The BIG Picture of Why Suc for Luck was a good Idea

[Mike]

I dont get your end of it. ****, I ve been saying it for years, I even had a over view of IT... But some of you pansies will never get it. Your so intent on sucking one last win in a meaningless season that you dont see the BIG Picture... and its the Big Picture that determines your future and destiny....


So Here is the BIG Picture
Every Generation has a few elite QBs. These QBs go on to Dominate, really dominate Take the Best 5 right now: Brady (5) P. Manning (2) E. Manning (2) Brees (1) Rogers (1) Rothlisburger (3). In the last Decade these 5 Players have had 14 Superbowl appearances!!! Thats 14 appearances out of a possible 20. Now who else showed up to the Big Dance: Warner, Haselback, Gannon, McNabb, Delhome, Johnson. So what is the Moral of the Story? Top 5 QBs DOMINATED!!! and a Pro Bowl QB is needed to have a chance. Furhter, if you want to win more than one SB, you better have a HOF Top 5 Type QB or it aint happening...

Current Generation
Brady, Manning, Brees, etc.. the old generation is getting old.. they will need to pass on the torch As the Marino, Elway, Kelly, Aikman era bleed into this era, so will this era bleed into the next one...

Currently there is a passing of the torch In the last couple a years a few good prospects have come out and showed they belong: Cam, Bradford, Luck, RG3, Tennehill, Ponder, Dalton, etc.... These players have a chance to become the top QBs of the new generation.

WHy It Was Critical to Get One of the above QBs

Once a generational QB is missed usually it will take at least another 15 years to find another similar prospect, if your are lucky. Last year was a great chance as too of the Best QB prospects of all time were available. Luck was the most highly touted QB to be drafted since Elway and RG3 beat him out that season as best college football player.

NOT LANDING A GENERATION QB MEANS YOUR TEAM WILL BE AT BEST GOOD -BUT NOT GREAT- FOR NEXT 15 YEARS. GOOD TEAMS DONT WIN SB.

* Once the Top Crust of Top NFL QB is determined in a generation it it very difficult to break through that barrier. Its akin to taking down Microsoft or IBM in their heyday or Apple now. These HOF QBs play on such a high lavel, that breaking though that barrier is nearly impossible, just ask Cutler, Vick, Romo, McNabb, etc....

***MIssing out on your chance at a LUCK or RG3 Prospect for a few extra measly wins is incredibly nieve. Your are selling your Future for a meaningless win or two. You are selling the Big Picture for a meaningless win and you are ensuring your own mediocrity for the next generation***

[Joe Fo Sho]

Re: The BIG Picture of Why Suc for Luck was a good Idea

Please tell me who was in charge of tanking the season for the Colts.

[Mike]

Re: The BIG Picture of Why Suc for Luck was a good Idea

Further, THE BILLS are a Day Late and a Dollar Short. No matter how much they suck this year, it wont matter. The boat has sailed the train has left the station. There are No QBs in this years draft that are nearly as good as: Bradford, Cam, Luck, RG3!!!

Last season was their their chance, once again, when the Bills draft a QB it will be Matt Linartesqe...

[Mike]

Re: The BIG Picture of Why Suc for Luck was a good Idea

Please tell me who was in charge of tanking the season for the Colts.

Its amazing to me how many of you can not see this. ITs so obvious. Lets look at the facts. Colts knew that Manning was done for the year, yet what do they do? They let Painter play QB!!!

They were a contender before Manning injury, a contender! They had opportunity to get a good back QB but they passed on it. Multiple times.

[Joe Fo Sho]

Re: The BIG Picture of Why Suc for Luck was a good Idea

Its amazing to me how many of you can not see this. ITs so obvious. Lets look at the facts. Colts knew that Manning was done for the year, yet what do they do? They let Painter play QB!!!

They were a contender before Manning injury, a contender! They had opportunity to get a good back QB but they passed on it. Multiple times.

You didn't answer my question, and I was very careful how I phrased it.

[Mike]

Re: The BIG Picture of Why Suc for Luck was a good Idea

Please tell me who was in charge of tanking the season for the Colts.

I have had this argument before, "Well the players wont tank a season and neither will the coaches, etc... they are all fighting for their jobs. So no NFL team ever tanked a season, such a thing would never happen..."

So let me break it down for you: First good teams dont tank seasons, they have something to play for. Bad teams have nothing to play for or almost nothing. They know changes are coming and they have lost faith in their coaches are not motivated and are going through the motions. If you want a good example of this, just look at the Bills. Heck there are players calling out other players for not playing hard. If you hear about it and I hear about it, imagine what that locker room is like. Division, no motivation, and little effort.

