After the Tank - what really happens

[Hapless Bills Fan]

I would like to address the persistent theme on this board that the Bills should tank.

As an example of this viewpoint, see: https://forums.twobillsdrive.com/topic/195620-this-team-is-being-built-like-water/?p=4489558

Let's look for a minute at the fate of teams which draft #1 overall (eg after being the NFL's "biggest losers") and choose a QB, as a franchise QB is generally regarded as the most important factor for a team's long term success. I'm going to look at the decade from 2005-2014 on the theory it's too soon to judge 2015 and 2016.

 

During that decade, a QB was drafted with the first overall pick 60% of the time (6/10). I'm going to look at the W/L record during the 'tank', and 5 years after the 'tank' since I think most fans would feel 5 years is enough time for a #1 draft pick to develop and a good coach/GM to build a team
Let's see what happened
Year Team Player W/L 'tank W/L Next 5 years Playoffs? Result
2005 SF Smith 2-14 4-12, 7-9, 5-11, 7-9, 8-8 N climb to Mediocrity

2007 Oak Russell 2-14 4-12, 5-11,5-11, 8-8, 8-8 N climb to Mediocrity

2009 Det Stafford 0-16 2-14, 6-10,10-6, 4-12,7-9 1x, WC 1 good year then Mediocrity
2010 StL Bradford 1-15 7-9, 2-14, 7-8, 7-9, 6-10 N Mediocrity
2011 Car Newton 2-14 6-10, 7-9, 12-4, 7-8, 15-1 2x ,Div, SB Success
2012 Ind Luck 2-14 11-5, 11-5, 11-5, 8-8, 8-8 3x WC, Div, Conf Success

Clearly, in 4 of 6 cases, drafting a QB #1 overall after a "tank" did NOT lead a team to long term winning success.

Was it just picking the wrong QB? In the case of Smith, like him or don't his teams have gone to playoffs 5 of the last 6 years, so arguably the team around the QB or the development of the QB has something to do with it. Matt Stafford overall has the stats of a good QB. He's durable, he passes for 7.1 ypa and >4000 yds per season, doesn't throw too many picks, took them to playoffs again in his 6th year. Bradford had durability issues, but played well in his 3rd season (a losing one for the team) and has played well his last 2 years, especially last year. The only clear-cut terrible, very bad, no good QB was Russell.

I just throw that out there for the guys who are clamoring for "tank, tank". Reflect a bit, because clearly tanking and drafting #1 Qb has not proven the path to success more often than it has.

 

[RyanC883]

I would like to address the persistent theme on this board that the Bills should tank.

As an example of this viewpoint, see: https://forums.twobillsdrive.com/topic/195620-this-team-is-being-built-like-water/?p=4489558

 

Let's look for a minute at the fate of teams which draft #1 overall (eg after being the NFL's "biggest losers") and choose a QB, as a franchise QB is generally regarded as the most important factor for a team's long term success. I'm going to look at the decade from 2005-2014 on the theory it's too soon to judge 2015 and 2016.

 

During that decade, a QB was drafted with the first overall pick 60% of the time (6/10). I'm going to look at the W/L record during the 'tank', and 5 years after the 'tank' since I think most fans would feel 5 years is enough time for a #1 draft pick to develop and a good coach/GM to build a team

Let's see what happened

Year Team Player W/L 'tank W/L Next 5 years Playoffs? Result

2005 SF Smith 2-14 4-12, 7-9, 5-11, 7-9, 8-8 N climb to Mediocrity

2007 Oak Russell 2-14 4-12, 5-11,5-11, 8-8, 8-8 N climb to Mediocrity

2009 Det Stafford 0-16 2-14, 6-10,10-6, 4-12,7-9 1x, WC 1 good year then Mediocrity

2010 StL Bradford 1-15 7-9, 2-14, 7-8, 7-9, 6-10 N Mediocrity

2011 Car Newton 2-14 6-10, 7-9, 12-4, 7-8, 15-1 2x ,Div, SB Success

2012 Ind Luck 2-14 11-5, 11-5, 11-5, 8-8, 8-8 3x WC, Div, Conf Success

 

Clearly, in 4 of 6 cases, drafting a QB #1 overall after a "tank" did NOT lead a team to long term winning success.

 

Was it just picking the wrong QB? In the case of Smith, like him or don't his teams have gone to playoffs 5 of the last 6 years, so arguably the team around the QB or the development of the QB has something to do with it. Matt Stafford overall has the stats of a good QB. He's durable, he passes for 7.1 ypa and >4000 yds per season, doesn't throw too many picks, took them to playoffs again in his 6th year. Bradford had durability issues, but played well in his 3rd season (a losing one for the team) and has played well his last 2 years, especially last year. The only clear-cut terrible, very bad, no good QB was Russell.

