OT: Do Teams Purposely Lay Down?

[Shane]

Complete bunk and doesn't happen.

 

[Mulli]

Complete bunk and doesn't happen.

Going with Curtis Painter? Ya, that was going to work.

 

[Russ Smith]

I don't know if they laid down or not but consider how incredible it is the Colts had Manning and now Luck. By the time Luck is retired the Cards will have had how many different starters at QB and the Colts will have had essentially 3, Manning, the guy who took over when Manning was out, and luck.

Luck probably never throws for 5000 yards and 45 Td's in a seasonbut the Colts will be a good team for years because he's so good, they will be in games, he will do what it takes to win games.

It's remarkable that one franchise got that twice essentially in a row.

I saw Luck enough at Stanford to know he's just a special kid, he isn't the athletic freak type there are faster guys, stronger arms etc, but there isn't a guy in years who came into the NFL better prepared.

 

[Russ Smith]

To me the more important question is how did they go from also rans to contenders in such a short period of time. Yes the Chiefs now have a new HC. Was that all it took to more them from the bottom to the top?

Was Luck the only reason the Colts climbed from the basement to the top tier?

Harbaugh did the same thing for the most part in SF once he took over. They went from being a doormat to contenders in a short period. Same for Carroll in Seattle.

It would seem that it would take more than one person to achieve that kind of movement. Is it luck or strength of schedule? Is it the moons aligning for them? I can see where this should merit some discussion. The even bigger question is why other teams (hint. hint) can't do the same thing. Even in the Whiz divisional title years the Cardinals were not world beaters.

What is the missing ingredient that propels teams from wallowing in the basement to competing for titles and playoffs?

The Colts were one of the youngest teams in the NFL last year. They had a very easy schedule so while Luck was learning, and getting beaten up, they were winning enough games to get those kids the experience of what it is to win in the NFL.

They drafted well and got just enough talent that with Luck improving, and their defense stepping up, suddenly they look really good. I don't see them as a SB contender this year I think they're still too young, but they're good. They blew it trading for Trent Richardson IMO, that draft pick could have been really valuable next year adding another key piece from the draft, but they've done most everythign right since they decided to move on from Manning.

 

[cardinalsfan]

If we miss on our QB of the future in this draft I say we "develop" Lindley for the entire 2014 season and pray Winston declares.

 

[CHAPTER 7]

No way. Players will play hard so they have job next year. Players who are set for life might not put full efforts but that's not because they want the organization to have better draft pick. Because they just don't care or don't want to get hurt. In order for owener to have players, HC, and GM to suck is to pay huge incentives so they can suck. And I doubt they do that and if they do, owner must paid them a lot.

 

[Broseph]

They WON two of their last 3 games, finishing in a tie with the Rams and only getting the pick based on SOS rankings, they were only a game worse than the Vikings (who also won in week 16). IMO there is absolutely ZERO chance that Indy tanked. They nearly jeopardized the entire operation by winning at the end of the year, then despite their "successful" tank job they fire the guys who had to have been on masterminding the entire thing?!

Seriously, there is not a chance they tanked. Zero. They (and their coach) were simply freaking horrible.

Irsay hamstrung his team from the top and trickled down to the bottom. The players won't lose on purpose, but they don't have to if they are not getting structural support. Irsay put the right people in the right positions in order to facilitate losing as much as possible. I have no doubt about it and will always believe the Colts sucked for Luck. Just my opinion, however...so take it what it's worth.

 

[jmt]

good luck getting a player to purposely suck and put tarnish marks on his own career for the betterment of a franchise that has little to no loyalty to him.

I agree. Tank so we can get better players and replace you? Stupid. You play to win, period.

 

[football karma]

A few examples that I can think of tell me no.

When we beat Atlanta in 1997 in the last game we lost the opportunity to draft Peyton Manning. Tank it, he's ours. I don't think that Indy tanked because it cost Infante his job.

When we beat the Vikings in 2003 we lost the opportunity to draft Eli.

I don't believe the Chargers tanked because, as was stated earlier, they almost won too many games at the end, and it cost the coach and GM their jobs.

In 1997, we weren't drafting Manning because hey had just drafted Plummer -- it's why they traded down with SD who took Ryan Leaf. Of course, Andre Wadsworth didn't work out all that well for the Cards either.

In 2003, Denny was drafting Fitzgerald regardless -- and actually liked Rowthlisberger better than Manning.

The real crime was the next years draft When the team passed on Aaron Rogers because they had Josh McCown.

 

[Broseph]

I agree. Tank so we can get better players and replace you? Stupid. You play to win, period.

Players don't have to tank...

 

[freebyrd]

i don't know about that, but i feel the defense of the cards laid down on purpose last year against seattle a week after wisenhunt had ordered them to let the jets score so the offense could try and score

it just felt like the defense said "you wanna see what its like to play without us"
58 to 0

 

[Russ Smith]

In 1997, we weren't drafting Manning because hey had just drafted Plummer -- it's why they traded down with SD who took Ryan Leaf. Of course, Andre Wadsworth didn't work out all that well for the Cards either.

In 2003, Denny was drafting Fitzgerald regardless -- and actually liked Rowthlisberger better than Manning.

The real crime was the next years draft When the team passed on Aaron Rogers because they had Josh McCown.

That was the one time I was right on a QB I kept saying Rodgers should be the first QB taken and that if he was on the board when we picked we should take him. Of course 2/3 of the NFL passed on him that year.

 

[BigRedRage]

That was the one time I was right on a QB I kept saying Rodgers should be the first QB taken and that if he was on the board when we picked we should take him. Of course 2/3 of the NFL passed on him that year.

wasnt he picked at like 28?

 

[Russ Smith]

wasnt he picked at like 28?

I'm thinking 24th but that's a guess, might have been later.

ESPN just kept showing him sitting there, felt sorry for him then, he got the last laugh.

Teams should have done a double check before drafting.

 

[GatorAZ]

I'm fully convinced Neil Rackers purposely tried to lose us games.

 

[Jetstream Green]

Teams accidentally lay down all the time

 

[cardpa]

I'm fully convinced Neil Rackers purposely tried to lose us games.

No I don't agree. I think it was a God given natural ability he had and it was never on purpose.