DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Tailgate Forum Should We Tank The Season?

One man's "giving up without a whimper" is another man's "tactical retreat".

I admire your morality, but honestly, I'm not sure it applies. Not any more. Too much has occurred within the NFL, and corruption runs all the way to the top, IMHO. Taking a high road in this business is likely naive. I don't disagree with you, it's just that I don't think it's truly relevant at this point in time. And it's not that I don't believe there are coaches, staff, GM and players with integrity, I do, but I also believe that "win at all costs" is a driving, motivating force within the NFL as a whole.

your right... no team ever garners success unless they have tanked a season or in some way cheated along the way.

If that's what it takes to win then sign me up to coach mediocrity.

Blame it on my dad who taught me if at the end of the day you can lay down and say you did your best and took no unfair advantage of anyone,... then you will sleep in peace. I sleep peacefully nightly.

That is a good answer. However this:



Is a great T-Shirt.

Indeed the motivating force behind most of society... more is the pity.

But I still I try to take the higher moral ground not for show, not to hoist myself above others but rather to rise above the flotsam and jetsam of the morass of modern society that tries to drag every person down to their lowest common denominator.

I do not judge or begrudge others their choices.. they have to do whatever is on their Karma to do, as do I.

I hold no high moral ground against others only walk path I have been chosen to walk

LOL I may have to use that.

LOL... I'd buy one

No.

I am a proud fan. I would rather my team try to win no matter who would be at the top of the draft and regardless of the chances of success.

I would consent on one condition only. If every team agreed to tank to try to get a once in a generation player. That would be worth the price of admission.

It would be hysterical watching the entire league play like a Brown.

But secretly I would still hope to win those games.
I just do not buy into draft placement. I prefer BPA always. Regardless of who or where they are taken or even needed. Why gamble on unknowns?

So here's a question for you Woof, and Texas, and Steve (and anyone else who cares to chime in):

If we end up in the middle of the pack, say 5-8 losses. And IF there is a guy at the top, (let's say Cardale has an incredible season, wins another championship, really develops as a pocket passer and is graded #1 overall,) who we'd really benefit from having as a franchise QB. Would you mortgage the house to get him, meaning give up the 2016, 2017 & 2018 first round picks to get him?

With NFL players careers so short, I think it would hard pressed to find enough players on the team to ensure the season be tanked, and keeping it a secret could be even more difficult.

Would you give up Bark Mingo, TRich, Weeden, Taylor, Gilbert, Manziel for Luck? No way

There is a 0% chance any of the players in those games were actively trying to lose games. Same with the coaches. Those guys are trying to keep their jobs.

If there is a QB worth that, then sure. We'd be in a much better place by doing that than if we purposefully went 1-15. The problem is when you guys start talking about tanking a season, you're too myopic about it. You think it will only impact our chances of getting a good QB. You guys leave out the all the damage it would do this franchise. For example:

-Our teams top Vets will leave i.e. Mack and Gipson (assuming he has a good year). Any of our quality depth will check out too if given the chance.

-Remember how people pissed an moaned about over paying for McCown and Kruger? Well, expect a whole lot more of that. Crappy teams over pay for bringing in vets remember?

-Tanking promotes a culture of losing.

-This franchise isn't good enough to purposefully lose, then all of a sudden start playing well again.

-By tanking the season, it just reinforces everything negative that's been said about this organization for the past 15 years.

Yes we need a great QB, but this team is more than just one person.

Is that a trick question? Right now I would give up Kruger, Crow, McCown, Hughes, Desir & Manziel for Luck.

With the Browns' uncanny ability to draft first round busts since '99, I'd throw in 2019 too for good measure. Unfortunately, there is no Luck.

if... IF ... there was a player with as much "cant miss" as say a Luck was... then yeah I would sell the farm to get him.

Browns fans embrace 'Fail for Cardale' Jones campaign

No, Cleveland, not now.

Not just two years removed from spending a first-round pick on Johnny Manziel, for whom there is still some hope, not to mention three to four years still on his contract.

A number of Twitter users claiming to be Cleveland Browns fans have taken to the social media site since Monday night with a #FailForCardale hashtag, referring to Ohio State quarterback Cardale Jones. The Buckeyes' starting quarterback was outstanding in passing for 186 yards on just nine completions and rushing for 99 yards more in Ohio State's season-opening win over Virginia Tech. The suggestion, of course, is that the Browns would be better off enduring another miserable 2015 season in order to choose Jones at the top of the 2016 NFL Draft.

Nevermind that Jones is only a junior and could return to the Buckeyes in 2016, anyway. Nevermind that the Browns have the same 0-0 record as every club in the NFL ... hope springs eternal, right?

