I smell a tank job for 2017

[DesertFox24]

I firmly believe the team thought they were close when the Pegulas came to own the team and that is why they hired Rex who was a previous head coach and also went to the AFC champ game twice.

Look at the coaches we are interviewing and also the fact this is the first year in a long time we have not extended one of our unrestricted FAs towards the end of the season.

I believe this and Terry realizing you need a QB to lead the organization may lend to us doing a tank job next year to try and get into the top 3 of the draft. I could be wrong but if we walk away from Tyrod just remember this post.

[feldspar]

They don't deliberately tank in the NFL...

In the NHL they do, in my opinion...but not the NFL

[Night Train]

I started a thread 2 years back thinking Rex may be an idea due to the fact he played the Pats tough. I was wrong and couldn't believe how south the D went.

Now we are talking asst. coaches who have never been a HC and Lynn who only coached no more than 5 RB's for basically 14-15 years until 3 months back. The players are rallying around him and Whaley seems to be comfortable with that idea, since he would owe him his job.

The thing is, I don't care what the players or Whaley want. They are married to 7-8 wins and seem content to coast with that.

QB, D scheme, Safties, RT, CB's...needs. Does the current regime see this ? I have serious doubts.

Tyrod was a transitional QB. He's done here, in my eyes. Can't throw or beat a winning team.

Move on and get serious...but I doubt Pegula can break away from the old Ralph employees who whisper losing, self preservation opinions into his ears. ( Whaley,Brandon and plenty more in the bldg.)

Sigh..

[Thurmal]

I hope not. With any other team, it'd be a good idea, but the Bills will either blow the top pick, or win a meaningless game at the end of the year to secure the 3rd pick, and have two future HOFers go #1 and #2, leaving us with a disappointing consolation prize.

[DesertFox24]

I do not know, I used to think we could get a serviceable QB but I do not think the bills are capable or show the ability to draft them in mid to later rounds to get one that is decent.

Maybe tanking and getting the top pick or hopefully the first they could potentially get a guy who is decent and help us turn this around. I do not know I just know 7 to 8 wins a year is not going to cut it until Brady retires.

[Buffalogic]

I hope not. With any other team, it'd be a good idea, but the Bills will either blow the top pick, or win a meaningless game at the end of the year to secure the 3rd pick, and have two future HOFers go #1 and #2, leaving us with a disappointing consolation prize.lol what a depressing post.

[Joe Fo Sho]

It's not necessary to tank to end up with a top 3 pick anymore. If there's a guy worthy of the pick, trade up and get him. We moved up to 4 for Sammy, we can move up further to get a player that matters if we really want to.

[justasportsfan]

We dont have to tank to get a qb. Just draft one in every round. I'm sure we'll hit one . :D

[Albany,n.y.]

It's not necessary to tank to end up with a top 3 pick anymore. If there's a guy worthy of the pick, trade up and get him. We moved up to 4 for Sammy, we can move up further to get a player that matters if we really want to.

Not when it's a franchise QB. The only way a team trades out of a potential franchise QB is either because they just drafted a guy they think will be the franchise QB like Tennessee did the year after drafting Mariotta or they are totally incompetent like Cleveland.

[Frenchman]

Yeah as really think that Tyrod is a great QB but not necessary franchise.As that is what every team wants. A franchise QB and other areas.

[Victor7]

They don't deliberately tank in the NFL...

In the NHL they do, in my opinion...but not the NFL

Colts sure as **** did to get Luck

[Mace]

Colts sure as **** did to get Luck

And look how great it worked out for them to get him.

Look too at how great it worked for the Sabres.

Woeful idea.

Btw, I still don't think they tanked. I think they were really that bad without the Peyton.

[YardRat]

They were close. And then they hired Wrecks.

[feldspar]

Colts sure as **** did to get Luck

BS, no...they absolutely did not tank on purpose.

Peyton Manning got hurt. Who did they hire or fire to make this tank happen? Nobody. That's a huge point.