 

I just throw that out there for the guys who are clamoring for "tank, tank". Reflect a bit, because clearly tanking and drafting #1 Qb has not proven the path to success more often than it has.

 

 

 

 

I agree. You need a talented team around a QB for that QB to have quick success (ex. Big Ben, Eli Manning, Rivers, Dak, Wentz, and Winston).

[4_kidd_4]

Prob hold each other and share a cig.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

Prob hold each other and share a cig.

 

Is this supposed to be related to my post on tanking in some way? too clever for me if so

[oldmanfan]

Back on the old board I got yelled at for saying that the T word should be banned and those using it as well. But I will reiterate that belief here. They are not going to "T word" this season, nor is there any reason to do so. Your post is spot on. Plus if you step back and look realistically at what has gone on this offseason, other than the Sammy trade (which I did not agree with), it seems to me there has been a balance of favorable and unfavorable things. The offense is essentially the same up front (and Glenn being healthy might just be the key to the season), other than Sammy the WR corps overall is as good if not better than last year. Shady is still around, and they added a great blocking FB. So really comparing to last year the key questions are Glenn's health, and whether Dennison's offense uses TT more favorably and maintains the strong running game (which at least based on a few carries by Shady last weekend seems like it should work).

 

The defense benefits from getting back to a scheme that fits more of the front 7 guys. Certainly the front 4 will like McD's D better, as will Brown at MLB. Lorax and Humber we'll have to see, but losing Zach B likely wasn't a huge loss because he may not have been as effective in the 4-3. We're worried about DB's, but we have a round one pick at one CB and Gaines who was all-rookie and likes the zone based scheme. Safeties I actually think Hydd and the other guy (I know I'll spell it wrong - Posner??) are playing well, and upgrade over A Will and Graham. The kicking game with Hauschka should be better. So we lost two CB's, have two to come in and take their roles, and a LB that was perhaps not a great 4-3 fit. Time will tell if these changes add up to a net negative or positive.

 

This year will come down to similar things as most years for most teams. Does TT do a good job at QB? Does our strength (running game) hold up? How will the D look? Can the dumb penalties stop? And of course how will injuries affect things. Many of these are unknown now. But if you try and look with a dispassionate eye towards things, no reason to think this team is all of a sudden horrible.

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

I would like to address the persistent theme on this board that the Bills should tank.

As an example of this viewpoint, see: https://forums.twobillsdrive.com/topic/195620-this-team-is-being-built-like-water/?p=4489558

 

Let's look for a minute at the fate of teams which draft #1 overall (eg after being the NFL's "biggest losers") and choose a QB, as a franchise QB is generally regarded as the most important factor for a team's long term success. I'm going to look at the decade from 2005-2014 on the theory it's too soon to judge 2015 and 2016.

 

During that decade, a QB was drafted with the first overall pick 60% of the time (6/10). I'm going to look at the W/L record during the 'tank', and 5 years after the 'tank' since I think most fans would feel 5 years is enough time for a #1 draft pick to develop and a good coach/GM to build a team

Let's see what happened

Year Team Player W/L 'tank W/L Next 5 years Playoffs? Result

2005 SF Smith 2-14 4-12, 7-9, 5-11, 7-9, 8-8 N climb to Mediocrity

2007 Oak Russell 2-14 4-12, 5-11,5-11, 8-8, 8-8 N climb to Mediocrity

2009 Det Stafford 0-16 2-14, 6-10,10-6, 4-12,7-9 1x, WC 1 good year then Mediocrity

2010 StL Bradford 1-15 7-9, 2-14, 7-8, 7-9, 6-10 N Mediocrity

2011 Car Newton 2-14 6-10, 7-9, 12-4, 7-8, 15-1 2x ,Div, SB Success

2012 Ind Luck 2-14 11-5, 11-5, 11-5, 8-8, 8-8 3x WC, Div, Conf Success

 

Clearly, in 4 of 6 cases, drafting a QB #1 overall after a "tank" did NOT lead a team to long term winning success.

 

Was it just picking the wrong QB? In the case of Smith, like him or don't his teams have gone to playoffs 5 of the last 6 years, so arguably the team around the QB or the development of the QB has something to do with it. Matt Stafford overall has the stats of a good QB. He's durable, he passes for 7.1 ypa and >4000 yds per season, doesn't throw too many picks, took them to playoffs again in his 6th year. Bradford had durability issues, but played well in his 3rd season (a losing one for the team) and has played well his last 2 years, especially last year. The only clear-cut terrible, very bad, no good QB was Russell.

