the best chance to win in a close game just because their offensive line is playing poorly.  Eagles did not bench Hurts to protect his health, they benched him to decrease their chances of winning.  It is the only reason you bench Hurts in that situation, because you no longer are trying as hard to win

And again, I get the logic behind it.  Picking 6, in theory, should be better than picking 9.  LIS, it isn't a huge deal.  But it still is a move that shows a complete lack of competitiveness, and it isn't the same as benching a guy at the start of the week. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

As  an Eagles fan I thought it was disgusting to give up like that.

  • Remember Doug also gave up and played for the tie earlier in the year

Going with Sudfeld at halftime instead of with the game on the line in the 4th would have felt different.

  • The jump offsides felt like it was planned even if it wasn't but that's what you get when you lose all credibility in the moment.
    • Maybe the D wanted to spare us from more Sudfeld?

TBH, its also absolutely what the Giants deserve for being a crappy team that could not win 7 games.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, speaking of crappy... the NFC Least as a whole anyway.  The league expands the playoffs without addressing the fact that a team from the East gets in despite meriting it, much less hosting a home game.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, JAF-N72EX said:

Sure it does. But maybe not to you.

What I quoted and responded to has nothing to do with your original statement that the Hurts benching is just “bad team being bad”. 

6 minutes ago, JAF-N72EX said:

And what good would that have done to keep Jalen in there?

Several reasons. Mainly, to win the game, to see what you have in Hurts, and to give your QBOTF much needed experience/playing time.

8 minutes ago, JAF-N72EX said:

Only because it doesn't fit your narrative. But feel free to believe what you want.

Likewise.

11 minutes ago, JAF-N72EX said:

It happens all the time with every coach.

Give me one example. Also, assuming Sudfield has some sort of PT incentive is complete conjecture on your end and incredibly unlikely. What would the incentive be, exactly? Some type of monetary bonus for playing 20 snaps?

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, iknowcool said:

It isn't though.  Steelers benched Ben at the start of the week and gave Rudolph the reps.  Eagles waited until it was a 3-point game in the 4th quarter to bench Hurts.  And they did it for a QB who clearly wasn't prepared to be out there.

One case is of a team genuinely resting a player to protect his health.  The other is a case of a team making it clear the efforts of the starters in the first 3 quarters was all for nothing.  

But I still don’t understand how resting starters is somehow different or better? They’re nearly identical situations with the only difference being one happened during the game. Why one is an accepted practice and the other isn’t is kinda lost on me? Either way neither team was trying to win, no?  

Edited by lavar703
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, iknowcool said:

Then why play him in the first place?  Why wait until it was a 3-point game at the top of the 4th quarter?

And again, I get the logic behind it.  Picking 6, in theory, should be better than picking 9.  LIS, it isn't a huge deal.  But it still is a move that shows a complete lack of competitiveness, and it isn't the same as benching a guy at the start of the week. 

Players get paid by the amount of snaps based on incentives put into their contracts and not all of them are equal.

It is the same when you're weighing options; "Do I risk our potential future QB health in a meaningless game?  Or do I pull him to keep him from suffering the same fate as Wentz and at the same time honor a guy who has been here faithfully for 3 years and give him a chance to earn more money? 

 

Edited by JAF-N72EX
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, SkippyX said:

This is a lame cold take.

Lots of teams rested players or pulled players.

The optics look bad but there are no penalties for it.

Now that gambling is legal and widespread, instances like this have to be fully investigated and dealt with harshly. Compromising the integrity of the game for any reason is unacceptable. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, checkcola said:

Well, speaking of crappy... the NFC Least as a whole anyway.  The league expands the playoffs without addressing the fact that a team from the East gets in despite meriting it, much less hosting a home game.  

Yeah. We have a division/conference set up where only the teams in your division play a similar schedule. We don't have a 31 week season where every team plays every other team so that we can see if an 8-8 team's record is not as strong as a 10-6 team's record. Only way to go truly by record only is to eliminate divisions and have a 31 week season so everyone can play everyone else.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't necessarily think they were tanking. Hurts was becoming less effective as the game wore on. 

