(04-19-2021, 08:18 PM)flgatorsandjags Wrote:

(04-19-2021, 07:57 PM)Bullseye Wrote: Exactly.

---

Then you would have had your loyalty questioned/assailed by Dakota, Predator, et al.

Draft position counts.  Having the ability to get a franchise QB counts.  Whether this is your first year rooting for us to lose or not, you admit it with your admission here.

Draft position is nice but you play to win the game.  Tanking for a guy you can get in the late first is just losing mentality imo.  A generational type talent when there is a couple games left and you can get him in a 1 win season is when you should want to lose a game to get that generational talent, which is rare.

what the fart? please cite any example in the history of all sports of a team being accused of tanking for the tenth or twentieth pick of a draft.

---

(04-20-2021, 05:09 AM)The Real Marty Wrote:

(04-19-2021, 05:52 PM)Bullseye Wrote: No it doesn't.

Anti tankers are moralists who would question your fanhood/loyalty if you root for the Jaguars to lose when they are out of playoff contention for the sake of better draft position.

Given the admission, the anti tanking moralizers would trash you.

Yes, but just to be clear, "tanking" means losing on purpose.  Although, the last 2 games last season, I wanted the team to lose, I have never been in favor of losing on purpose.  

In that way, I am on the side of the anti tankers.  Even though I wanted them to lose, I would never want players and coaches to lose on purpose.  Therefore, I am an anti tanker, and I have no argument with them.  

I wanted the team to lose, but I did not want them to tank.  Capisci?

Exactly. If a team truly wanted to tank, they would be bringing guys off the street to take the field. There is a difference between incompetent roster building/management and intentional attempts to lose.

---