 

I just throw that out there for the guys who are clamoring for "tank, tank". Reflect a bit, because clearly tanking and drafting #1 Qb has not proven the path to success more often than it has.

 

 

 

 

....NICE work bud.......too much talent on this team to think about tanking.....would you want to be a player on a "tank job" club?......maybe we could have the inaugural "Tankers of the Year" trophy presented at SB halftime by Goodell with all 53 players inscribed along with a $10 million dollar fine......this is probably TT's "make it or break it" year so give the kid one last shot....bring Peterman along slowly.....besides, what's wrong with two 1sts, two 2nds AND two 3rds in 2018?.....and who even knows what QB's come out, who stays healthy, who gets injured, etc?.....tank is just wasted yap........

[TheElectricCompany]

and who even knows what QB's come out, who stays healthy, who gets injured, etc?.....tank

Yes, this is what gets me about the whole "tanking" argument.

What if the guy you wanted stays in school, or shreds his knee in the bowl game like Jaylon Smith?

There are too many factors at the NCAA level to be able to tank effectively.

[26CornerBlitz]

Nice followup by HBF to the Flip Johnson thread. Well done.

[GoBills808]

So...as long as we don't draft Alex Smith or Jamarcus Russel we have a 50% chance of becoming a very good football team? Sign me up.

[ddaryl]

So I sing you to sleep
After the tankin'
I brush back the hair from your eyes.
And the disgust on your face
Is so real that it makes me want to cry.

And I know that my song
Isn't sayin' anything new.
Oh, but after the tankin'
I'm still in love with you

[billz4life820]

you can argue all you want but the one thing this team has been missing in the 17 year playoff drought is an above average qb...... we have had teams with a talented defense, great running offense, talented wrs, etc.... but we have never had a truly good qb....and guess what the results were the same for those 17 years

[Kemp2Warlick]

good job Hap...

[DaBillsFanSince1973]

 

Is this supposed to be related to my post on tanking in some way? too clever for me if so

 

just another smart ass reply by said poster.

 

good job on the OP but you're never going to change the loser mentality of the tanksters.

 

 

they'll all be crying the blues when the team doesn't tank so keep a large supply of tissues for them to pass around.

[4_kidd_4]

So I sing you to sleep

After the tankin'

I brush back the hair from your eyes.

And the disgust on your face

Is so real that it makes me want to cry.

And I know that my song

Isn't sayin' anything new.

Oh, but after the tankin'

I'm still in love with you

This guy gets it.

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

Yes, this is what gets me about the whole "tanking" argument.

What if the guy you wanted stays in school, or shreds his knee in the bowl game like Jaylon Smith?

There are too many factors at the NCAA level to be able to tank effectively.

 

...."quitters NEVER prosper" is how I put it......the yipsters about the Cheatriots, yup them with 5 SB's and 14 AFCE titles ALL from cheating (COUGH), don't see "tanking" as another form of cheating.....go figure....

[Bleeding Bills Blue]

 

I agree. You need a talented team around a QB for that QB to have quick success (ex. Big Ben, Eli Manning, Rivers, Dak, Wentz, and Winston).

 

Which means hitting on a few picks next year would go a long way to building a successful team. Rather than trading them all.

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

 

Which means hitting on a few picks next year would go a long way to building a successful team. Rather than trading them all.

 

..the draft is a never ending crap shoot....no way to measure what is in a kid's head and heart...do you get a hard charger who loves the game and plays accordingly?...do you get a kid that now hits the bankroll with major guaranteed money and Bentleys are more important than football?...injury, unknown or undisclosed health condition (docs have missed some)?.....BUT...with six in the first three rounds of 2018, the future POSITIONALLY is bright.....do all, some or none pan out?......stay tuned...............

[elroy16]

Well researched information there.

 

My favorite pro tank argument I saw on twitter was, "3-13 gets you a franchise QB, 7-9 gets you whitner." The problem with that statement is the only QB that was drafted before Whitner was Vince Young, so yeah.

 

 

Between changing systems, not the best QB, lack of quality depth, and what looks like a brutal schedule, I wouldn't be shocked with 5 wins or so. I don't think they'll be worse than that, but it's possible. Hopefully with their mid-high first round pick and the additional stock they have, they can move up and get a QB if Tyrod and Peterman don't appear to have the ability to run the offense. If they do, they have a bunch of picks to add a lot of talent.

