. No different from say trading Trent Richardson mid year to have ammunition for the deepest draft in recent
id say its completely different. wanting to see your team win vs wanting to see your team lose has nothing to do with who is playing RB.
the notion that one should root for his/her team to lose to get a better draft pick is understandable, but its based on a ridiculous oversimplification of reality. It's essentially saying that the "real" solution to winning a Super Bowl is getting one player . . . when there is all kinds of evidence that is NOT the case . . . and a lot of that evidence shows teams FAILING even with a "premium" pick . . . . but it is simpler to say "if we lost one more game we would have gotten Calvin Johnson" while ignoring that that Lions have not won squat with him and neither would we with Aaron Sears, Sabby Piscitelli, Raheem Morris . . etc. It's sort of the "magic bullet" argument in that its is simple, where building a contender is complex.
Not that I outwardly rooted for Ls during the season, but even if I did, I know my rooting is not correlated with the players performance by any means. Whether I cheer for wins or losses is not going to impact how Revis, McCoy, Glennon, etc actually performed on the field, so I think it's illogical to bring in the arguments that such and such needs to play hard if we want to have a SB team in the next 5 years or you don't want to see a player quit.And Vin, I don't think it's necessarily the "magic bullet" argument either. But you can't deny that picking a player in the top 5 does more for a team than picking in the teens or 20s. Especially when the need is at QB. or in our case DE when the supposed best DE in a generation is on the board. Either way we were a 4-12 team and our draft pick this year is not sending us to the Super Bowl. But Clowney or Bridgewater/Manziel/Bortles(?), even Watkins does a lot more to fill needs, getting us there closer than David Carr or someone else we might grab at 7. I guess what I'm saying, in hindsight admittedly, is that there seems to be 5 or 6 elite prospects in this draft and we are sitting at #7. Gametimes argument is valid in that we are believing the media scouts of the world in determining that there are in fact 5 or 6 elite prospects, but, at this point, we have nothing else to go on. The point is to get as close to a game changing player as possible in the first round, and the lower in the first round you draft, the lower the probability is that it happens. Can it happen still if you win more games and have a lower draft pick? Absolutely. But, in my head, I'd rather sacrifice two wins off of this past year to guarantee we get a player like those listed above who, I think, could help add 3-4 wins to our total every year for at least the next 5 years if not longer. But that's just me.
Not that I outwardly rooted for Ls during the season, but even if I did, I know my rooting is not correlated with the players performance by any means. Whether I cheer for wins or losses is not going to impact how Revis, McCoy, Glennon, etc actually performed on the field, so I think it's illogical to bring in the arguments that such and such needs to play hard if we want to have a SB team in the next 5 years or you don't want to see a player quit.And Vin, I don't think it's necessarily the "magic bullet" argument either. But you can't deny that picking a player in the top 5 does more for a team than picking in the teens or 20s. Especially when the need is at QB. or in our case DE when the supposed best DE in a generation is on the board. Either way we were a 4-12 team and our draft pick this year is not sending us to the Super Bowl. But Clowney or Bridgewater/Manziel/Bortles(?), even Watkins does a lot more to fill needs, getting us there closer than David Carr or someone else we might grab at 7. I guess what I'm saying, in hindsight admittedly, is that there seems to be 5 or 6 elite prospects in this draft and we are sitting at #7. Gametimes argument is valid in that we are believing the media scouts of the world in determining that there are in fact 5 or 6 elite prospects, but, at this point, we have nothing else to go on. The point is to get as close to a game changing player as possible in the first round, and the lower in the first round you draft, the lower the probability is that it happens. Can it happen still if you win more games and have a lower draft pick? Absolutely. But, in my head, I'd rather sacrifice two wins off of this past year to guarantee we get a player like those listed above who, I think, could help add 3-4 wins to our total every year for at least the next 5 years if not longer. But that's just me.
I get the point and it is a fair one, but I would be interested to see how this comment holds up: "But you can't deny that picking a player in the top 5 does more for a team than picking in the teens or 20s." I'd also love to see how picking "a player in the top 5" compares as a strategy to successfully picking players in all rounds? Its likely skewed at the QB position for sure.But my overall point is the Bucs are not picking outside the top 5 because they won a game or two . . . they are picking outside the top 5 because they have SUCKED at picking players from all rounds for a few years, have made poor FA decisions and hired a bad coach. Hoping to lose a few games more in 2013 to pick in the top 5 is a "simple solution" to the more complex, issue which would be to pick better over a number of years, make better FA moves and get better coaches
. No different from say trading Trent Richardson mid year to have ammunition for the deepest draft in recent
id say its completely different. wanting to see your team win vs wanting to see your team lose has nothing to do with who is playing RB.
