FMIA: Tanking shouldn’t be a dirty word

[DaveThePanther2008]

5 minutes ago, stbugs said:

SMH. Do you guys really not know what tanking is? Tanking is not signing FAs and trading away guys like Jamal Adams for 2 1sts. WTF do you think we traded CMC for?

For the last time, tanking <> players trying to lose a game. It’s getting rid of your top players (usually the higher priced ones, not cheap rookies or guys at key spots) for picks and not spending FA money to roll it over when you’ve added draft talent.  

When the Dolphins traded away Tunsil, Fitzpatrick and others for picks, was that not tanking?

It’s amazing that people can’t grasp the concept of trading away talent or not signing a QB to let Clausen or Weinke get you a top pick.

You're another one changing the argument.  The argument was to lose as many games as possible to get that #1 pick.  

I'm done with this conversation.  

Bottom line I win, you lose.  The Panthers will continue to try to win every game possible regardless of what the fanbase wants.  They'll take whatever get as far as draft position after the season.

Panther's aren't tanking.   You'll just have to swallow that pill and get over it. 

[DaveThePanther2008]

4 minutes ago, mrcompletely11 said:

The fact that you cannot grasp what we are talking about is pretty telling 

I grasp perfectly fine with what you are implying.  You want to give up the season and I don't.  Nor do the players.  So who isn't grasping the concept?  

[Growl]

12 minutes ago, DaveThePanther2008 said:

You can also find Mahomes and Allen in the middle or maybe a Lamar Jackson at 32.   Tanking does nothing but instill a losing mentality.  It also prevents good Free Agents from wanting to come to a loser. 

just because those things happen doesn’t mean-stastically-that it is preferable 

also, free agents? Lol

this team has two players on it right now who left the reigning super bowl champions to come here and play for what was a lame duck coach in a rolling tire fire

 

Edited October 24, 2022 by Growl

[Yup]

Only losers think losing is a good thing.

 

[ForJimmy]

10 minutes ago, stbugs said:

SMH. Do you guys really not know what tanking is? Tanking is not signing FAs and trading away guys like Jamal Adams for 2 1sts. WTF do you think we traded CMC for?

For the last time, tanking <> players trying to lose a game. It’s getting rid of your top players (usually the higher priced ones, not cheap rookies or guys at key spots) for picks and not spending FA money to roll it over when you’ve added draft talent.  

When the Dolphins traded away Tunsil, Fitzpatrick and others for picks, was that not tanking?

It’s amazing that people can’t grasp the concept of trading away talent or not signing a QB to let Clausen or Weinke get you a top pick.

Exactly.  We aren't going to march our team out there and just punt it every play to lose.  People are getting way too literal with this poo.  Trade away the big contracts and get picks (CMC and RA).  Sit any play with a mild injury (Horn) and roll with your young guys.  It's how they "tank" in the NFL.  

[Zappy]

TRrading CMC wasn't a tank move it was a move to win .. he's not a winning player .. he's never contributed to winning in Carolina

[Captroop]

23 minutes ago, NAS said:

So Cam Newton was not worth the 2-14 season in 2010 because we failed to win the Superbowl? Or Joe Burrow to Bengals at #1?

Depends what you want. You want a Super Bowl? Then yes, it was a waste. Because he didn't win one.

If you're saying that it was worth it because he made the team wildly entertaining and fun to watch year in and year out regardless of record...

They why the hell are we talking about tanking and not about hoping this is the best, most entertaining season it can be with 10 games less and in position to win our division?

I don't see how those two thoughts can inhabit your head simultaneously. If you're so pragmatic that you're willing to call an entire 10-game an unimportant "exhibition match" because you think the #1 QB will make us a contender. Then how can you say a QB who did anything less than win a title was anything but an utter failure. The Luke, TD, Cam era was a colossal waste of time. Shouldn't we should have traded Cam for more picks when he was the MVP and tanked every year of the Rivera dynasty because clearly he wasn't the right coach? Look at all the #1 picks we missed out on!

 

So, in seriousness, I ask you: What do you want? If we tank, and if we get the #1 pick, what do you want the outcome of that to be?