They brought in Kerry Collins, who did not last past 3 weeks. Then they went with Curtis Painter...if the Colts REALLY WANTED TO TANK, they would not have benched Curtis Painter when they were 0-11. Does this not follow logic for you? After benching him, the Colts went 2-3. They "TIED" the Rams for the worst record in the league with 2 wins...they TRIED to win down the stretch when they were 0-11. No doubt.

Why the **** would they bench Painter if they wanted to tank? The Rams already had 2 wins to the Colts' 0 at the time Painter was benched late in the season. To get the #1 pick, why would Painter be benched at that point when he had already proven himself to be completely inept? They benched Painter, and the #1 pick went down to a tiebreaker.

If you wanna tank, you deliberately send incompetent guys out there in key positions that you think won't get the job done. That's the whole premise, right? Nobody in the NFL is going to sell their future careers on helping get their team the #1 pick after they are fired.

[DesertFox24]

If we let Tyrod go and do not resign gilmore, woods, brown, alexander, Worthy, Bryant then what exactly are we saying. We are going to replace all of these decent serviceable players with rookies, we only have 7 picks maybe 8 with the comp pick we will probably get from Bradham, Brooks. We released Mario, Urbik, and McKelvin. I am not sure about a comp for Hogan as we did not match so I am guess no.

[Homegrown]

I think that "smell" you speak of is just a crappy team..... based on the 2017 opponents, the Bills are looking at a 3 win season without "tanking"

No conspiracies here, just a woefully incompetent organization

[Victor7]

And look how great it worked out for them to get him.

Look too at how great it worked for the Sabres.

Woeful idea.

Btw, I still don't think they tanked. I think they were really that bad without the Peyton.

You can blame their ****ty ass coach Pagano and their most likely league worst (behind Whaley) GM Grigson.

They certainly got the QB. Nobody on this board can tell me they wouldn't take Luck over Taylor or any of our other misfits in recent memory.

[Victor7]

BS, no...they absolutely did not tank on purpose.

Peyton Manning got hurt. Who did they hire or fire to make this tank happen? Nobody. That's a huge point.

They brought in Kerry Collins, who did not last past 3 weeks. Then they went with Curtis Painter...if the Colts REALLY WANTED TO TANK, they would not have benched Curtis Painter when they were 0-11. Does this not follow logic for you? After benching him, the Colts went 2-3. They "TIED" the Rams for the worst record in the league with 2 wins...they TRIED to win down the stretch when they were 0-11. No doubt.

Why the **** would they bench Painter if they wanted to tank? The Rams already had 2 wins to the Colts' 0 at the time Painter was benched late in the season. To get the #1 pick, why would Painter be benched at that point when he had already proven himself to be completely inept? They benched Painter, and the #1 pick went down to a tiebreaker.

If you wanna tank, you deliberately send incompetent guys out there in key positions that you think won't get the job done. That's the whole premise, right? Nobody in the NFL is going to sell their future careers on helping get their team the #1 pick after they are fired.

Dan Orlovsky started the games after Painter was demoted. Some stud huh ?

They may have tried to make it less obvious. But make no mistake they tanked. Or at least didn't really try hard to win.

[feldspar]

Dan Orlovsky started the games after Painter was demoted. Some stud huh ?

They may have tried to make it less obvious. But make no mistake they tanked. Or at least didn't really try hard to win.

You can think whatever you want...which apparently you do without the need to think things through...but that team was built around Peyton Manning, who wasn't even done yet as it turned out.

Orlovsky gave them the better option to win by a country mile at that point. He was LOADS better than Painter, which only says things about Painter. Did you actually even WATCH Colts games that year?

Who do you think engineered this tank then? Your old hero Bill Polian? Did Bill Polian agree to tank for a big hit on his reputation to get Andrew Luck in exchange for his own firing? Polian wanted to get fired? Jim Caldwell want to get fired too?

You are just wrong.

Lol, as if they wanted to PRETEND not to tank. If the Rams won their last game (or even ONE of their last five games as it were), THEY would have had Andrew Luck...whew. If the Colts stuck with Painter, there would be no need to sweat if the idea was to tank, trust me.

