The Latest On Tanking

[Chopper0080]

That is the advantage/disadvantage of being a fan. They only worry about today, and never consider tomorrow.

That is disingenuous. The statement was that we are not tanking, which is a concept of doing things to put yourself in a position to not compete that year. The statement was not about any sort of long term plan which is also not what this thread was commenting on.

 

[Proximo]

If it is a honest question, here is the answer.

Didn't re-sign two of it's 10 best players on the roster as free agents when the roster was already bad. (Allen and Murphy)

Didn't add any significant outside FAs when the roster was bad.

Traded back in the draft, passing up a pass rusher for an offensive lineman. (Will Anderson)

Cut one of it's 10 best players without getting any compensation in return. (Hopkins)

Traded a former top 10 pick for a 7th round pick. (Simmons)

Cut the starting QB after the last game of the preseason to create a battle between a 5th round rookie and a guy who has not practiced with the team all year. Two weeks before the first game of the season. (McCoy)

Those are not moves teams generally make that are trying to win football games. People on here dismiss the idea because they believe it is part of a "master plan". However, that is what tanking is. Losing by design.

Yeah see I don't see it that way - none of those things answer the question at all IMO.

Hopkins was not happy and never would have played for us.

Passing up a pass rusher for a tackle makes a lot of sense - first off the likelihood of hitting on an OT is far higher than a pass rusher, and a new GM is going to want the surest pick available when he is starting his new job. Also in my opinion tackle is just a more valuable position.

Simmons was continuing to make mental mistakes and was a likely cut if not traded.

When you are choosing whether to resign a player or not, there is more to it than are they just good - first off they need to fit the new coaches schemes, 2nd it has to be determined if the price to retain them is worth it in the situation you are in - and most importantly they have to even consider resigning with you - it's not like they were restricted.

Colt McCoy was coming off an injury and looked horrible in camp - cutting him has nothing to do with tanking, it has to do with him being bad.

Not signing free agents of any significance makes sense at the start of a rebuild as well, because the only way you can sign them to an unknown coaching staff and a team with bad talent is to grossly over pay them. It makes far more sense to pay them after you have made your situation better with some an up and coming young talent.

 

[Chopper0080]

It's like Deandre Hopkins. There is no long term benefit for cutting him this year that couldn't be gained by cutting him next year.

We didn't save money to spend elsewhere. (minor savings next year)

We didn't upgrade in talent.

We didn't receive any compensation to benefit the future.

However, we did it anyways. That is not a move made to win games. That is a move made to get rid of a player who wants to win every year when that is not your primary focus in 2023.

 

[Totally_Red]

If there is a difference between 'tanking' and foregoing near term success for more sustained long-term success that is what they are trying to do IMO. I give Michael some credit for making the change and starting the process after he dug his own grave with the foolish extensions.

I like JG. I am on the fence about Monti. This year is going to be ugly.

 

[Chopper0080]

Yeah see I don't see it that way - none of those things answer the question at all IMO.

Hopkins was not happy and never would have played for us.

Passing up a pass rusher for a tackle makes a lot of sense - first off the likelihood of hitting on an OT is far higher than a pass rusher, and a new GM is going to want the surest pick available when he is starting his new job. Also in my opinion tackle is just a more valuable position.

Simmons was continuing to make mental mistakes and was a likely cut if not traded.

When you are choosing whether to resign a player or not, there is more to it than are they just good - first off they need to fit the new coaches schemes, 2nd it has to be determined if the price to retain them is worth it in the situation you are in - and most importantly they have to even consider resigning with you - it's not like they were restricted.

Colt McCoy was coming off an injury and looked horrible in camp - cutting him has nothing to do with tanking, it has to do with him being bad.

Not signing free agents of any significance makes sense at the start of a rebuild as well, because the only way you can sign them to an unknown coaching staff and a team with bad talent is to grossly over pay them. It makes far more sense to pay them after you have made your situation better with some an up and coming young talent.

The question was asked why there is this narrative the Cardinals are tanking. You are adding your own context, conditions, and stories to justify why these are smart moves...for the long term. They may be. However, there is not one move made this season, outside of the draft, to benefit the Cardinals franchise this year.

 

[Proximo]

It's like Deandre Hopkins. There is no long term benefit for cutting him this year that couldn't be gained by cutting him next year.

We didn't save money to spend elsewhere. (minor savings next year)

We didn't upgrade in talent.

We didn't receive any compensation to benefit the future.

However, we did it anyways. That is not a move made to win games. That is a move made to get rid of a player who wants to win every year when that is not your primary focus in 2023.

There is no benefit to cutting Hopkins?

You really think having a malcontent around a bunch of young players and rookies has no negative impact. Having a guy known for not wanting to practice - even when he is happy and we know he wouldn't be has no negative value.
A guy that is likely to bad mouth the organization to the other players because they won't trade him has no negative impact?

 

[Chopper0080]

If the 49ers let two of their 10 best players go, and those players were both under 25, every person on this board would be happy and would see it as a benefit to the Cardinals.

