What's your point? That having a later pick is better than having an earlier pick?

 

That even if you don't have the top pick, you can still get an elite player.

---

That even if you don't have the top pick, you can still get an elite player.

 

Well thanks for clearing that up for everyone that didn't already know you can still get good players even if you don't have the first overall pick.

---

Here is some evidence the Buccaneers were tanking:

 

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000...-nfl-draft

 

<p style="font-family:arial, verdana, helvetica;color:rgb(34,34,33);">Not that this terrible 2-14 Tampa team isn't capable of such a collapse, but there was enough evidence during the game that made it look more suspicious than coincidental, including the pulling of most starters in the second half:

<p style="font-family:arial, verdana, helvetica;color:rgb(34,34,33);">» Wide receivers Vincent Jackson and Mike Evans, who each passed 1,000 yards this season, were benched.

<p style="font-family:arial, verdana, helvetica;color:rgb(34,34,33);">» Three starters on the offensive line were pulled in favor of a trio that had a combined two years of NFL experience.

<p style="font-family:arial, verdana, helvetica;color:rgb(34,34,33);">» LB Lavonte David, whom Bucs coach Lovie Smith has called the best outside linebacker in the NFL, was a healthy second-half scratch.

<p style="font-family:arial, verdana, helvetica;color:rgb(34,34,33);">» Quarterback Josh McCown, who completed 12 of 20 passes in the first half, had only three attempts in the third and fourth quarters.

---

That's JaguarWoman for you, ladies and gents. Glad to have you on the forum. I'm never bored reading your responses.

---

That's JaguarWoman for you, ladies and gents. Glad to have you on the forum. I'm never bored reading your responses.

 

:thanks:

---

Anybody who has studied draft history knows having the first overall pick does not guarantee you will get the best player and you don't even need a first round pick to get a future Hall of Famer. It also has been proven you can botch the pick. I will never understand how anybody can know all this and think it is smart to tank for the top pick of the draft.

Nothing is statistically guaranteed it's just the odds are it's more likely than not.


It's like, am I guaranteed to be on a place that goes missing if I fly with an Asian provider, no. It's definitely a lot more likely though!

---

It sure smells like they tanked, and it couldn't have happened to a better organization.

---

Never argue with idiots. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

It sure smells like they tanked, and it couldn't have happened to a better organization.

 

It is fitting too because Tampa Bay is forever known as the team that made the worst draft mistake ever - one that turned them from a playoff team to a perennial loser.

---

:thanks:

It's not really a compliment...

---

I am somewhat confused by this. Constantly when a tank is brought up, it is immediately defended that these guys are playing for their livelihood and are professionals and would never tank. Maybe that is the case and the guys who were playing just aren't talented, but one has to question Lovie's 2nd half personnel decisions.

 

In all honesty, I am surprised the Saints didn't tank right back because facing Mariota for a decade probably isn't in their best interests. 

 

I like an idea that someone threw out earlier that draft position should be based on your average position in the past 2 or 3 years.

 

Also, I find it VERY odd there is an article questioning if a team tanked on NFL.COM

---

I never said owning the first pick guarantees the team with that pick drafts the best player.

 

The only thing having the first pick overall guarantees is first access to the available talent pool.

 

It is still on the team to get the pick right.

 

However, if you do not see the inherent advantage of having first access to the available talent pool, there's nothing else to discuss.

 

That much more since the 2011 CBA went into effect.   Hence,  there are no more Sam Bradford type of rookie contracts.

---

It is fitting too because Tampa Bay is forever known as the team that made the worst draft mistake ever - one that turned them from a playoff team to a perennial loser.

 

An even worse draft mistake by Tampa Bay than the Booker Reese fiasco was the Bucs drafting Bo Jackson with pick # 1 in 1986 and not being able to sign him to a contract.   At least the Reese fiasco occurred in Round 2.

