Did Gannon Foil Ossenfort’s Plan?

kerouac9

Klowned by Keim
Joined
Feb 14, 2003
Posts
37,387
Reaction score
27,540
Location
Gilbert, AZ
If they weren't trying to improve in the long term, why didn't they just keep Keim/Kliff?

I think the team is in the bottom 3 talent wise. When that happens, your record almost always reflects that.

"Tanking" is by definition purposefully foregoing short-term success with the hope of improving for the long term. You're proving my argument.

How did this team get to bottom-3 talent-wise if not by purposeful benign neglect by the front office? This is a league built around the concept of parity.

So we don't totally suck, but we are also tanking?
Yes. We are being bad on purpose, but we're not a historically bad circus like those Browns and Lions teams.

This really shouldn't be that hard to wrap your mind around.
 

dreamcastrocks

Chopped Liver Moderator
Super Moderator
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2005
Posts
46,063
Reaction score
11,596
"Tanking" is by definition purposefully foregoing short-term success with the hope of improving for the long term. You're proving my argument.
You're playing semantics here. This team is NOT purposefully losing. That is tanking.

If they are tanking, in what world did it make sense to sign and start Dobbs? Why not keep noddle arm Colt, or start Tune? Why wouldn't they just stick with Keim/Kliff that got them into this mess?
 

dreamcastrocks

Chopped Liver Moderator
Super Moderator
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2005
Posts
46,063
Reaction score
11,596
Yes. We are being bad on purpose, but we're not a historically bad circus like those Browns and Lions teams.
We are bad because our roster is bad, and we don't have a choice. You think keeping Murphy and Allen, and maybe signing a nice FA makes this team competitive? Our starting QB will be out half a year. There aren't many teams that can be good in that scenario.
This really shouldn't be that hard to wrap your mind around.
Nor should it be that we didn't really have a chance this year like you claim.
 

kerouac9

Klowned by Keim
Joined
Feb 14, 2003
Posts
37,387
Reaction score
27,540
Location
Gilbert, AZ
You're playing semantics here. This team is NOT purposefully losing. That is tanking.

If they are tanking, in what world did it make sense to sign and start Dobbs? Why wouldn't they just stick with Keim/Kliff that got them into this mess?
I'm playing semantics? Hilarious.

We are purposefully non-competitive. That is tanking. The fact that the offense has been quiet quitting in the second half of every game since Dallas really makes you wonder whether even the coaching staff isn't purposefully losing.

We've gone over the Dobbs question multiple times. I'm not going to go over it again. If you're sensitive about the term tanking for some reason, whatever.

We're purposely designed to be professionally non-competitive.
 

dreamcastrocks

Chopped Liver Moderator
Super Moderator
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2005
Posts
46,063
Reaction score
11,596
I'm playing semantics? Hilarious.


We are purposefully non-competitive. That is tanking. The fact that the offense has been quiet quitting in the second half of every game since Dallas really makes you wonder whether even the coaching staff isn't purposefully losing.
Yes. You are playing semantics. There is some nuance as to WHY a team isn't capable of being competitive.

You KNOW that there is a difference between intentionally losing, and losing despite your best efforts.
We've gone over the Dobbs question multiple times. I'm not going to go over it again. If you're sensitive about the term tanking for some reason, whatever.
LOL, sensitive. I'm not sensitive about it. I'm practical.

Tell me how this team was tanking when they very well should have been 3-1 to start the year?
We're purposely designed to be professionally non-competitive.
EXACTLY, and it was done by the previous regime. I don't know why this is so hard to understand.

Furthermore, by your logic, since we are 1-6 we are tanking. But somehow Carolina being 0-6 isn't.
 

kerouac9

Klowned by Keim
Joined
Feb 14, 2003
Posts
37,387
Reaction score
27,540
Location
Gilbert, AZ
Yes. You are playing semantics. There is some nuance as to WHY a team isn't capable of being competitive.

You KNOW that there is a difference between intentionally losing, and losing despite your best efforts.

LOL, sensitive. I'm not sensitive about it. I'm practical.

Tell me how this team was tanking when they very well should have been 3-1 to start the year?

EXACTLY, and it was done by the previous regime. I don't know why this is so hard to understand.