Unfortunately not:

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000...-jones-campaign

to be blunt i really find it disgusting that any browns fan would hope for failure.

as far as mccown? i think every one knows i think it was a mistake bringing him here and i pretty much know what is going to happen. doesnt mean i am rooting againts him. if he proves me wrong great!!!!

And some fans label Farmer as a CHEATER for TEXTING...now want them to TANK a season.

Tanking is a form of cheating you cheat fans, players(Browns and other teams), coaches and the game itself by altering the outcome of games. Myself, I cannot take PRIDE in winning if it takes cheating to accomplish it. It's a sad day for the Browns that this thread exists.

JMO

LMFAO! Yeah, it's the thread that makes it a sad day for the Browns. Good one!

First of all, what is tanking? Defining that goes a long way toward determining whether it's reasonable or ethical or whatever.

When I think of tanking, I think more along the lines of 'building for the future'. That is, none of the players or coaches are trying to lose. They are doing their best, but maybe the team is built in such a way that it focuses on playing young players with potential rather than vets who are past their primes or who won't contribute long-term.

Or maybe look at it this way, Say the Browns are 3-10 and McCown is having a league-average year, or maybe a little below league average (say 20th best starting quarterback in the NFL.) Manziel still looks kind of lost, but we really don't know because we haven't seen him in a game yet.

Is starting Manziel in that situation tanking? It's obvious that if the Browns were 10-3 in that situation, that they would start McCown as it would give them the best chance to win, even if he played exactly the same as in the 3-10 case. But if they are 3-10, it makes perfect sense to play Manziel, to see what you have (even if he gives you a lesser chance to win that week) and if he plays horrible, who cares? See what you have, and 'worst' case scenario you are in a better chance to upgrade the position.

What is so wrong about that? The fundamental reality is that occasionally it is in a team's best interest to lose. I think it makes most sense to change that reality, not to punish and have a holier-than-thou attitude toward teams who take advantage of that fact when it's immediately obvious.

As hasugopher points out, there's more than one way to tank and, to be clear, I don't believe Pettine or the players would ever coach or play to lose. I do think that it's possible to set up for failure. Not that I personally condone it, and not that I'm advocating tanking the season, but a 2-14 records isn't going to shock me or destroy my love for the team.

To most people, tanking means you put in little effort to win, and even possibly intentional mistakes, to ensure winning is not possible.

It's essentially, active forfeiture.

You NEVER "play to lose".
QB's can be gotten later in round 1. Bridgewater and Carr are prime examples of this. You don't have to tank to get a QB. You just have to know how to pick a QB.

That is still kind of ambiguous. I normally wouldn't endorse such a thing (especially if it is blatantly obvious), but even then there are exceptions.

Earlier I brought up the example of the week 17 game in 2011 between the Colts and Jaguars. This is the best example I can think of in the modern NFL. If the Colts lost this game (which they did), they were guaranteed Andrew Luck. If they won the game, they would have fallen and not gotten him although I don't remember how far they would have fallen.

The Jags were also pretty bad, not in the running for the #1 pick but they were 4-11 at the time so they could have also improved their draft position by losing. More importantly, by losing, they would not have to compete with the Colts in the same division and have to face Andrew Luck twice a year for however many years.

I honestly don't remember the game much, but it seems pretty obvious that both teams should have tried to lose. How can anybody say with a straight face that either team should have tried to win? If you agree with that but aren't usually a fan of tanking, then it's really just the details that you disagree on-- when and to what extent 'not trying your hardest' is acceptable. Obviously reasonable people can differ on that.

Maybe the solution is just simply to not reward bad behavior. Don't guarantee the worst team the #1 pick and so on. Take away (or at least reduce) the incentive to lose. There are a lot of proposals out there, from the draft wheel, to the NBA's draft lottery, to eliminating the draft (and letting the salary cap sort things out), to games won/percentage of games won after being eliminated, etc. All of those have their own sets of problems but if it's truly the integrity of the game and competition you want to preserve, those all do a good job of eliminating or at least reducing the occasional incentive to lose.

If there's an incentive to lose, sometimes teams will push it and under the current system you're really just punishing the honest teams that won't partake in it.

Here's a funny NBA box score. http://www.nba.com/games/20150415/MIAPHI/gameinfo.html

It was the last game of the season and neither team had a chance for the playoffs. The Heat were trying to protect their pick (it was top 10 protected and they were fluctuating between 10/11) and the Sixers were going for the second best lottery odds I believe.

I genuinely don't blame the Heat there.. there's literally nothing to gain from winning that game so they just sat all their best players and played some of their scrubs for 48 minutes. Of course, you can't out-tank the Sixers (the Heat won), and the Heat actually picked #10 anyway due to some oddities in the lottery so ultimately the game affected nothing. But the intention was obviously there-- I just acknowledge the weirdness of how everything is set up rather than condemn the teams for trying to do what's right for themselves.