[Growl]

Just now, ForJimmy said:

Exactly.  We aren't going to march our team out there and just punt it every play to lose.  People are getting way too literal with this poo.  Trade away the big contracts and get picks (CMC and RA).  Sit any play with a mild injury (Horn) and roll with your young guys.  It's how they "tank" in the NFL.  

yeah, so, I’m pretty sure it’s not an accidental misunderstanding of what tanking is but a purposeful misrepresentation 

is playing rookies in a lost season for the purpose of development and evaluation a scandal?

of course not.

thus the argument must be reframed as “tell Walker to intentionally throw an interception” and then you can feign righteous indignation at how we’re compromising the competitive integrity of the game

[mrcompletely11]

Just now, Zappy said:

TRrading CMC wasn't a tank move it was a move to win .. he's not a winning player .. he's never contributed to winning in Carolina

That's how you troll folks

[DaveThePanther2008]

7 minutes ago, stbugs said:

I’d rather give our guys the chance to get our best QB rather than hope we luck into Allen because two idiot GMs in front of us made mistakes. There are also Manning/Leafs out there.

I get that, but you don't do it by purposely throwing games.  If we traded Burns and Shaq and DJ than we'd probably lose all our games regardless of how hard we try.  Right now, we traded a big money RB for several picks.   So far that's it.  

Until we do that, this team is still trying to win as many games as they can.  Why can't anyone see that.  Do you really think that the players want to give up.  Do you think Wilks will go along with trying to lose and lose any chance ever again at being a HC? 

[DaveThePanther2008]

3 minutes ago, Growl said:

yeah, so, I’m pretty sure it’s not an accidental misunderstanding of what tanking is but a purposeful misrepresentation 

is playing rookies in a lost season for the purpose of development and evaluation a scandal?

of course not.

thus the argument must be reframed as “tell Walker to intentionally throw an interception” and then you can feign righteous indignation at how we’re compromising the competitive integrity of the game

When you are mathematically eliminated, I have no problem with this. 

[NAS]

5 minutes ago, Captroop said:

Depends what you want. You want a Super Bowl? Then yes, it was a waste. Because he didn't win one.

If you're saying that it was worth it because he made the team wildly entertaining and fun to watch year in and year out regardless of record...

They why the hell are we talking about tanking and not about hoping this is the best, most entertaining season it can be with 10 games less and in position to win our division?

I don't see how those two thoughts can inhabit your head simultaneously. If you're so pragmatic that you're willing to call an entire 10-game an unimportant "exhibition match" because you think the #1 QB will make us a contender. Then how can you say a QB who did anything less than win a title was anything but an utter failure. The Luke, TD, Cam era was a colossal waste of time. Shouldn't we should have traded Cam for more picks when he was the MVP and tanked every year of the Rivera dynasty because clearly he wasn't the right coach? Look at all the #1 picks we missed out on!

 

So, in seriousness, I ask you: What do you want? If we tank, and if we get the #1 pick, what do you want the outcome of that to be?

May be the dumbest thing I ever read

[Sir Purr]

Damn, some of you guys are a miserable lot and actually deserve the team you have gotten the last few years. Wallow in the misery that you wanted. This team has not, and will not quit no matter how much you draft nerds beg for it.  

[Captroop]

1 hour ago, Growl said:

lol did you just try to pass off Stafford and Manning as mere free agent acquisitions and not the #1 overall pick they are? What about the other QB in those games? Or is your plan to trade to spot #199 to lock down our elite QB prospect there

...yeah. Because in your plan, we're Detroit. Detroit took him #1. Not L.A. He didn't do poo in Detroit.

So now you're saying it's a good thing to tank so we can draft someone else's Super Bowl winner?

Quote

you don’t desire to have an intellectual conversation, and you’ve made this plainly clear not just with this post but your overall sentiment: if you Culture Win people would simply admit it’s an emotional plea then I could at least respect your stance, “I know elite QBs get drafted high, I know it’s not the smart thing to do, but I just want my instant gratification so bad I can’t root for a loss.”

i could respect that. but to twist and reject what is plainly documented and try to present the argument as an intellectual is an insulting to other posters here.

I plainly documented to you that the Super Bowl winners aren't teams that drafted QBs #1 overall. So I don't know why you keep saying this is emotional. I'm looking at the most recent 10 years of human existence. You don't have data to back up your point aside from pointing out that they have a higher TD/INT ratio. Whoopdie-fuging-doo.

As for the highlighted portion, we did draft an elite QB at #1. And we got no titles to show for it. That, again, is very recent history. Why do you think if we repeat the process the results will be different?