Obviously with the way the season has been going so far, there has been a lot of talk about the merits of "tanking" to secure a high draft pick. There has been a fair amount of debate on this, so I decided to do some research into the merits of tanking.
I looked at the last 10 year's Super Bowl champions and where they had drafted in the first round the ten years prior to their Super Bowl victory. I have attached a link to the spreadsheet below.
http://imgur.com/s25056z
To summarize, of the teams that have won a Super Bowl in the last 10 years (Giants, Steelers, Patriots all repeated, so they were analyzed a couple times at different dates):
-10/10 picked in the top 10 within 10 years prior to their victory with varying levels of success/failure
-5/10 picked in the top 5 within 10 years prior to their victory (Eli Manning, AJ Hawk, Reggie Bush, Peyton Manning, Willie McGinest)
-1/10 picked first overall within 10 years prior to their victory (Peyton Manning)
Furthermore, of the teams to draft first overall in the past 20 years, only two have won Super Bowls (Rams with Orlando Pace and Patriots who drafted Drew Bledsoe who did win one with them...from the bench). So basically one, non-quarterback first overall pick has been a contributor on a Super Bowl winning team in the last 20 years.
Feel free to analyze this however you like. However, I for one have come to the conclusion that <b>how you draft is more important than where you draft</b>. With that being said, I am going to sit back, root for the Jaguars to win as many games as they can (which will not be many anyways), and hope that Caldwell knows what he is doing in the front office.
That almost makes sense. So it will get no traction here.
Quote:Obviously with the way the season has been going so far, there has been a lot of talk about the merits of "tanking" to secure a high draft pick. There has been a fair amount of debate on this, so I decided to do some research into the merits of tanking.
I looked at the last 10 year's Super Bowl champions and where they had drafted in the first round the ten years prior to their Super Bowl victory. I have attached a link to the spreadsheet below.
http://imgur.com/s25056z
To summarize, of the teams that have won a Super Bowl in the last 10 years (Giants, Steelers, Patriots all repeated, so they were analyzed a couple times at different dates):
-10/10 picked in the top 10 within 10 years prior to their victory with varying levels of success/failure
-5/10 picked in the top 5 within 10 years prior to their victory (Eli Manning, AJ Hawk, Reggie Bush, Peyton Manning, Willie McGinest)
-1/10 picked first overall within 10 years prior to their victory (Peyton Manning)
Furthermore, of the teams to draft first overall in the past 20 years, only two have won Super Bowls (Rams with Orlando Pace and Patriots who drafted Drew Bledsoe who did win one with them...from the bench). So basically one, non-quarterback first overall pick has been a contributor on a Super Bowl winning team in the last 20 years.
Feel free to analyze this however you like. However, I for one have come to the conclusion that <b>how you draft is more important than where you draft</b>. With that being said, I am going to sit back, root for the Jaguars to win as many games as they can (which will not be many anyways), and hope that Caldwell knows what he is doing in the front office.
I agree to your conclusion. But what player is of most need depends on this as well; and some luck. QB is our highest need and we need the best of the class. The higher pick, the better, because other teams in our same situation may be looking at QB too (Bucs, Raiders, Vikings, etc). But overall, tanking for the #1 pick wouldn't make a huge difference. We are the exception to this.
I remember seeing some study that claimed the worst thing an NFL team can do is go 8-8 or similar repeatedly and keep having draft in the middle of the round. Every year there are maybe 3 players worthy of the #1 and picking a long term talent is a 50/50 chance. Meanwhile, around pick #16 all the elite talent is gone while the amount of players worthy of a pick is that much larger making the chance of drafting a bust larger.
Quote:
Feel free to analyze this however you like. However, I for one have come to the conclusion that <b>how you draft is more important than where you draft</b>.
No doubt. ^
Regardless of history and statistical analysis, these Jaguars seem destined to have the #1 pick whether they want it or not.
Quote:how you draft is more important than where you draft.
Yeah obviously, but where you draft greatly affects how you draft. Getting the first pick in this draft guarantees a great QB.
Its a lot easier to draft well picking high than picking in the middle.
Quote:Yeah obviously, but how where you draft greatly affects how you draft. Getting the first pick in this draft guarantees a great QB.
Its a lot easier to draft well picking high than picking in the middle.
It doesn't guarantee a great QB. It guarantees you get to pick what you think is the best QB in that year's draft.
Quote:...but how where you draft greatly affects how you draft.
:blink: Say what now?
Just kidding... I know what you meant!
Quote:It doesn't guarantee a great QB. It guarantees you get to pick what you think is the best QB in that year's draft.
Notice i said THIS draft. Bridgewater is the closest thing to a guarantee there is.
Quote::blink: Say what now?
Just kidding... I know what you meant!
hahah oops, gonna go edit that
Quote:Obviously with the way the season has been going so far, there has been a lot of talk about the merits of "tanking" to secure a high draft pick. There has been a fair amount of debate on this, so I decided to do some research into the merits of tanking.
I looked at the last 10 year's Super Bowl champions and where they had drafted in the first round the ten years prior to their Super Bowl victory. I have attached a link to the spreadsheet below.
http://imgur.com/s25056z
To summarize, of the teams that have won a Super Bowl in the last 10 years (Giants, Steelers, Patriots all repeated, so they were analyzed a couple times at different dates):
-10/10 picked in the top 10 within 10 years prior to their victory with varying levels of success/failure
-5/10 picked in the top 5 within 10 years prior to their victory (Eli Manning, AJ Hawk, Reggie Bush, Peyton Manning, Willie McGinest)
-1/10 picked first overall within 10 years prior to their victory (Peyton Manning)
Furthermore, of the teams to draft first overall in the past 20 years, only two have won Super Bowls (Rams with Orlando Pace and Patriots who drafted Drew Bledsoe who did win one with them...from the bench). So basically one, non-quarterback first overall pick has been a contributor on a Super Bowl winning team in the last 20 years.