Leadership:
The top of an organization can also aid in the demise of a season, tanking of it. The Colts did this part to perfection. The ownership opted to let a Painter play, and requested that he and that other QB take turns.... Painter started season, then played poorly, so other Qb played for a bit then back to painter. Further, other players were also given chance for more snaps. When a season is lost, often times ownership will request that rookies and 2nd year players are given more snaps.

Mid Season Firings:
In these cases its not uncommon for Owners to fire Coach, or assistant Coaches mid season. It does not need mentioning that this disrupts a team not only from an emotional stand point but also from a technical and strategic one.

- You have to remember that Winning is the Hard part not loosing. To tank a season or influence it to go in a bad direction is very easy. Its so easy it will almost never get noticed. Its like putting to much salt in a meal. Its unnoticeable and ruining the meal is very easy.

[Mike]

Re: The BIG Picture of Why Suc for Luck was a good Idea

Who was in charge? It does not matter. Most likely it came down from the Top.

I dont think the Colts ownership intentionally tanked the season from the get go. I think they found themselves in a predicament with the Manning injure and being competent they knew their season was over. There really is no way to replace Manning. So, realizing this they accepted the notion that they were not going to be as competitive. What happened next was interesting. The players also excepted the notion that it was going to be a very bad season as did the coaches. Next thing you know, the whole team is playing as if it has a pass. Once it was understood which way things were going, starting 0-4 then 0-6, then 0-8 etc..., the team played musical chairs with the QB, placed players on IR, played more rookies and second year players. Once it was evident that they could have LUCK they went for it.

Heck, this years team has allready won 3 games!!! And they arguably had more talent last year outside of QB position.

[Mike]

Re: The BIG Picture of Why Suc for Luck was a good Idea

Compare it to the Bills...when they started 0-8

- Bills start 0-8 find a way to finish with 4 wins and get Darius instead of Cam Newton or Von Miller. Now Darious should become a good player but you can not compare him with a top QB prospect.

- Where are they now? Bills still suck a big one, maybe they are worst now than when they started 0-8
- What about Denver & Carolina = at least both teams have a QB. Denver might go on to win division maybe more. Carolina is having major problems.

[Mike]

Re: The BIG Picture of Why Suc for Luck was a good Idea

At this point I would prefer Cam over MD

[Joe Fo Sho]

Re: The BIG Picture of Why Suc for Luck was a good Idea

Who was in charge? It does not matter. Most likely it came down from the Top.

I dont think the Colts ownership intentionally tanked the season from the get go. I think they found themselves in a predicament with the Manning injure and being competent they knew their season was over. There really is no way to replace Manning. So, realizing this they accepted the notion that they were not going to be as competitive. What happened next was interesting. The players also excepted the notion that it was going to be a very bad season as did the coaches. Next thing you know, the whole team is playing as if it has a pass. Once it was understood which way things were going, starting 0-4 then 0-6, then 0-8 etc..., the team played musical chairs with the QB, placed players on IR, played more rookies and second year players. Once it was evident that they could have LUCK they went for it.

Heck, this years team has allready won 3 games!!! And they arguably had more talent last year outside of QB position.

So was it the Head Coaches idea because he played rookies? Well Jim Caldwell got canned, couldn't have been him.

Was it the GMs idea because he IR'd a bunch of players? Bill Polian and his son got canned, must not have been them.

Must've been Curtis Painters idea then...oh wait, he got cut because they drafted his replacement because he tanked the season!

Your argument makes no sense. Someone has to make the call to tank a season, that person also has to BENEFIT from a tanked season in some way. You've yet to convince me that this is a real thing that any team does.

[Mouldsie]

Re: The BIG Picture of Why Suc for Luck was a good Idea

Organizations will never and should never intentionally tank, but I can still root for it.

[Mike]

Re: The BIG Picture of Why Suc for Luck was a good Idea

So was it the Head Coaches idea because he played rookies? Well Jim Caldwell got canned, couldn't have been him.

Was it the GMs idea because he IR'd a bunch of players? Bill Polian and his son got canned, must not have been them.

Must've been Curtis Painters idea then...oh wait, he got cut because they drafted his replacement because he tanked the season!

Your argument makes no sense. Someone has to make the call to tank a season, that person also has to BENEFIT from a tanked season in some way. You've yet to convince me that this is a real thing that any team does.

