Quote:I always appreciate the knowledge.  Thanks for sharing the insight above.  I respect your point of view and have missed reading your thoughts the last few weeks.   

 

With that said, I don't think my assertion is off base compared to your assessement.  When considering record and draft spots, I can see your point.  But you must remember my post was based on the OP's question to those that are leaning towards us "tanking" for a specific player.  I've been hearing many well regarded posters as well as out spoken moderators imply or overtly state that securing the #1 pick is the only objective of this team.  I brought up the 49'ers because of thier lack of talent and there continued push for competition. 

 

 

In terms of philosophy and organizational direction, I feel my point still stands.  The 49'ers were in major turmoil, as you have mentioned.  This turmoil allowed them to have high draft picks.  However, I would argue it was not the plan of the organization to "Tank" in order to solidify 'x' draft spot in order to propel the team to contention.  They stayed true to pride and tradition, they muddled through tough times, drafted well while never consciously trying to solidify a higher draft position.

 

Yes they had several years of high draft picks.  But so have we.  You hit and you miss.  But I don't ever recall during the 49'ers lost decade the term "tank" the way I hear on this MB.  And I know that the 49'ers never would try to "suck for Luck" the way the clot ownership did.  That type of direction should not be lauded like some have here.

 

If I have misinterpreted your thoughts feel free to let me know. 

 

Well, as I read your post to which I replied, I'm not sure if I "disagreed" in the strongest, truest sense of the word.

 

I guess my goal was to make the point that draft position has its advantages in rebuilding efforts, and to the extent that "tanking" helps to secure superior draft position, there is an argument to be made for tanking.  Admittedly, my execution of that position was lacking.

 

However, you correctly identified the missing link in my argument-namely that there is considerable difference between legitimately losing due to bad drafting, attrition, etc., vs. "tanking."  To the extent sports leagues generally and the NFL in particular operate under competitive ethical norms, I imagine tanking to be a most dubious departure from those ethical norms.

 

I do not allege the 49ers tanked to obtain the draft position to get the players I listed above.  For that matter, I do not allege the Jaguars have tanked or are currently tanking to secure draft position.  Any of us can look at the Jaguars poor drafting over the past decade and see the correlation between poor drafting and our sad state of affairs.

 

That said, there is a link between "bottoming out" record wise, having greater access to the available talent pool, correctly evaluating the talent in that pool, and then ascent into contender status.  To the degree that bottoming out, whether by legitimate sustained ineptitude or contrived ineptitude (i.e. tanking) grants that greater access, it puts us potentially closer to becoming contenders.

---