 

 

Anyway, in the NFL, I am 100% anti-tank. I'm against it in any sport really, I hate the idea of not trying to win, but in the Sabres case, it worked out. Even in the NHL it's not a guarantee, look at Reinhart. I like him as a player, but he's not looking like a star who can turn a franchise around.

[JohnBonhamRocks]

Thanks for the work on this

 

Don't see any team beating the Jets in the 2017 Tank-a-palooza.

 

Also, definitely agree with the gist of this argument.

 

Look at all the QBs recently who have had degrees of success and were not high 1st round picks: Prescott (4), Siemian (7), Bridgewater (1, but pick 32), Carr (2), and Savage (4). That's back through 2014.

 

While 2013 sucked for QBs overall, look at 2012: Wilson (3), Foles (3), and Cousins (4).

 

2011: Dalton (2), Kaepernick (2), and Taylor (6).

 

Point being, if we're not picking top 3, I'd almost rather we wait til round 2-4 and get "our guy." All depends on who is there though.

Edited August 25, 2017 by JohnBonhamRocks

[BillsFan4]

Did all those teams truly tank a season?

 

What I consider tanking is what Cleveland did, and what the Jets are doing this season. They were clearly not trying to compete before the season even started (IMO anyway).

 

Can you say the same about all the teams you listed? Were they truly not trying to compete, or did they just have a bad year?

I honestly don't know the answer to this without doing some research on it.

 

To me, it seems like there have been plenty of very good, successful teams built without "tanking", and plenty of good QBs found outside the top 2-3 picks.

 

 

 

 

 

I just don't see tanking as necessary in football, like it is in Hockey. In this day and age in the NHL, you almost need a top 3 pick to get that truly elite franchise changing center/player. Guys like McDavid, Eichel, Matthews, Kane, Toews, Doughty don't fall in the draft. They go top 3. If you look at the teams that have won Cups recently, basically every single one of them has had at least 1 top 3 pick.

 

Where as football just seems different to me. Yes, you need a top 3 pick to get those truly elite QBs when there is even 1 in the draft to get. But so many good franchise QBs have been fond outside the top 5 as well. Some of the best QBs in the NFL were found outside the top 5. There is also plenty of game changing talent all through the first 2 (and even 3) rounds of the draft, and there have been quite a few SB winning teams built without a top 3 pick.

 

Just look at the list of teams who have won the Super Bowl recently - only a couple of them had top picked QBs. Just going back 10 years, 3 of those 10 winners had top picked QBs, and 1 of those 3 was an old, decrepit Peyton Manning playing as a shell of himself. The other 7 had QBs that were picked outside of the top 5 (and really, the top 9/10).

 

And actually, if you go back further than 10 years there are a lot more SB winning QBs taken outside the top of the draft - just going back to 2000, 13 of the 17 SB winning QBs were not top 5 draft picks (if I counted correctly...)

 

http://www.topendsports.com/events/super-bowl/winners-list.htm

[TheElectricCompany]

Did all those teams truly tank a season?

 

What I consider tanking is what Cleveland did, and what the Jets are doing this season. They were clearly not trying to compete before the season even started (IMO anyway).

 

Cleveland and the Jets got rid of fading veterans and big contracts, and are investing in youth they think they can develop. I think they'd rather get these guys reps and let them learn on the fly. It's as close as you're going to get to tanking, but the reality of their situation is that they're terrible teams who couldn't buy a win.

 

The only time I really suspected a team to tank was the year the Colts went without Manning, but I think that team was poorly coached and was completely deflated without Manning leading them out there.

Edited August 25, 2017 by TheElectricCompany

[87168]

same mediocrity.

 

"build through the draft" should mean holding onto talent, and filling in the missing pieces. that's not what they're doing.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

Nice followup by HBF to the Flip Johnson thread. Well done.

 

Thanks!

good job Hap...

 

Thanks

 

So...as long as we don't draft Alex Smith or Jamarcus Russel we have a 50% chance of becoming a very good football team? Sign me up.

 

Right, now all you have to do is figure out which of the draft class is the equivalent of Alex Smith or Jamarcus Russell.

[nedboy7]

After 25 years of not missing a game I think we have a front office I truly despise.

Edited August 26, 2017 by nedboy7

[Buffalo Barbarian]

I would like to address the persistent theme on this board that the Bills should tank.

 

As an example of this viewpoint, see: https://forums.twobillsdrive.com/topic/195620-this-team-is-being-built-like-water/?p=4489558

Let's look for a minute at the fate of teams which draft #1 overall (eg after being the NFL's "biggest losers") and choose a QB, as a franchise QB is generally regarded as the most important factor for a team's long term success. I'm going to look at the decade from 2005-2014 on the theory it's too soon to judge 2015 and 2016.