 

[Proximo]

The question was asked why there is this narrative the Cardinals are tanking. You are adding your own context, conditions, and stories to justify why these are smart moves...for the long term. They may be. However, there is not one move made this season, outside of the draft, to benefit the Cardinals franchise this year.

Yeah I don't agree.

Stripping out everything - bad contracts, bad draft picks, bad attitudes and starting fresh is a necessary step in a rebuild. That's all I have seen them do.

I think your whole problem is you don't actually want a rebuild. You want instant gratification.

 

[Chopper0080]

There is no benefit to cutting Hopkins?

You really think having a malcontent around a bunch of young players and rookies has no negative impact. Having a guy known for not wanting to practice - even when he is happy and we know he wouldn't be has no negative value.
A guy that is likely to bad mouth the organization to the other players because they won't trade him has no negative impact?

Coaches are paid to deal will malcontent players. They are paid to hold them accountable. They are paid to motivate them. Getting rid of one of your 10 best players to make your coaches job easier doesn't help you win that season.

 

[Chopper0080]

Yeah I don't agree.

Stripping out everything - bad contracts, bad draft picks, bad attitudes and starting fresh is a necessary step in a rebuild. That's all I have seen them do.

I think your whole problem is you don't actually want a rebuild. You want instant gratification.

Lol.

Again, this premise of this thread has nothing to do with what I want. It has to do with perception. If you won't recognize that, there can't be a conversation.

 

[kerouac9]

Yeah I don't agree.

Stripping out everything - bad contracts, bad draft picks, bad attitudes and starting fresh is a necessary step in a rebuild. That's all I have seen them do.

I think your whole problem is you don't actually want a rebuild. You want instant gratification.

Yes, but you can replace them with good contracts, good attitudes, etc. That's what the Giants did last year, that's what the Vikes are doing this year.

We took one step and passed on the second step. We still have bad contracts on the roster like Conner and Ertz.

 

[Chopper0080]

The alternative question is what moves did the Cardinals make this offseason to help them win games in 2023?

 

[Chopper0080]

How does sitting on 26.8 mil in cap space and increasing the dead cap dollars by 31 mil help build a roster to compete and win games this year?

 

[GatorAZ]

Then why we didn’t trade Buddha?

Team leader/fan favorite. Didn’t need any more bad PR. Given the fact they didn’t extend him with tons of cap space available the trade deadline is going to be interesting.

 

[Chopper0080]

This is why I started my initial response with "If this is an honest question". Because when you compile all of these individual moves, you are left with two possibilities, incompetence or intention.

 

[kerouac9]

The alternative question is what moves did the Cardinals make this offseason to help them win games in 2023?

This is becoming a very Keim-like conversation where people are defending each individual action in a vacuum and not understanding that each of those moments build to a large narrative.

If you make four moves to improve the team in 2023, you can trade Simmons for nothing and you're still ahead.

If you add a second back with promise, you can dump Deandre Hopkins and tell a story that we're de-emphasizing the passing game.

This offseason had such a sour tone because EVERY decision had no benefit toward winning in 2023 and becoming more competitive after that is purely speculative.

 

[Chopper0080]

Team leader/fan favorite. Didn’t need any more bad PR. Given the fact they didn’t extend him with tons of cap space available the trade deadline is going to be interesting.

Basically they couldn't get a deal good enough to compensate for the blow back.

 

[kerouac9]

OP: Why is everyone saying we're tanking?

Usual suspects: Here are 10 ways the Arizona Cardinals showed that winning games in 2023 is a low priority

OP: Well, I don't believe it anyway.

Usual suspects: OK cool.

 

[Stout]

Here is the thing. If you believe Monti and Gannon spent this offseason making moves to try to win as many games in 2023 as possible, then they are incompetent.

Indubitably.

 

[Stout]

And after the way our center handled Allen in PS game #1, the Broncos wished they didn't. And they overpaid him as well. But thanks for NOT using the word fans.

I don't think the Broncos put much store into that play in the least.

 

[Chopper0080]

OP: Why is everyone saying we're tanking?

Usual suspects: Here are 10 ways the Arizona Cardinals showed that winning games in 2023 is a low priority

OP: Well, I don't believe it anyway.

Usual suspects: OK cool.

I do laugh at the idea that being the worst team in the NFL is better for your culture than having DeAndre Hopkins on your roster.

 

[Garthshort]

This is why I started my initial response with "If this is an honest question". Because when you compile all of these individual moves, you are left with two possibilities, incompetence or intention.

Over my 86+ years, I've been called crazy AND stupid. But I think you are the first to question my honesty. Congrats.

 

[Garthshort]

I don't think the Broncos put much store into that play in the least.

I can see why.

 

[Chopper0080]

Over my 86+ years, I've been called crazy AND stupid. But I think you are the first to question my honesty. Congrats.

This seems extreme to me, but you do you.

 

[Dan H]

Are you saying we should...


....


Trust the process?

I think you have to give a new regime at least two years before pulling the pin.