- Feb 12, 2005
- 58,804
- 30,199
The one minor detail with the Browns that makes me question whether or not their tanking is the decision to start Hoyer. Why? Campbell was the backup in Cleveland and probably gives them the best chance to win. So, why now do they go with Hoyer unless they want to better their chances of losing?
They are in full-tank mode. No point in starting a QB who will make them reasonably competitive. IF the colts finish w/ 6 wins, that would be 2 first round picks (maybe the #1 overall) in the top 10.
I can never get on board with tanking.
would you rather have them completely suck for 1-2 years, or be stuck in mediocrity for 5-6 years?
i watched the texans hand out bad contract after bad contract just to remain at 8-8 7-9 9-7. then they started drafting better and we're a playoff team now.
You can still draft well even though you may not have a high pick. By tanking, you send the message to players that ownership has no faith in them and their commitment to winning only comes from if the roster looks good on paper.
And it's not like we're talking about Andrew Luck here...Is Teddy really as safe a pick as people say? For the most part, an organization that tanks, shows their ineptitude to build a consistent winner and need to get lucky with a top pick in order to win.