Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

RGIII shows why not to Tank...


Renegade7

Losing for Higher Draft Picks???  

87 members have voted

  1. 1. Do you want the Redskins to lose games this season for higher draft picks???



Recommended Posts

I, for one, refuse to support losing games for higher draft picks. I cannot get jiggy with doing what's neccesary to bomb the rest of the season in order to get a a chance at the next "Robert Griffin".  These players want to win, so keeping Griffin in when he's showing he's shellshocked for the hope of high draft picks is rediculous.  

 

This conveniently glosses over the fact that we didn't finish in a bad enough position to draft RGIII.  Which is why we gave up an additional two first round picks and a second in order to get him.  Had we lost meaningless Minnesota and Giants games, we would have finished something like 3 worst at best, with 3 wins. 

 

I'm totally on board with fixing other parts of the team first, such as O-line and secondary.  But I only want to win if it means the team is 'coming together', so to speak and learning how to compete together.  Putting in Cousins or McCoy doesn't do that unless you're now totally convinced Griffin isn't the answer.  I'm more convinced our O-line and safeties certainly aren't the answer to compete week in and out. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does tanking even translate to the NFL?  In the NBA it makes sense - teams have 3 games in 4 nights, so it's easy to shut down players and not execute any real offense and no one notices.  

 

Here you have a week to prepare with a full staff breaking down film and game planning.  And unlike basketball, you have to ask your players to risk serious injury in a game a you're not planning to win.  That's a tough sell.  

 

I think you'd have to have an NFL fanbase on board with advanced metrics to not riot as you lose your consecutive 7th game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Win lose or draw! I just don't really care at this point. If they happen to win a game, it just don't matter. If they lose, it's what I come to expect.

As for rg, I've lost any hope that he will become the franchise qb that we need. He's just not progressing. Whatever qb that we end up with. I really hope he can complete a pass more than 5 yards past the line of scrimmage.

So sick of watching our offense come out on the field and have no confidence that they may score. And win they happen to score. It's more of a shock than enjoyment.

And one last thing. The defense played balls out yesterday. But in the end. How many of you really thought we could hold that lead. As typical and we have seen it on countless of times. No matter how good the defense has played. As soon as we score. Haslett's defense let's us down!

Sorry for such a negative post. I just don't have any positive left in me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Luck is a top 5-10 QB in the league only 3 years into his career.

Yeah, because he gets to play the Jags, titans, and Texans twice a year. Those 3 teams have a combined record of 8-25.

If the redskins were in the afc south, the would be in 2nd place at 3-7. Let that sink in....

Andrew Luck is doing what Brady did the last 10 years: dominate the weakest division in the nfl. Is Andrew Luck a good QB? Yes. Does he benefit greatly from playing one of the easiest schedules in the league every year with Jax, Ten and Hou twice? Absolutely.

Guess what Andrew Luck's record is this season against losing teams? 6-0. Guess what his record is against winning teams? 1-4. Boom.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This argument has always fascinated me, and I honestly can't say where I fall on the argument because I see merit with both sides.  You always hope that if you suck you will be able to turn it around.  The higher your draft picks are, arguably the better your chances of getting better are (for the sake of argument, let's leave the individuals actually making the picks out of it for now).  I also see how frustrating, demoralizing, and potentially locker-room breaking losing can be for a team.  Regardless of all the hyperbole being spewed around here about how everyone on this team sucks, the truth is that we do have some great players and a few that are still young and have the potential to be very good if not great.  These players can't bank on having long careers.  Any play could be their last, and the idea of having to play with, never mind be led by a player who isn't close to being up to par, cannot sit easily with some of these guys.

 

So, with all this in mind, I decided to take a look at the 32 current starting QB's for each team and where they were drafted (if they were) to get a visual on how top picks on the position have actually worked and translated to the game.  Here is an alphabetical list of the current starters and their draft spot:

 

Bortles (3)

Brady (199)

Brees (32)

Bridgewater (32)

Carr (36)

Cutler (11)

Dalton (35)

Flacco (18)

Griffin (2)

Hill (Undrafted)

Hoyer (Undrafted)

Kap (36)

Luck (1)

Mallett (74)

Manning, E (1)

Manning, P (1)

McCown (81)

Mettenberger (178)

Newton (1)

Orton (106)

Rivers (4)

Rodgers (24)

Romo (Undrafted)

Roethlisberger(11)

Ryan (3) 

Sanchez (5)

Smith (1)

Stafford (1)

Stanton (43)

Tannehill (8)

Vick (1)

Wilson (75)

 

Looking over that list, there are definitely arguments to be made that good to great QB's can be found outside of a top 5 or 10 pick.  Keep in mind that there are a couple starters on this list that are playing due to other first round picks getting benched, and there are a few high picks that, even though they are starters, aren't getting the job done as well as their teams and fans had hoped for.  So, tanking for a higher pick doesn't guarantee anything.  Of course, I know that most people probably knew this already, but, as a visual learner, I wanted to take a look at the list and thought I'd share.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We don't need to tank. The losses will come naturally when we're this inefficient, injury-riddled and incompetent.