[feldspar]

Lol, as if they wanted to PRETEND not to tank. If the Rams won their last game (or even ONE of their last five games as it were), THEY would have had Andrew Luck...whew. If the Colts stuck with Painter, there would be no need to sweat if the idea was to tank, trust me.

Sorry, I misspoke, as will happen sometimes when you try to edit your post at the last minute.

I meant something to the tune of this: there were five games left, and the Rams were 2 games ahead of the Colts. The Rams didn't even have to win a single more game for the Colts to get Luck as it turned out, yet the Colts were TRYING to win every game. Benching Painter was no ploy to keep up appearances.

[djjimkelly]

I firmly believe the team thought they were close when the Pegulas came to own the team and that is why they hired Rex who was a previous head coach and also went to the AFC champ game twice.

Look at the coaches we are interviewing and also the fact this is the first year in a long time we have not extended one of our unrestricted FAs towards the end of the season.

I believe this and Terry realizing you need a QB to lead the organization may lend to us doing a tank job next year to try and get into the top 3 of the draft. I could be wrong but if we walk away from Tyrod just remember this post.

if we went 1-15 next year and got the next peyton manning im all for 1 win

[BillsImpossible]

I smell pussy.

[feldspar]

I smell pussy.

Well, then pull your head out from between your legs.

Sorry, what I meant to say is that you are a fine fellow...

[Mace]

You can blame their ****ty ass coach Pagano and their most likely league worst (behind Whaley) GM Grigson.

They certainly got the QB. Nobody on this board can tell me they wouldn't take Luck over Taylor or any of our other misfits in recent memory.

Yeah Vic, but you're talking about the Bills who will have a ****ty ass coach and GM too. If you don't think we could have misused or under supported Luck even worse than they did, I don't know what to tell you.

[Victor7]

Yeah Vic, but you're talking about the Bills who will have a ****ty ass coach and GM too. If you don't think we could have misused or under supported Luck even worse than they did, I don't know what to tell you.
Of course I think we could screw up a top prospect. In fact I think I wrote in this very thread that we could probably screw up a tank job. That's how bad this team is. We suck at sucking.

I was just saying that I honestly think the Colts tanked (or didn't mind it) to get Luck. All the other stupidity they have done after is not relevant to that.

[sukie]

Of course I think we could screw up a top prospect. In fact I think I wrote in this very thread that we could probably screw up a tank job. That's how bad this team is. We suck at sucking.

I was just saying that I honestly think the Colts tanked (or didn't mind it) to get Luck. All the other stupidity they have done after is not relevant to that.


We are really good at sucking. If anyone want to claim "tank" in order to feel good about 4 wins.. Go ahead

[The Jokeman]

BS, no...they absolutely did not tank on purpose.

Peyton Manning got hurt. Who did they hire or fire to make this tank happen? Nobody. That's a huge point.

They brought in Kerry Collins, who did not last past 3 weeks. Then they went with Curtis Painter...if the Colts REALLY WANTED TO TANK, they would not have benched Curtis Painter when they were 0-11. Does this not follow logic for you? After benching him, the Colts went 2-3. They "TIED" the Rams for the worst record in the league with 2 wins...they TRIED to win down the stretch when they were 0-11. No doubt.

Why the **** would they bench Painter if they wanted to tank? The Rams already had 2 wins to the Colts' 0 at the time Painter was benched late in the season. To get the #1 pick, why would Painter be benched at that point when he had already proven himself to be completely inept? They benched Painter, and the #1 pick went down to a tiebreaker.

If you wanna tank, you deliberately send incompetent guys out there in key positions that you think won't get the job done. That's the whole premise, right? Nobody in the NFL is going to sell their future careers on helping get their team the #1 pick after they are fired.
aka what the Cleveland Browns did this year.

[trapezeus]

problem is that the bills have traded up so many times in particular rounds, that a tank is no good. they need to stockpile some picks so that they can get a large grouping of home grown talent. ideally there is a can't miss qb for the first pick. but to tank and have 5-7 picks in an average class. that smacks of the buffalo bills current regime's way of thinking. they literally don't think about 5 minutes out. it's always about plugging the immediate holes now.

[feldspar]

aka what the Cleveland Browns did this year.

Not at all.