 

During that decade, a QB was drafted with the first overall pick 60% of the time (6/10). I'm going to look at the W/L record during the 'tank', and 5 years after the 'tank' since I think most fans would feel 5 years is enough time for a #1 draft pick to develop and a good coach/GM to build a team

Let's see what happened

Year Team Player W/L 'tank W/L Next 5 years Playoffs? Result

2005 SF Smith 2-14 4-12, 7-9, 5-11, 7-9, 8-8 N climb to Mediocrity

2007 Oak Russell 2-14 4-12, 5-11,5-11, 8-8, 8-8 N climb to Mediocrity

2009 Det Stafford 0-16 2-14, 6-10,10-6, 4-12,7-9 1x, WC 1 good year then Mediocrity

2010 StL Bradford 1-15 7-9, 2-14, 7-8, 7-9, 6-10 N Mediocrity

2011 Car Newton 2-14 6-10, 7-9, 12-4, 7-8, 15-1 2x ,Div, SB Success

2012 Ind Luck 2-14 11-5, 11-5, 11-5, 8-8, 8-8 3x WC, Div, Conf Success

Clearly, in 4 of 6 cases, drafting a QB #1 overall after a "tank" did NOT lead a team to long term winning success.

Was it just picking the wrong QB? In the case of Smith, like him or don't his teams have gone to playoffs 5 of the last 6 years, so arguably the team around the QB or the development of the QB has something to do with it. Matt Stafford overall has the stats of a good QB. He's durable, he passes for 7.1 ypa and >4000 yds per season, doesn't throw too many picks, took them to playoffs again in his 6th year. Bradford had durability issues, but played well in his 3rd season (a losing one for the team) and has played well his last 2 years, especially last year. The only clear-cut terrible, very bad, no good QB was Russell.

I just throw that out there for the guys who are clamoring for "tank, tank". Reflect a bit, because clearly tanking and drafting #1 Qb has not proven the path to success more often than it has.

 

They didn't tank, they just sucked, like we did in 84,85 , here's to sucking, go Bills !!

[Marty McFly]

I would like to address the persistent theme on this board that the Bills should tank.

 

 

 

 

Nice work hap. The tank mentality is a fallacy for us, having a good team around your new QB will help him develop the best. We can still draft a qb high with the draft pick ammo we have and keep the good players on roster, i dont know why so many want to make this team worse so bad but its not a good idea we are not in cap hell.

After 25 years of not missing a game I think we have a front office I truly despise.

 

Beane definitely turned heel on us. More tank moves and im gonna troll heavy.

[cage]

All of this tank talk is beyond tiresome. I've posted this in other threads, but nobody's responded, so I'll try it here. Beyond the OP's correct viewpoint, there would be several problems with any tanking related effort.

 

I get the two trades thus far.... unclear how healthy Sammy really is and whether he could be re-signed at the end of the year. By the articles I've read, Darby wasn't a fit nor buying into the new system. If those are the reasons to move them then that's fine. To run a fire sale during training camp just before the season starts is simply not possible.

 

Any further trades of star players would be a more blatant communication of an intention to tank than even anything the Sabres did. Tyrod is under long-term contract and was just in the pro-bowl, dumping him to play a 5th round rookie would be the ultimate disrespect to fans and the players that remain. And trading Shady completely neutralizes the offense. How do you explain that to guys like Kyle Williams or Lorenzo or Ritchie? The coach and front office would lose the locker room. Particularly after Shady's interview this week telling reporters that FO was honest.

 

The team would be playing in front of low crowds and have no team unity, getting destroyed on talk radio every day. I'm not sure if there's a punishment the league could put on a team for practically deliberately trying to lose? The NFL could try to do that for conduct detrimental to the league, just as they took draft picks away from the Patriots. At least they did what they did trying win!

 

And how do you justify these actions to any player that got hurt with either a season or career ending injury, while you're tanking?? Players are being diagnosed w/ CTE and having life threatening repercussions from putting it all on the line playing football... to tank?? What player would ever want to play for a FO that did that? The careers of football players are shorter and more fragile than any other sport.

 

I don't think the Front Office would recover from doing a move like that.

 

Furthermore, people from Buffalo endlessly talk about how the city is disrespected far and wide. What would be the reaction to BOTH sports teams in the city, having worked to deliberately lose in the eyes of sports fans across the country? The Pegulas would be branded as owners for allowing it to happen to both of their teams.