In reference to cutting bait on something that's over, in light of a draft you know is coming. They knew they could get rid of Richardson, although to the detriment of their season, for a future pick. It was an active decision, sure. And our players (I hope) never decide to quit. But I would be lying if I said that when we were in top 5 draft position, I wasn't hoping to maintain that position throughout the season, regardless of how many more Ls we encountered.... At the end of the day all anyone is going to say about last season is "We came up short. Didn't get it done. Looking forward to the new year." Just a matter of do you want to start said year with the #3 or #7 pick. I just realized it in November, I guess.
the notion that one should root for his/her team to lose to get a better draft pick is understandable, but its based on a ridiculous oversimplification of reality. It's essentially saying that the "real" solution to winning a Super Bowl is getting one player . . . when there is all kinds of evidence that is NOT the case . . . and a lot of that evidence shows teams FAILING even with a "premium" pick . . . . but it is simpler to say "if we lost one more game we would have gotten Calvin Johnson" while ignoring that that Lions have not won squat with him and neither would we with Aaron Sears, Sabby Piscitelli, Raheem Morris . . etc. It's sort of the "magic bullet" argument in that its is simple, where building a contender is complex.
First off, really agree with Jay Auggs. I'll ad that it's not the "one player" and the "premium pick" - it's the PROBABILITY. Obviously getting a Tom Brady in round 6 is great, but chance that you are able to find a Tom Brady in the top 5 vs round 6 is astronomically high. It might be lottery numbers high. And that's the point. A premium pick that nets you a Clowney or Mack isn't the answer... it's just a higher probability it's the answer. Our chances of netting a Pro Bowl caliber player that adds a couple wins a years for at least the next 5 years might looks something like this: Pick 3 (46%) Pick 7 (23%) Pick 27 (13%). Now, those numbers are totally made up but they highlight the thinking behind a premium pick. And yes, bad drafting is part of why you're there in the first place but that doesn't change the value of those picks. If Ozzie Newsome was picking top 5 every year, he might win a Super Bowl every year.As for Calvin Johnson - the reasons the Lions haven't won squat isn't because of him. And that's part of the issue as well - geting a chance at a game-changing franchise QB.And if my rooting for the team had any impact at all on their ability to win, I'd be rooting for a win every day all day. Seeing as it has absolutely 0 impact, when it's to the teams long term benefit I'll take a loss that nets improved draft position over a meaningless win any day. And I don't think anyone is suggesting picking in the top 5 is the panacea. When you're 4-12 you have a HOST of problems. That's why there's a new HC and GM and why they're turning over the roster. A higher pick just makes that easier and increases the chances they'll succeed.
. No different from say trading Trent Richardson mid year to have ammunition for the deepest draft in recent
id say its completely different. wanting to see your team win vs wanting to see your team lose has nothing to do with who is playing RB.
In reference to cutting bait on something that's over, in light of a draft you know is coming. They knew they could get rid of Richardson, although to the detriment of their season, for a future pick. It was an active decision, sure.
Actually, I don't think the Richardson trade was to the detriment of the Browns season at all. He really, really sucks. I think they knew that and saw little difference between a Richardson and a McGahee off the street (or anyone on the roster).
The probability is most of those guys in the top 5 will fail miserably.Look at last year...only 2 of the top 5 players picked made significant impacts on their team. They still might...but to root for your team to lose for that?No thanks. I want the Bucs to win every single Sunday. I don't care if we're 7-1 or 1-7, that next game I want to see them win.
The probability is most of those guys in the top 5 will fail miserably.Look at last year...only 2 of the top 5 players picked made significant impacts on their team. They still might...but to root for your team to lose for that?No thanks. I want the Bucs to win every single Sunday. I don't care if we're 7-1 or 1-7, that next game I want to see them win.
You can't make that criticism at all. The rule of thumb is that it takes AT LEAST 3 years to evaluate a draft class. 1 year means nothing - in that case McCoy is a bust (and so is Peyton Manning...)
its hard to root for a team full of quitters. and its even harder for me to expect a team full of quitters to magically become winners. HOFs are found at pick 7, at pick 20, and also at pick 2.it baffles me that our fans would be more interested in draftday ratherthan gameday.
I can't root for quitters. I would understand sitting the veterans to see what back-ups can or can't do. I do understand the interest in the draft for the last few years, having seen the quality of play on the field.