Feel free to analyze this however you like. However, I for one have come to the conclusion that <b>how you draft is more important than where you draft</b>. With that being said, I am going to sit back, root for the Jaguars to win as many games as they can (which will not be many anyways), and hope that Caldwell knows what he is doing in the front office.
You are correct. Picking first is not necessary to get a significant contributor but drafting well across the board is much more effective. We've drafted in the top 10 how many times in the last 10 years and look at us.
While I agree with the basic premise, I still think the best thing for our long-term future is for us to get the first pick in each round next year.
You don't want to have the 3rd pick of the draft, and have a horrible team, when #1 is Luck and #2 is RG3, for instance.
Quote:You are correct. Picking first is not necessary to get a significant contributor but drafting well across the board is much more effective. We've drafted in the top 10 how many times in the last 10 years and look at us.
Yep, which is why that GM is currently unemployed. As a GM, if you hit on your 1st rounders, you will be safe. If you hit on your QB, you are very safe. If that doesn't happen, only extraordinary circumstances will keep you employed. Caldwell will get his chance to draft a QB. Luckily, this appears to be a good QB year (which you could not say about last year).
Quote:While I agree with the basic premise, I still think the best thing for our long-term future is for us to get the first pick in each round next year.
You don't want to have the 3rd pick of the draft, and have a horrible team, when #1 is Luck and #2 is RG3, for instance.
The jury is still out on Luck and RGIII as this is only their 2nd season. The #1 pick also included David Carr, Jamarcus Russell, Tim Couch, Alex Smith, Carson Palmer, Sam Bradford, Cam Newton. At this point Bridgewater, Manziel, McCaron, Boyd, et. al. are no different than them.
Regards.....................the Chiefjag
Quote:The jury is still out on Luck and RGIII as this is only their 2nd season. The #1 pick also included David Carr, Jamarcus Russell, Tim Couch, Alex Smith, Carson Palmer, Sam Bradford, Cam Newton. At this point Bridgewater, Manziel, McCaron, Boyd, et. al. are no different than them.
Regards.....................the Chiefjag
WELL LET'S JUST NOT DRAFT AT ALL AND LET THE CLOCK RUN DOWN
You're one of the worst posters I've ever seen in my [BLEEP] life.
Quote:WELL LET'S JUST NOT DRAFT AT ALL AND LET THE CLOCK RUN DOWN
You're one of the worst posters I've ever seen in my [BAD WORD REMOVED] life.
You're funny!
Regards....................the Chiefjag
Quote:The jury is still out on Luck and RGIII as this is only their 2nd season. The #1 pick also included David Carr, Jamarcus Russell, Tim Couch, Alex Smith, Carson Palmer, Sam Bradford, Cam Newton. At this point Bridgewater, Manziel, McCaron, Boyd, et. al. are no different than them.
Regards.....................the Chiefjag
The jury is not out on Luck or RG3... They have each improved their teams, played very well, and lead their team to the playoffs. Something that Carr, Russel, Couch, Alex Smith, Bradford, etc can not say. RG3 and Luck have already shown to be better than the bunch. Please don't talk about Tim Couch or Russell when they have outperformed them by pretty much a lightyear. Sadly, only the QB on this roster is challenging Couch and Russell or Ryan Leaf when you think of pathetic QB play.
Quote:The jury is not out on Luck or RG3... They have each improved their teams, played very well, and lead their team to the playoffs. Something that Carr, Russel, Couch, Alex Smith, Bradford, etc can not say. RG3 and Luck have already shown to be better than the bunch. Please don't talk about Tim Couch or Russell when they have outperformed them by pretty much a lightyear. Sadly, only the QB on this roster is challenging Couch and Russell or Ryan Leaf when you think of pathetic QB play.
Well currently Luck is #12 in ranking and RGIII is #17 and has a won/loss record 1-3. Coming out of college, being drafted #1 overall Couch, Russell, Carr, Smith, Bradford all had the same expectations. You can think you know what these guys will do, as those experts did who drafted CArr, Smith, Bradford, Russell, Couch, Palmer, Newton et. al. did but until they suit up you don't KNOW.
Tanking is for losers. Anybody wanting to tank for the #1 pick is a loser. The OP showed you it doesn't work the majority of the time.
Regards.......................the Chiefjag
Regards...................the Chiefjag
Quote:Well currently Luck is #12 in ranking and RGIII is #17 and has a won/loss record 1-3. Coming out of college, being drafted #1 overall Couch, Russell, Carr, Smith, Bradford all had the same expectations. You can think you know what these guys will do, as those experts did who drafted CArr, Smith, Bradford, Russell, Couch, Palmer, Newton et. al. did but until they suit up you don't KNOW.
Tanking is for losers. Anybody wanting to tank for the #1 pick is a loser. The OP showed you it doesn't work the majority of the time.
Regards.......................the Chiefjag
Regards...................the Chiefjag
Pray tell, Mr. Double Signature, what should the Jaguars do? Just win more games? Just pull some wins out of their [BLEEP]? Is that how you win football games?