 

Can we STOP the tank talk??

Edited August 26, 2017 by cage

[CSBill]

And all this is why I HATE trading away two of your best young players. You win by building a team of better players. When you have them, keep them. Every draft pick--even number one quarterbacks--is a crap shoot. If you have proven stars, keep them!

 

The idea of Tanking and then drafting your way to instant success is ludicrous TBD.

Edited August 26, 2017 by CSBill

[Over 29 years of fanhood]

So tanking is clearly a hapless pursuit!

[oldmanfan]

And all this is why I HATE trading away two of your best young players. You win by building a team of better players. When you have them, keep them. Every draft pick--even number one quarterbacks--is a crap shoot. If you have proven stars, keep them!

 

The idea of Tanking and then drafting your way to instant success is ludicrous TBD.

I didn't like the Sammy trade. But let's not go overboard and call Darby a star. Good rookie year but spotty last year.

 

I also think the whole conversation about the T word is ridiculous. Should be banned from the board. And the other thing that keeps getting talked about that is way off base is how we only traded these guys for draft picks. Not true. We got a pretty good WR in Matthews and a pretty good CB in Gaines. To me we lose some at WR if Sammy is healthy, a wash swapping out Gaines for Darby, and they get a couple higher round picks and gave up a 6th round pick. When discussing the trades people need to be accurate about what the deals actually were.

[SoTier]

Yes, this is what gets me about the whole "tanking" argument.

What if the guy you wanted stays in school, or shreds his knee in the bowl game like Jaylon Smith?

There are too many factors at the NCAA level to be able to tank effectively.

 

Better yet, what if you tank for a QB and pick the wrong one??? Tim Couch in '99 over Donovan McNabb? Alex Smith in 2005 over Aaron Rodgers?

 

Of course, there's always the possibility that there's no QB worth the #1 pick ... Russell in 2007 and Bradford in 2010 both come to mind.

 

In 2008, the #3 pick got the Falcons Matt Ryan. In 2014, the #3 pick got the Jags Blake Bortles.

 

Whether the Bills are deliberately tanking for a high draft spot or they're cynically cutting salary so that they can make more $$$ or they're simply incompetent, my guess is that they'll easily break 20 years of no playoffs even if the unnamed QB they'll undoubtedly draft in the first round in 2018 is the Messiah.

[Big Turk]

I would like to address the persistent theme on this board that the Bills should tank.

As an example of this viewpoint, see: https://forums.twobillsdrive.com/topic/195620-this-team-is-being-built-like-water/?p=4489558

 

Let's look for a minute at the fate of teams which draft #1 overall (eg after being the NFL's "biggest losers") and choose a QB, as a franchise QB is generally regarded as the most important factor for a team's long term success. I'm going to look at the decade from 2005-2014 on the theory it's too soon to judge 2015 and 2016.

 

During that decade, a QB was drafted with the first overall pick 60% of the time (6/10). I'm going to look at the W/L record during the 'tank', and 5 years after the 'tank' since I think most fans would feel 5 years is enough time for a #1 draft pick to develop and a good coach/GM to build a team

Let's see what happened

Year Team Player W/L 'tank W/L Next 5 years Playoffs? Result

2005 SF Smith 2-14 4-12, 7-9, 5-11, 7-9, 8-8 N climb to Mediocrity

2007 Oak Russell 2-14 4-12, 5-11,5-11, 8-8, 8-8 N climb to Mediocrity

2009 Det Stafford 0-16 2-14, 6-10,10-6, 4-12,7-9 1x, WC 1 good year then Mediocrity

2010 StL Bradford 1-15 7-9, 2-14, 7-8, 7-9, 6-10 N Mediocrity

2011 Car Newton 2-14 6-10, 7-9, 12-4, 7-8, 15-1 2x ,Div, SB Success

2012 Ind Luck 2-14 11-5, 11-5, 11-5, 8-8, 8-8 3x WC, Div, Conf Success

 

Clearly, in 4 of 6 cases, drafting a QB #1 overall after a "tank" did NOT lead a team to long term winning success.

 

Was it just picking the wrong QB? In the case of Smith, like him or don't his teams have gone to playoffs 5 of the last 6 years, so arguably the team around the QB or the development of the QB has something to do with it. Matt Stafford overall has the stats of a good QB. He's durable, he passes for 7.1 ypa and >4000 yds per season, doesn't throw too many picks, took them to playoffs again in his 6th year. Bradford had durability issues, but played well in his 3rd season (a losing one for the team) and has played well his last 2 years, especially last year. The only clear-cut terrible, very bad, no good QB was Russell.