I got your point, it has been better stated by other posters. Your "sad day" comment was just plain funny.

I understand your PoV.


But IMO, tanking from start of season is completely different from tanking once your eliminated form the post-season.

totally agree with you there

I hope the Browns wouldn't do that and obviously they won't. It just depends on the situation-- for example, if the Browns are eliminated from the playoffs, are in contention for an early pick, and a franchise QB or two really separates himself/themselves from the crowd, I will have absolutely no shame in rooting for the Browns to lose.

I'd rather they just have a successful season of course-- i.e. make it to the playoffs and hopefully deep into the playoffs.

The Colts let Manning go then cheated/tanked a season to get Luck.

Manning has been back to the SB and Luck hasn't even sniffed it.

Pretty sure Manning would have gotten the Colts back the the SB again by now. Just saying Karma is an unforgiving entity.

I don't condone "tanking" on purpose for sure but I do believe it's time to stop the cycle of mediocrity. To do this, you need to get a top-notch QB (not a 22nd pick variety) with the first pick.

So let's just say I'll be rooting for my Brownies all year but won't be very upset if they end up 2-14 and have the first pick.

I support #FailForCardale

What's the point in tanking if Cardale is a junior? He might not even be in the draft.

Plus it would likely result in staff and players being cut.

Why would they put their jobs at risk?

He'll likely come out, IMHO, since I'm pretty sure he needed to be convinced to not come out this year. Plus, a good year will likely guarantee it.

Also, as I stated earlier, I do not think neither Pettine nor the players would intentionally tank. I think their pride in their jobs and their will to win overrides any desire to take a high pick. So to answer your question, they wouldn't.

I believe this. It will be interesting to see how they do this year.

I don't believe in tanking and don't believe the Colts tanked in 2011 either. For years people were saying that Manning made that team and that with out him they were a losing team and just so happens they were right. In 2011 Indy had no QB, no running game, and a below average defense, which spells disaster.

I know... and the next year and every year after they've gone 11-5... hmmm...

The college season is not even 2 weeks old and some of you want to tank? I remember 2013 (I think) and 4 weeks into that college season posters wanted us to tank for Matt Barckley or Gino Smith and they went in rounds 2 & 4.

2 years ago "Tank for Teddy" was the chant and he went late first.
Sam Bradford was anointed but he couldn't stay healthy.
From 2011 draft Cam Newton has not gotten to the SB and then came the 3 reaches (Locker, Gabbert & Ponder)in round one. RGIII looked on his way to HOF and now Skins probably can't even trade him. Add Mark Sanchez to the list.

Wishing a guy is a franchise QB does not make him one. No one knows if Cardale is the real deal. I hope he is because likely the Bucks will have a great season if so.

We have no idea who the top QB will be for the 2016 draft. Injuries, a top guy having a bad year, the best prospect suspended for whatever.

Can we play a game before we throw in the towel?

If losing is some of your desires, you guys probably going to have a fun season. We may try full effort to win, but will still fall short.

I think if any team seriously and purposely dives, then all the NFL fans should get some money from their gamechecks... that's a JOKE.

If tanking the season is acceptable, why not just forfeit the season and save on injury potential. Or just field all scrubs and put folks like JT on IR and save his knees for next season.

It thoroughly disgusts me that people would actually hope the team would tank the season for a draft pick. I sit here everyday reading a lot of the same posters whining and complaining about all the losing that has occurred. Fans wanting to fire every coach we get before their system even evolves. Fans bashing every draft pick that doesn't make the probowl as a rookie.

These same fans like to tout how the Browns have the greatest fanbase. I call BS. Browns fans nowadays are turning into a joke. It sickens me. I've watched this team for over forty years, and through thick and thin, I am a fan. Call me out if you want, but I think anybody who honestly wants the team to tank the season for a draft pick is the worst kind of fan there is. There are hundreds of thousands of Browns fans that are dying to see this team succeed. The franchise owes these folks their best effort, no matter what the results are.

You think guys like Whitner, Thomas, Haden, Dansby, and many of the younger guys like Bitonio would be in for such an assinine proposal? Who would want to play on a team who would even consider this. No, I don't think the Colts did it on purpose. When Manning went down, they had no one to replace him. IMO they got lucky that Luck became the player he is.

Like it or not, if you wish this team to lose for any reason, you are not a true fan.

If we want Jones that bad, there are ways to make it happen, IMO tanking the season is not one of them.

The thought of people being serious about this pisses me off to the max. I say go cheer for someone else, I'll stick with my team win or lose.