---

An even worse draft mistake by Tampa Bay than the Booker Reese fiasco was the Bucs drafting Bo Jackson with pick # 1 in 1986 and not being able to sign him to a contract.   At least the Reese fiasco occurred in Round 2.

 

The Booker Reese fiasco was worse because by trading their 1983 first round pick, they missed out on Dan Marino at a time when they needed a replacement for Doug Williams. Without a good quarterback, they were bad from then to when a guy named Tony Dungy got the head coach job.

---

The Booker Reese fiasco was worse because by trading their 1983 first round pick, they missed out on Dan Marino at a time when they needed a replacement for Doug Williams. Without a good quarterback, they were bad from then to when a guy named Tony Dungy got the head coach job.

 

Dan Marino lasted to pick # 27 of the 1983 Draft.  Based on the Bucs decision making track record in those days,   I seriously doubt they would have drafted him in Round 1.  

 

If the Bucs would have somehow drafted Marino,  he probably would have ended up signing with a USFL team.

---

It is fitting too because Tampa Bay is forever known as the team that made the worst draft mistake ever - one that turned them from a playoff team to a perennial loser.

Booker Reese was a mistake, but not the worst draft mistake ever.

 

Furthermore, it was far from the only pick/personnel move that turned the Bucs fortunes for the worse in the 1980s.

 

Allowing Doug Williams to leave to the USFL was a bigger mistake.

 

Trading away Steve Young also represents a mistake.

---

 

Worst to 1st.  Curse Reversed!

I am somewhat confused by this. Constantly when a tank is brought up, it is immediately defended that these guys are playing for their livelihood and are professionals and would never tank. Maybe that is the case and the guys who were playing just aren't talented, but one has to question Lovie's 2nd half personnel decisions.

 

In all honesty, I am surprised the Saints didn't tank right back because facing Mariota for a decade probably isn't in their best interests. 

 

I like an idea that someone threw out earlier that draft position should be based on your average position in the past 2 or 3 years.

 

Also, I find it VERY odd there is an article questioning if a team tanked on NFL.COM

 

I'm not sure I like that, either.

 

What of the team that goes from worst to first (i.e. Stl. Louis Rams in 1999)?

 

Should a team that wins the Super Bowl be awarded with a middle first round pick because they didn't have their stuff together in the years before their ascent?

 

Or, should a long time contender who, after years of low picking in each round, fails to replenish talent sufficiently, age, and finally collapse be penalized because they won 2-3 seasons ago?

---

 

Worst to 1st.  Curse Reversed!

I think a lottery is the fairest way, I agree with the above poster when he says it's unfair on certain teams.


However it would make it interesting because teams with even an outside chance of a Super Bowl would go after Veterans to win now, instead of doing a mini rebuild. You basically wouldn't see a Mini rebuild anymore as if you lose an extra 3/4 games in a year whilst doing it it would like affect your draft position by between 1-3 positions?


What you would see would be teams trying desperately to win now and then when it was completely over, just blow it up and have a 3-5 year rebuild.

---

I'm not sure I like that, either.

 

What of the team that goes from worst to first (i.e. Stl. Louis Rams in 1999)?

 

Should a team that wins the Super Bowl be awarded with a middle first round pick because they didn't have their stuff together in the years before their ascent?

 

Or, should a long time contender who, after years of low picking in each round, fails to replenish talent sufficiently, age, and finally collapse be penalized because they won 2-3 seasons ago?

 

Just keep the part of the draft we currently have where playoff teams are seeded separately from non playoff teams and the two teams that participate in the Superbowl draft with the last two picks.

 

It's really not hard. When a team has the kind of problems that the bucs, raiders, Jaguars, bills, etc have for years and years the last thing the team should have to worry about is whether they're ruining their shot at a great player and dropping four slots in the draft because they win a meaningless game in week 17.

 

Sure it could still come into play with my idea for a rolling two or three year record determining draft position instead of only the prior season, but it's much less likely and statistically speaking as you increase a sample size you come much closer to the actual statistical quality of a team over time.

---