I love the draft, at the very least as much as anyone else! I just don't think our future rides on whomever kiper/mcshay say is the best pick at #2 rather than 7. Clowney could just as easily bust as Mack or donald become stars. Bigger name, sure, but I'd never want to see my team lose just to get a bigger name.
There was a debate during the season - sometime at the tail end of and immediately after the 8 game losing streak - about whether it was "right" of a fan to actively cheer for the Bucs to lose or at the very least be okay with losing. The position of those rooting for losses was mainly rooted in the draft. The position of those who felt a true fan couldn't root against their team and those who did weren't true fans was mainly based in loyalty and supporting the team no matter what.Now, knowing the draft order, and seeing that we might miss out on one of the prospects who is truly a team need and could be a game changer for this franchise- whether it be Clowney, Watkins, or one of the QBs - how do folks feel about the "tanking" discussion now? Was it worth it to have one or two more wins this past season and miss out on one of those franchise altering prospects? Or would another loss or two have been more than this team or fan base (or yourself) can handle?My personal opinion is that while I didn't actively cheer for losses, I reached a point during the season where I also couldn't cheer for wins. I was just stuck in this indifferent zone where I wanted the Bucs to win games, but knew that, at a certain point, winning games did nothing but hurt this team moving forward. It was a lose lose either way for me. Now, looking back, I would love to be sitting in the top 3 right now with the chance to grab a prospect like Clowney or even Watkins given MWills troubles. Hindsight is 20/20 but I would absolutely trade 2 wins for that chance, but that's just me.
I was one of the those that sat in the stands but became very indifferent to the wins. Fact is....this is a team that sucks at sucking. Even when we're bad, we're not bad enough. The Texans were in the playoffs, sucked this past season....will have the top pick and will probably be in the playoff hunt again. Yet....we flounder in mediocrity. Very frustrating.
I love the draft, at the very least as much as anyone else! I just don't think our future rides on whomever kiper/mcshay say is the best pick at #2 rather than 7. Clowney could just as easily bust as Mack or donald become stars. Bigger name, sure, but I'd never want to see my team lose just to get a bigger name.
Sorry, I didn't realize that was the point you were trying to make.
a team capable of winning the SB doesn't have any quit in them... if we're going to win the SB within the next 5 years, we're going to need alot of the players on the current roster to help us get there. it's a good thing that we had players that were fighting even when the playoffs were out of reach... speaking of, we should be thanking schiano that he got rid of alot of the cancers who didn't give their full effort consistently.if we're not contending in 5 years, lovie is probably gone and we're rebuilding again.
That second sentence is absolutely true. They seemed to know they will be better... Hopefully sooner rather than later.
There was a debate during the season - sometime at the tail end of and immediately after the 8 game losing streak - about whether it was "right" of a fan to actively cheer for the Bucs to lose or at the very least be okay with losing. The position of those rooting for losses was mainly rooted in the draft. The position of those who felt a true fan couldn't root against their team and those who did weren't true fans was mainly based in loyalty and supporting the team no matter what.Now, knowing the draft order, and seeing that we might miss out on one of the prospects who is truly a team need and could be a game changer for this franchise- whether it be Clowney, Watkins, or one of the QBs - how do folks feel about the "tanking" discussion now? Was it worth it to have one or two more wins this past season and miss out on one of those franchise altering prospects? Or would another loss or two have been more than this team or fan base (or yourself) can handle?My personal opinion is that while I didn't actively cheer for losses, I reached a point during the season where I also couldn't cheer for wins. I was just stuck in this indifferent zone where I wanted the Bucs to win games, but knew that, at a certain point, winning games did nothing but hurt this team moving forward. It was a lose lose either way for me. Now, looking back, I would love to be sitting in the top 3 right now with the chance to grab a prospect like Clowney or even Watkins given MWills troubles. Hindsight is 20/20 but I would absolutely trade 2 wins for that chance, but that's just me.
I was one of the those that sat in the stands but became very indifferent to the wins. Fact is....this is a team that sucks at sucking. Even when we're bad, we're not bad enough. The Texans were in the playoffs, sucked this past season....will have the top pick and will probably be in the playoff hunt again. Yet....we flounder in mediocrity. Very frustrating.
I feel ya my dude
Even if we would have come out with the #3 pick, I would probably take Clowney. Otherwise I was more hoping for a trade down, a la St. Louis, in 2012. I wouldn't bank the future on one player either, I just was hoping for a chance to cash in on a crap ton of team equity (trade for draft picks in what turned out to be a very deep draft).