 

I just throw that out there for the guys who are clamoring for "tank, tank". Reflect a bit, because clearly tanking and drafting #1 Qb has not proven the path to success more often than it has.

 

 

 

 

We aren't tanking...might want to post this on a Jets message board.

[cage]

 

We aren't tanking...might want to post this on a Jets message board.

 

Uh,.... its a fair topic, there's been endless discussion on this board with several posters advocating for it, some sportswriter have brought it up, national media has as well... and most don't think Anquan Boldin would have retired to pursue social good if he had just signed a 1 yr w/ a top contender.

[4_kidd_4]

After 25 years of not missing a game I think we have a front office I truly despise.

Tom Donahoe did nothing for you in that regard?

 

Russ Brandon as GM? Marv as GM?

 

At least give the new guys a year or two. I'm as salty as they come, and I'm even willing to let this play out for a few season.

 

Weather I pay for season tix again after this year is a different story.

[cage]

 

Clearly, in 4 of 6 cases, drafting a QB #1 overall after a "tank" did NOT lead a team to long term winning success.

 

 

 

I'm too lazy to do the analysis, but would love to see a same analysis for teams that traded up to get a "top QB". Doesn't have to be just #1, maybe top 3? This is Rams going to get Goff, Redskins trade-up to get Griffin and I know there's others. So these are teams that gave up huge draft collateral to get that one supposed savior.

 

That's my biggest fear with this accumulation of draft picks. Having a bad season, picking #6-10 and they give up all the draft picks they accumulated to get up to #1 or #2.... #NeverDoThat

 

UPDATE,... here's the analysis on Buffalo Rumblings

 

Here are the guys teams traded a boatload to go up and get over the last 20 years: Jared Goff, Carson Wentz, Robert Griffin, Blaine Gabbert, Mark Sanchez, Michael Vick and Ryan Leaf

 

So Goff and Wentz are undecided yet, but the rest is a 20% hit rate, plus a hugh loss of draft picks... and none of these teams improved. Unclear how good Vick could have made Falcons if he didn't derail his career.

Edited August 26, 2017 by cage

[Hapless Bills Fan]

So tanking is clearly a hapless pursuit!

 

I see what you did there heh heh

 

 

We aren't tanking...might want to post this on a Jets message board.

 

Would not be an effective strategy to address folks on this board who claim we should...besides, Jets message board? Ewwwwwww

Edited August 26, 2017 by Hapless Bills Fan

[4_kidd_4]

....pretty much the same?

[KellyToughII]

I would like to address the persistent theme on this board that the Bills should tank.

As an example of this viewpoint, see: https://forums.twobillsdrive.com/topic/195620-this-team-is-being-built-like-water/?p=4489558

 

Let's look for a minute at the fate of teams which draft #1 overall (eg after being the NFL's "biggest losers") and choose a QB, as a franchise QB is generally regarded as the most important factor for a team's long term success. I'm going to look at the decade from 2005-2014 on the theory it's too soon to judge 2015 and 2016.

 

During that decade, a QB was drafted with the first overall pick 60% of the time (6/10). I'm going to look at the W/L record during the 'tank', and 5 years after the 'tank' since I think most fans would feel 5 years is enough time for a #1 draft pick to develop and a good coach/GM to build a team

Let's see what happened

Year Team Player W/L 'tank W/L Next 5 years Playoffs? Result

2005 SF Smith 2-14 4-12, 7-9, 5-11, 7-9, 8-8 N climb to Mediocrity

2007 Oak Russell 2-14 4-12, 5-11,5-11, 8-8, 8-8 N climb to Mediocrity

2009 Det Stafford 0-16 2-14, 6-10,10-6, 4-12,7-9 1x, WC 1 good year then Mediocrity

2010 StL Bradford 1-15 7-9, 2-14, 7-8, 7-9, 6-10 N Mediocrity

2011 Car Newton 2-14 6-10, 7-9, 12-4, 7-8, 15-1 2x ,Div, SB Success

2012 Ind Luck 2-14 11-5, 11-5, 11-5, 8-8, 8-8 3x WC, Div, Conf Success

 

Clearly, in 4 of 6 cases, drafting a QB #1 overall after a "tank" did NOT lead a team to long term winning success.