Coaches have pulled starters late in games before in order to try to get a "spark" going. Yes, even in close games.

Regardless if it was a tank or not, the Washington forum will tell you I had wanted a top 5 pick instead of a fool's gold division title.

But one of the BEST outcomes for me is that the result of this game made John Mara sad. Anything that does that, I'm okay with.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, SmittyBacall said:
18 minutes ago, JAF-N72EX said:

Sure it does. But maybe not to you.

What I quoted and responded to has nothing to do with your original statement that the Hurts benching is just “bad team being bad”. 

Yes it does. But again, you just don't wanna believe it. 

4 minutes ago, SmittyBacall said:
19 minutes ago, JAF-N72EX said:

And what good would that have done to keep Jalen in there?

Several reasons. Mainly, to win the game, to see what you have in Hurts, and to give your QBOTF much needed experience/playing time.

And get him hurt in the process and suffer the fate as Wentz. 

7 minutes ago, SmittyBacall said:
22 minutes ago, JAF-N72EX said:

It happens all the time with every coach.

Give me one example. Also, assuming Sudfield has some sort of PT incentive is complete conjecture on your end and incredibly unlikely. What would the incentive be, exactly? Some type of monetary bonus for playing 20 snaps?

Yes, players have that in their contracts.  Belichick and every other coach does it to some extent and tonight was a good time to do it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, checkcola said:

Well, speaking of crappy... the NFC Least as a whole anyway.  The league expands the playoffs without addressing the fact that a team from the East gets in despite meriting it, much less hosting a home game.  

The 8-8 Bears (2-4 in their division) are in the playoffs with a QB who has beaten:

  • The 1-15 Jags
  • The 4-12 Texans
  • The 5-11 Lions
  • The 7-9 Vikings
  • The 6-10 Giants
  • The 4-12 Falcons (he need help in that one)
  • Foles beat the 5-11 Panthers
  • Foles also beat the 11-5 Bucs
    • 1 real win = playoffs!!!

I don't think we need to rewrite any rules because the 8-8 Cardinals could not beat (already forgot his name) at QB. 😄

  • or the Lions
  • or the Panthers
  • or the Patriots

At least the WFT went 4-2 in their division as well as beating the Steelers.

Schedules and divisions constantly change. Making a new rule for something that happens once every 5 to 7 years is weak.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, lavar703 said:

Jalen Hurts tears ACL

”OMG what was Pederson thinking leaving Hurts in in a meaningless game?”

 

No one would react that way under tonights circumstances.

If it was, for example, a blowout late in the game and Hurts was consistently getting rocked all night, sure. Pull the guy for safety. But in a close game where he wasn’t? Nah. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, JAF-N72EX said:

Yes it does. But again, you just don't wanna believe it. 

And get him hurt in the process and suffer the fate as Wentz. 

Yes, players have that in their contracts.  Belichick and every other coach does it to some extent and tonight was a good time to do it. 

Lol. This is going no where fast. 

Agree to disagree.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, lavar703 said:

But I still don’t understand how resting starters is somehow different or better? They’re nearly identical situations with the only difference being one happened during the game. Why one is an accepted practice and the other isn’t is kinda lost on me? Either way neither team was trying to win, no?  

Because the Eagles weren't resting Hurts for rest, otherwise he wouldn't have played in the first place.  They benched Hurts to negatively impact their chances of winning.  

One thing to bench starters before the game.  One thing to wait to bench them in a 3-point game in the 4th quarter.  Again, if you think that is okay, then that is fine.  But let's stop pretending like he did it to rest them.  Mike Tomlin rested his QB.  Andy Reid rested his QB.  Doug Pederson played his QB and his best active option, and then waited until it was a 3-point game to bench him.  That is how it is different.  Pederson's motives were not rest, and thus, it comes across as pathetic and lacking competitiveness.  At least to me.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...