Furthermore, by your logic, since we are 1-6 we are tanking. But somehow Carolina being 0-6 isn't.
Okay.
 

Chopper0080

2021 - Prove It
Joined
May 15, 2002
Posts
26,966
Reaction score
35,862
Location
Colorado
Yes. You are playing semantics. There is some nuance as to WHY a team isn't capable of being competitive.

You KNOW that there is a difference between intentionally losing, and losing despite your best efforts.

LOL, sensitive. I'm not sensitive about it. I'm practical.

Tell me how this team was tanking when they very well should have been 3-1 to start the year?

EXACTLY, and it was done by the previous regime. I don't know why this is so hard to understand.

Furthermore, by your logic, since we are 1-6 we are tanking. But somehow Carolina being 0-6 isn't.
You do come across sensitive about the term of tanking. I don't really understand why.

Also, I don't understand how you can say that this team was almost 3-1 to start the year but then argue Murphy, Allen or other talented players would not have made the team competitive?
 

dreamcastrocks

Chopped Liver Moderator
Super Moderator
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2005
Posts
46,063
Reaction score
11,596
You do come across sensitive about the term of tanking. I don't really understand why.
You don't have to take my sensitive word for it. The proof is in the play. We aren't tanking.

Also, I don't understand how you can say that this team was almost 3-1 to start the year but then argue Murphy, Allen or other talented players would not have made the team competitive?
I think we could have been 3-1 and finished with about 6 wins if we had signed those two and a couple of free agents. I have said that since the beginning of the offseason. I don't consider that competitive. Do you?
 

kerouac9

Klowned by Keim
Joined
Feb 14, 2003
Posts
37,387
Reaction score
27,540
Location
Gilbert, AZ
You don't have to take my sensitive word for it. The proof is in the play. We aren't tanking.


I think we could have been 3-1 and finished with about 6 wins if we had signed those two and a couple of free agents. I have said that since the beginning of the offseason. I don't consider that competitive. Do you?
So we could have been 3-1. We lose every other game we lost. Today we'd be 3-4. Let's say Kyler comes back for the Atlanta game, but we lose the next two. We'd be 3-6. Kyler goes .500 as a starter over the remaining eight games. We end up 7-10.

Depending on the sequence of wins, we could be playing the last four games of the season with a shot at the playoffs. I consider that competitive.
 

dreamcastrocks

Chopped Liver Moderator
Super Moderator
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2005
Posts
46,063
Reaction score
11,596
So we could have been 3-1. We lose every other game we lost. Today we'd be 3-4. Let's say Kyler comes back for the Atlanta game, but we lose the next two. We'd be 3-6. Kyler goes .500 as a starter over the remaining eight games. We end up 7-10.

Depending on the sequence of wins, we could be playing the last four games of the season with a shot at the playoffs. I consider that competitive.
I don't. I call that purgatory.
 

Arz101

ASFN Lifer
Joined
Apr 23, 2014
Posts
4,906
Reaction score
5,598
I don't know about you all, I will take a 9-8 team every year over rebuilding for something that doesn't come to fruition , even at best, several years down the lane..complete rebuilding is really a crap shoot.

Buenos Noches.
 

TheCardFan

Things have changed.
Joined
May 14, 2002
Posts
12,069
Reaction score
14,673
Location
Charlotte
I don't know about you all, I will take a 9-8 team every year over rebuilding for something that doesn't come to fruition , even at best, several years down the lane..complete rebuilding is really a crap shoot.

Buenos Noches.

We have NEVER been that franchise. See Steelers.

I want to rebuild now with new GM/HC and try to become that franchise.

Otherwise, we can look forward to being the same 4-7 win team every year with one 10 win season every 10 years.
 

kerouac9

Klowned by Keim
Joined
Feb 14, 2003
Posts
37,387
Reaction score
27,540
Location
Gilbert, AZ
I’m willing to bet that every GM that Bidwill interviewed recommended some sort of roster teardown/short-term pain long-term gain scenario.

Personally I felt we leaned a bit too hard into the roster tank but I get where they’re coming from.
I said on another thread that 42% of our 2024 cap commitments are Kyler + Baker + Jalen Thompson. Wild.
 

Latest posts

Staff online

Forum statistics

Threads
540,441
Posts
5,293,416
Members
6,287
Latest member
NoObstacles92
Top