 

And Luck is a sick fantasy QB, but he hasn't won a damn thing of significance. Look at his playoff numbers or watch him play the Pats and tell me he's elite when it matters. The guy is going to spend the next decade beating up on lowly AFC South teams and getting ousted in the first or second round year after year. Which I would absolutely take over what we have now FWIW.

 

Wow, with a whole 2 seasons in the playoffs you've already decided he'll never ever have success in the playoffs. He should feel ashamed of himself that he didn't will the Colts to the Super Bowl in his rookie season. What a loser!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, because he gets to play the Jags, titans, and Texans twice a year. Those 3 teams have a combined record of 8-25.

If the redskins were in the afc south, the would be in 2nd place at 3-7. Let that sink in....

Andrew Luck is doing what Brady did the last 10 years: dominate the weakest division in the nfl. Is Andrew Luck a good QB? Yes. Does he benefit greatly from playing one of the easiest schedules in the league every year with Jax, Ten and Hou twice? Absolutely.

Guess what Andrew Luck's record is this season against losing teams? 6-0. Guess what his record is against winning teams? 1-4. Boom.

 

This doesn't discount Luck's more impressive victories.

 

When Bob can lead us to wins over the likes of Denver, Seattle, Green Bay, San Francisco, and Kansas City, then we can presume to marginalize Luck's accomplishments relative to those of Bob.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Teams live and die as there QB's do. Luck took a one win team to the playoffs his rookie season; and is a top 5-10 QB in the league only 3 years into his career.

 

Yeah, it must have been tough taking over a team that averaged 12 wins for 10 years and had 1 off season. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looking at that list of QBs annoys me because I can see the near miss, Rogers that went one pick before we took Candle, and QBs we passed on. Drives me insane. If any fan base is due a true star QB it's this one. We even won superbowls with QBs that weren't great. In my lifetime, can't we just once have a guy that's great for a decade?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does tanking even translate to the NFL? In the NBA it makes sense - teams have 3 games in 4 nights, so it's easy to shut down players and not execute any real offense and no one notices.

Here you have a week to prepare with a full staff breaking down film and game planning. And unlike basketball, you have to ask your players to risk serious injury in a game a you're not planning to win. That's a tough sell.

I think you'd have to have an NFL fanbase on board with advanced metrics to not riot as you lose your consecutive 7th game.

Not to mention most of the players tanking will get cut at the end of the season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We should have done that before, allowing us to draft Robert without selling the house, and being able to build an OL.

Now I voted no, because even with a top 3 pick, I think Allen and Co will manage to screw things up.

This. I would say RG3 shows us why you should tank (Andrew Luck even more so. ****ing Colts.). Those two extra firsts and the second would have been nice.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

This conveniently glosses over the fact that we didn't finish in a bad enough position to draft RGIII.  Which is why we gave up an additional two first round picks and a second in order to get him.  Had we lost meaningless Minnesota and Giants games, we would have finished something like 3 worst at best, with 3 wins. 

 

I'm totally on board with fixing other parts of the team first, such as O-line and secondary.  But I only want to win if it means the team is 'coming together', so to speak and learning how to compete together.  Putting in Cousins or McCoy doesn't do that unless you're now totally convinced Griffin isn't the answer.  I'm more convinced our O-line and safeties certainly aren't the answer to compete week in and out. 

 

I didn't gloss over anything, you just missed my point out of pure frustration. Even if we had lost those two games and not had to trade up, we would've tanked to draft a guy #2 overall who has a serious chance of being out the league very soon. We would've lost all those games for nothing, we drafted a bust, guys.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Did beating Seattle and NY in 2011 make drafting RG3 cost more picks? I fail to see how not tanking helped us or how it taught us not to tank. We made the playoffs the next season. I don't believe in momentum of 5 wins versus 3 wins carrying over.

 

I don't know if you read the whole OP or not or if I just left out key pieces to why I want us to keep trying to win games. This is the first year in a new offense, so dumbing it down to JV status to lose games the rest of the season is helping no one that we plan to keep here next year. We can't practice audibles, motions, nothing if we insist on leaving Griffin in there for the sake of losing as many games as possible.

Losing those two games or not, we still drafted a bust at QB. I tried to avoid calling out the FO in this, but it seems most of us collectively agree that we don't trust the FO to draft a franchise QB with a high first round draft pick. Do we really want to repeat that mistake again?

And I'm sorry to anyone that feels I'm pulling their fan card on this topic, because people can root how they want to root, I don't have time to care anymore. But if having to rationalize my team winning as many games as possible makes me an arrogant homer, so be it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In order for higher draft picks to matter, you need to have a front office actually capable of drafting talented players.  History has shown this organization is one of the worst at drafting players -- mainly due to Danny's front office influence.

 

So ultimately, it doesn't matter.  Whether high or low, we will squander our picks on talentless players until an adequate front office is in place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really wish we could do a vote or something where the fans decided who the owner would be for this team. I mean it makes sense since we're the ones putting revenue in this team. Just something to ponder.

 

With that being said, at this point it wouldn't matter if we tank. Our FO is royally incompetent w/ our owner being the head of this debacle like Voltron. I respect that he's a fan of the team, but the numbers don't lie, and it's only a matter of time until the fans really rally against him and protest against the team until he sells it. (praying the day this happens)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...