 

Was it just picking the wrong QB? In the case of Smith, like him or don't his teams have gone to playoffs 5 of the last 6 years, so arguably the team around the QB or the development of the QB has something to do with it. Matt Stafford overall has the stats of a good QB. He's durable, he passes for 7.1 ypa and >4000 yds per season, doesn't throw too many picks, took them to playoffs again in his 6th year. Bradford had durability issues, but played well in his 3rd season (a losing one for the team) and has played well his last 2 years, especially last year. The only clear-cut terrible, very bad, no good QB was Russell.

 

I just throw that out there for the guys who are clamoring for "tank, tank". Reflect a bit, because clearly tanking and drafting #1 Qb has not proven the path to success more often than it has.

 

 

 

What part of the crap we have done with the position for 21 years now, doesn't work is still being missed. We ARE Taking a QB high next year you can count on it. And you MUST keep swinging until you find the QB with out one you don't have a shot

[Big Turk]

 

Uh,.... its a fair topic, there's been endless discussion on this board with several posters advocating for it, some sportswriter have brought it up, national media has as well... and most don't think Anquan Boldin would have retired to pursue social good if he had just signed a 1 yr w/ a top contender.

 

He would have been cut from a top contender because he looked old and slow in the Eagles game...as in like, he should have stayed retired.

 

Why do we automatically assume it was because the Bills weren't good when Boldin just as likely saw how younger players were running circles around him in that game, realized he just didn't have it anymore, and didn't want to embarrass himeslf or ride the bench the entire season? The man definitely has pride and from what I know is an upstanding person and could have felt like he was stelaing money from the team and just didn't want to risk tarnishing his reputation.

Edited August 26, 2017 by matter2003

[BuffaloBillsGospel]

I would like to address the persistent theme on this board that the Bills should tank.

As an example of this viewpoint, see: https://forums.twobillsdrive.com/topic/195620-this-team-is-being-built-like-water/?p=4489558

 

Let's look for a minute at the fate of teams which draft #1 overall (eg after being the NFL's "biggest losers") and choose a QB, as a franchise QB is generally regarded as the most important factor for a team's long term success. I'm going to look at the decade from 2005-2014 on the theory it's too soon to judge 2015 and 2016.

 

During that decade, a QB was drafted with the first overall pick 60% of the time (6/10). I'm going to look at the W/L record during the 'tank', and 5 years after the 'tank' since I think most fans would feel 5 years is enough time for a #1 draft pick to develop and a good coach/GM to build a team

Let's see what happened

Year Team Player W/L 'tank W/L Next 5 years Playoffs? Result

2005 SF Smith 2-14 4-12, 7-9, 5-11, 7-9, 8-8 N climb to Mediocrity

2007 Oak Russell 2-14 4-12, 5-11,5-11, 8-8, 8-8 N climb to Mediocrity

2009 Det Stafford 0-16 2-14, 6-10,10-6, 4-12,7-9 1x, WC 1 good year then Mediocrity

2010 StL Bradford 1-15 7-9, 2-14, 7-8, 7-9, 6-10 N Mediocrity

2011 Car Newton 2-14 6-10, 7-9, 12-4, 7-8, 15-1 2x ,Div, SB Success

2012 Ind Luck 2-14 11-5, 11-5, 11-5, 8-8, 8-8 3x WC, Div, Conf Success

 

Clearly, in 4 of 6 cases, drafting a QB #1 overall after a "tank" did NOT lead a team to long term winning success.

 

Was it just picking the wrong QB? In the case of Smith, like him or don't his teams have gone to playoffs 5 of the last 6 years, so arguably the team around the QB or the development of the QB has something to do with it. Matt Stafford overall has the stats of a good QB. He's durable, he passes for 7.1 ypa and >4000 yds per season, doesn't throw too many picks, took them to playoffs again in his 6th year. Bradford had durability issues, but played well in his 3rd season (a losing one for the team) and has played well his last 2 years, especially last year. The only clear-cut terrible, very bad, no good QB was Russell.

 

I just throw that out there for the guys who are clamoring for "tank, tank". Reflect a bit, because clearly tanking and drafting #1 Qb has not proven the path to success more often than it has.

 

 

 

 

It would mean purging all the older vets 1st. like Tyrod, McCoy, Incognito, Wood and Hughes, none of which has happened and is probably not going to happen so until those players are gone this "tank" word people are saying must be coming from the playstation kids that don't really know football. How can you scream "tank" when a WR of pretty decent caliber was traded for in Watkins spot? Same for CB also, Gaines for Darby isn't a "tank", people need to understand the game better, Watkins hasn't been a big piece of this team since being drafted (injuries), Darby was being benched last season for his poor play, it's not like the management said these are Whaley's guys, F them, lets trade them. We got very good compensation for players who haven't really made huge impacts for us, just my opinion.