OK, you all know my position by now.
I think it's never acceptable to lose. You have to hold your teams/people to a higher standard. Just like organizations like the Steelers, Eagles, Pats, and Colts do. (see: PIT yesterday).
I loathe having this discussion year after year about "losing to get a higher pick."
Losing is for losers.
Winning is for winners.
"Losing will make us winners" is one of the stupidest things I've ever heard.
Winning and continually winning is what separates the WINNING organizations from the LOSING ones. It's about culture. Change the culture to one in which winning is acceptable and losing is not. Don't "hope to win" by losing.
So, that being said, the argument for those who want a better pick is that the Bills always have these "meaningless wins" that cost them these great players in the draft.
Really? Let's take a closer look at that.
The fact is the Bills HAVEN'T won all these meaningless games the "let's hope to lose to win" crowd talks about.
Before I present the data, I have to assume everyone actually thinks it's ok to keep winning when you are in playoff contention, right? Because if not, then no games ARE ever meaningful. Here you go:
2008: were at 6-6 headed to December fighting for playoffs. Finished 1-3.
2007: were at 7-6 fighting for playoffs, then finished 0-3.
2006: were at 6-6 fighting for playoffs, then finished 0-2.
2005: were at 4-5 in mid-November. Finished season 1-6.
That's 2-14 in "meaningless" games the past 4 years. That's a full season of 2-14 football, which could be good for the #1 overall pick in most years.
Where are all these "meaningless" wins everyone is talking about?!
Just because some people want to believe they are there and tell others they are there doesn't make it true.
Wow, they beat Cincy and the Broncos when it didn't matter. They also lost the other 14 damn games when they mattered. 2-14 cost them a bunch of pro bowlers? You gotta be kidding me!
Now here's my challenge for the "let's hope to lose" crowd since I already debunked your made-up theory.
Tell me any way or any how this organization is better ON THE FIELD by picking in the top-12 (including a top-10) EVERY YEAR over the same span I just looked at the record (past 4 years)?!
I think it's never acceptable to lose. You have to hold your teams/people to a higher standard. Just like organizations like the Steelers, Eagles, Pats, and Colts do. (see: PIT yesterday).
I loathe having this discussion year after year about "losing to get a higher pick."
Losing is for losers.
Winning is for winners.
"Losing will make us winners" is one of the stupidest things I've ever heard.
Winning and continually winning is what separates the WINNING organizations from the LOSING ones. It's about culture. Change the culture to one in which winning is acceptable and losing is not. Don't "hope to win" by losing.
So, that being said, the argument for those who want a better pick is that the Bills always have these "meaningless wins" that cost them these great players in the draft.
Really? Let's take a closer look at that.
The fact is the Bills HAVEN'T won all these meaningless games the "let's hope to lose to win" crowd talks about.
Before I present the data, I have to assume everyone actually thinks it's ok to keep winning when you are in playoff contention, right? Because if not, then no games ARE ever meaningful. Here you go:
2008: were at 6-6 headed to December fighting for playoffs. Finished 1-3.
2007: were at 7-6 fighting for playoffs, then finished 0-3.
2006: were at 6-6 fighting for playoffs, then finished 0-2.
2005: were at 4-5 in mid-November. Finished season 1-6.
That's 2-14 in "meaningless" games the past 4 years. That's a full season of 2-14 football, which could be good for the #1 overall pick in most years.
Where are all these "meaningless" wins everyone is talking about?!
Just because some people want to believe they are there and tell others they are there doesn't make it true.
Wow, they beat Cincy and the Broncos when it didn't matter. They also lost the other 14 damn games when they mattered. 2-14 cost them a bunch of pro bowlers? You gotta be kidding me!
Now here's my challenge for the "let's hope to lose" crowd since I already debunked your made-up theory.
Tell me any way or any how this organization is better ON THE FIELD by picking in the top-12 (including a top-10) EVERY YEAR over the same span I just looked at the record (past 4 years)?!
Comment