Jump to content

In your hindsight, 2017: go all out to win, or tank?


boater

Recommended Posts

56 minutes ago, nucci said:

Then go ahead and hope we lose. Most everyone else is looking forward to an exciting draft and another playoff berth. 

We were talking about last year.  We all see what you did there!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Counter question.  When have the Patriots tanked?  They simply created a culture of winning.  They won when their franchise guy sat out a year and had to play with their backup.  Tanking, like many NBA teams are doing right now, doesn't accomplish anything other than getting used to losing.  I think that the offense under Tyrod is still terrible, but glad that as a team they played to win.  That should play out this year.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I enjoyed seeing the guys get excited and I'm glad we made the playoffs but we all knew this team was not built to win a super bowl yet. Most know that we need a major upgrade at the QB position to even have a chance. Knowing that their were going to be at least 4 solid QB's coming out I was hoping for a 5 or 6 win season and a trade up to get our QB without giving up a arm and a leg. 

 

Im at the point where their is only 1 QB that I want out of this draft and that is Mayfield. I would give up so much just to get this one player.

Edited by Call_Of_Ktulu
  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, sleeby said:

Shoulda tanked - a streak is just silly numbers in the end.  17, 18, 19 - is there really a difference at that point?  We would be having much brighter discussions about this draft (and less bickering) if 21 was instead 04.  

Looking at it another way, most all here agree that playing for .500 for 20 years is not a smart idea - it's why we had that streak BUT yet almost all here wanted and celebrated an essentially .500 year yet again just for reasons of internal stress or depression or voodoo. . .I don't get it.  I am a very analytical sort though and not much for emotions when the logic seems clear - I expect to get crap for this post and that's fine.  Ha

AMEN!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, sleeby said:

The colts count - 0-16 after manning broke his neck and then moved on.

 

I am NOT the sports statistician type!  At a quick glance if one counts 4 wins as a lousy year and then building up within a three or so years to championship game else SB appearance.

 

Atl: 2013 --> 2016

Phil 2012 --->2017

Seattle 2008 --> 2013

Jax : 2012/13/14/15/16 --> 2017.  :o)

 

Seems going low is an effective plan - and looking at the bills perenial mediocrity 50-50 is not.

 

In the last 20 years, the Patriots have had exactly 2 seasons at or below 0.500.  Tell me you wouldn't take that and I'll tell you that you're a liar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, boater said:

When you see the countless posts looking to sell the estate to trade up and draft that magical "franchise" QB, -- it makes you wonder: maybe deliberate tanking would have been a wise approach to the 2017 season. (given the Watkins and Darby trades, one can argue the tank was on)

 

If the Bills tanked: we wouldn't be talking about trading multiple first rounders plus other picks/players for a shot at Darnold, Rosen, Mayfield et al. We'd be talking about which to choose with our naturally given draft choice.

 

What happened: the Bills played balls to the wall. I believe they exceeded their potential and got lucky. They made the playoffs and earned a less than mid-first round draft pick.

 

Would you have rather tanked (and pick a franchise QB without selling the farm), or made the playoffs?

 

Me? I'm glad the Bills went all-in and made the playoffs, that goes so far in building a winning culture for the future. Also I look at the Sabres suckitude and can't help but feel once you tank, it's hard to wash the stench of losing out of the locker room.

If we are doing hypotheticals after the fact how about going all the way. Under my scenario Bills would still break draught last year and have great pick this year and still have Tre White.

 

McDerma should have traded with Houston who wanted to move up for Watson or mayby it was Mahomes.

Tre White was drafted at 27 so would have still been there at 25.

Watson would have been there at 10 if he was Texans target as he was drafted 12.

Mahomes was their at 10.

(McDerma should have been able to project KC was going further than HOU as HOU had no QB and KC wins every year)

 

McDermott really screwed this up channeling man-love for Andy Reid. Then doubled down and traded the 3rd round pick #91 they got in that trade to trade up for a not very good WR.

 

I know hind sight is 20/20 but dam what a screw up. Bills would have pick #4 right now and maybe would have picked a 2017 WR who can catch balls without moving up. Ju Ju Shuster maybe?

Edited by cba fan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

high draft picks don't guarantee wins. ask the browns. we got a rookie of the year candidate and a potential elite cornerback at number 27 last year.

 

the belief and confidence that was instilled in this team after making the playoffs is far more valuable than a high draft pick to me. you can't build a winning culture by losing games.

Edited by bills.avfc
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Luxy312 said:

 

In the last 20 years, the Patriots have had exactly 2 seasons at or below 0.500.  Tell me you wouldn't take that and I'll tell you that you're a liar.

Sure I would.  I did not say that losing was the only path to winning - it's one proven path and one we really have not explored in the past 15 years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Draft position is important, but so is free agency. It's easier to attract quality free agents when you're a playoff team. It's difficult when your playoff drought is old enough to vote.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, boater said:

When you see the countless posts looking to sell the estate to trade up and draft that magical "franchise" QB, -- it makes you wonder: maybe deliberate tanking would have been a wise approach to the 2017 season. (given the Watkins and Darby trades, one can argue the tank was on)

 

If the Bills tanked: we wouldn't be talking about trading multiple first rounders plus other picks/players for a shot at Darnold, Rosen, Mayfield et al. We'd be talking about which to choose with our naturally given draft choice.

 

What happened: the Bills played balls to the wall. I believe they exceeded their potential and got lucky. They made the playoffs and earned a less than mid-first round draft pick.

 

Would you have rather tanked (and pick a franchise QB without selling the farm), or made the playoffs?

 

Me? I'm glad the Bills went all-in and made the playoffs, that goes so far in building a winning culture for the future. Also I look at the Sabres suckitude and can't help but feel once you tank, it's hard to wash the stench of losing out of the locker room.

I would rather have 

 

#1 Taken Mahomes or Watson and trade bk into the late first for Tre White and still made the playoffs 

 

#2 Traded with Hou knowing they would be worse then KC . We would be sitting at #4 right now talking bout who we will get. I realize some here will question if that was possible but answer to that is Hou had to be shopping around to make that trade they just didn't decide while Cleveland was on the clock up make the deal. They most likely had multiple deals in place.  Mcd just choose to do business with his buddy Reid and it cost us dearly. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...