Here is what one GM had to say about it:

Polian helped build the Bills teams that went to four consecutive Super Bowls - he was gone after the first three - because he had the good fortune to inherit Jim Kelly after the USFL folded. His best job might have been in Carolina, where the expansion Panthers made the NFC Championship Game in their second year. Collins was his QB and the first player he drafted in franchise history. But he failed the Colts by not signing Matt Hasselbeck or trading for Donovan McNabb or just finding someone better than Painter as soon as the lockout ended.
“Bill Polian is great and he's got a chance at the Hall of Fame,” one GM said. “But in 100 years, I will never understand why they didn't have a backup quarterback who is established. I'm even more shocked that they paid Manning (by signing him to a new contract) without knowing for sure if he could play or not. Then not to have a plan in place in the event he couldn't play or couldn't play early. I'm shocked. The only thing that makes sense is maybe they want Andrew Luck. That would be one thing that would go through your mind.”
Does he think the Colts are intentionally bad?
“I would never accuse anybody of that. Ever,” he said. “I have too much respect for the league and too much respect for the people that do their jobs. But the temptation of thinking it is there. If you are not thinking it, you are stupid.”


Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/fo...#ixzz2ALGmLrde

[Mike]

Re: The BIG Picture of Why Suc for Luck was a good Idea

So was it the Head Coaches idea because he played rookies? Well Jim Caldwell got canned, couldn't have been him.
- No he is following order. Caldwell was an ok coach at best. I dont know his strength or weaknesses and how they contributed to the situation
Was it the GMs idea because he IR'd a bunch of players? Bill Polian and his son got canned, must not have been them.
- It could of been Polian. No one knows the value of a QB quite like him and if it worked, and he did not get fired he would be GM for another 12 years. It was a high risk high reward proposition.
- Further, it was an absolute SHOCK that he got fired. No one expected it, not him or his family or even his players. Some have stated that it was his son's fault that they were fired.
Must've been Curtis Painters idea then...oh wait, he got cut because they drafted his replacement because he tanked the season!
- Now you are being sarcastic. Are you suggesting that Curtis Painter can NOT tank a season and that if he Decided he Could Play like Brady or Manning? Is that what you are suggesting that, Painter is Brady like but decided to play like a focking idiot???
Your argument makes no sense. Someone has to make the call to tank a season, that person also has to BENEFIT from a tanked season in some way. You've yet to convince me that this is a real thing that any team does.
- IS that True??? You think the call comes from somewhere then everyone just sucks? Really, you think that a few men sit in a dark room and talk about how to tank a season? LOL. No its SUBTLE, its unnoticeable its the new way.... Its manipulation... It happens slowly and surely and there need not be a call from anywhere. The GM does not even need to know about it. In fact, its better if he does not.

-Owners manipulated the situation.

[Joe Fo Sho]

Re: The BIG Picture of Why Suc for Luck was a good Idea

Here is what one GM had to say about it:

Polian helped build the Bills teams that went to four consecutive Super Bowls - he was gone after the first three - because he had the good fortune to inherit Jim Kelly after the USFL folded. His best job might have been in Carolina, where the expansion Panthers made the NFC Championship Game in their second year. Collins was his QB and the first player he drafted in franchise history. But he failed the Colts by not signing Matt Hasselbeck or trading for Donovan McNabb or just finding someone better than Painter as soon as the lockout ended.
“Bill Polian is great and he's got a chance at the Hall of Fame,” one GM said. “But in 100 years, I will never understand why they didn't have a backup quarterback who is established. I'm even more shocked that they paid Manning (by signing him to a new contract) without knowing for sure if he could play or not. Then not to have a plan in place in the event he couldn't play or couldn't play early. I'm shocked. The only thing that makes sense is maybe they want Andrew Luck. That would be one thing that would go through your mind.”
Does he think the Colts are intentionally bad?
“I would never accuse anybody of that. Ever,” he said. “I have too much respect for the league and too much respect for the people that do their jobs. But the temptation of thinking it is there. If you are not thinking it, you are stupid.”


Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/fo...#ixzz2ALGmLrde

So this guy who may or may not be real is suggesting that Bill Polian wanted to get fired?

[Joe Fo Sho]

Re: The BIG Picture of Why Suc for Luck was a good Idea

- IS that True??? You think the call comes from somewhere then everyone just sucks? Really, you think that a few men sit in a dark room and talk about how to tank a season? LOL. No its SUBTLE, its unnoticeable its the new way.... Its manipulation... It happens slowly and surely and there need not be a call from anywhere. The GM does not even need to know about it. In fact, its better if he does not.

That's not 'tanking' a season then. That's called being a bad team.