Are the meaningless wins worth the chance at a top draft pick?

Like when we picked second and ended up with an average left tackle (or the chiefs who picked before us and ended up with a bad left tackle) or the Dolphins who picked third ended up with a bust who is suspended for the year.

 

Meanwhile the Cowboys picked up one of the best centres in the NFL at pick 31...

---

A valid question (ignore the snarky responses).


During the first two years of the current rebuild, I would've (and did) support not going for what I'll charitably refer to as 'non impact' wins. At that time, we desperately needed every high draft pick we could possibly get as we were rebuilding from scratch.


Our situation now, however, is somewhat different. We have (we hope) the key people we needed on our offense. We have holes we need to fill on defense now, but we should be able to do that even if were not picking in the top five for a change. The fact that Fowler didn't play at all this season in effect almost makes it seem like we're fielding a #1 draft pick right off the bat!


The point is that now the importance of instilling a winning attitude is probably at least as important as a high draft pick, maybe more so. I for one think that Gus Bradley allowing the team to serve up a 50+ burger on the dolts was far more important to instilling that winning instinct than the mere gratification of blowing out a bad dolts team. In fact (and I hope I'm not giving him too much credit here) I think that may be the reason why he allowed it. It would be counter productive for the team to tank at this point.


The core of this team is those young guys who we've endured watching though those tough years... and now we're starting to see some light at the end of what has been a long and dark tunnel. Tanking now for a higher draft pick under these circumstances would be, in effect, to derail the train as it's finally picking up speed. I'm a gamer, and I, for one, have no problem with tanking for strategic purposes. That being said however, I don't advocate tanking unless there is a clear and definable target that would make doing so worth it. Like what the dolts did to get their franchise quarterback... and if you believe they didn't...I own a bridge in Brooklyn that I'd like to sell you.


There's a right time for most things. In my opinion, this is the time to be encouraging the winning attitude. We seem to do better on later round draft picks than we do with the high ones anyway, so I wouldn't sweat the draft... yet.

No its not a valid question, at all. This is professional football. You play to win, there's no such thing as a meaningless game in this league. There's probably bowl talent available in every round, not just the top 10.

---

IT WAS ALWAYS THE JAGS

Are the meaningless wins worth the chance at a top draft pick?

Should the team keep losing for all eternity to assure top draft picks, or is there going to come a time when they might have to win some games in your world? 

 

I'll take the wins.  Good teams aren't concerned about getting "top draft picks". 

---

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

I didn't know unicorns [BAD WORD REMOVED] rainbows!

It's a scientific fact

---

Of course there are meaningless wins, I cited a perfect example earlier in the thread. If the Colts had won another game, its not like the trajectory of the team was going to change for the better. Just look at last year, the Texans won their last game to elevate them to 9 wins. How has that affected the trajectory of the team this year? It seems their progress stagnated because they weren't able to inject anymore top talent to the roster. Look at the 49ers, Saints and Browns of last year. Your success doesn't 'carry over' in some magical way. The Panthers have continued their winning ways because they have a supremely talented roster, not because they 'built momentum' from the year past. You don't have to look hard to find examples on the other side of the coin--the Bucs went from 2 wins to competing for the playoffs largely due to the play from top pick Winston. Or how about the Colts when they got Luck? The answer to long term success is acquiring talent, and you best raise your chances of doing so at the top of the draft, not the middle.

You continue to cheer for losses and focus on mock drafts.  The rest of us will hope our team wins.  Most fans cheer for a Super Bowl victory and those don't happen unless you win games.  By your theory, we should already be Super Bowl champs because we've had high draft picks for ten years now and still are lucky to win half our games. We've tried your theory for a decade now, is that enough time for you to understand that you might want to reconsider?

---

Why do people respond to Baconeater? He's a troll. Just stop. He's not even a good troll. We have much better trolls on this board. Baconhead's trolling is so droll. We can do better jacksonville. #demandbettertrolls

---

Why do people respond to Baconeater? He's a troll. Just stop. He's not even a good troll. We have much better trolls on this board. Baconhead's trolling is so droll. We can do better jacksonville. #demandbettertrolls

 

I thought he had a PhD in trolling?

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

I'm not trying to troll, I'm just thinking about draft history. Remember the game the Colts lost to the Jags that solidified their rights to the top pick where they selected Luck over RG3? If they had stolen a meaningless win there, the entire makeup of their franchise changes and they miss out on a generational prospect. What good do the wins do for a team that outweighs the value of getting a potentially generational prospect? I understand that good players can be found at every spot, but the likelihood decreases the farther you get from the top. Moral victories don't seem to be worth much in sports.

 

Getting the top pick only matters for one position: QB. That's when you want the chance to get Luck over RG3, or Manning over Leaf.

 

We got our guy. 

---

I thought he had a PhD in trolling?

Not yet, he's still in school working on it. He attends Bovine University. Home of the streaming piles of cow excrement.

---

Not yet, he's still in school working on it. He attends Bovine University. Home of the streaming piles of cow excrement.

I hear he's minoring in Advanced Metrics

---

IT WAS ALWAYS THE JAGS

I'm not trying to troll, I'm just thinking about draft history. Remember the game the Colts lost to the Jags that solidified their rights to the top pick where they selected Luck over RG3? If they had stolen a meaningless win there, the entire makeup of their franchise changes and they miss out on a generational prospect. What good do the wins do for a team that outweighs the value of getting a potentially generational prospect? I understand that good players can be found at every spot, but the likelihood decreases the farther you get from the top. Moral victories don't seem to be worth much in sports.

The fans want to see wins. The strategy you speak of works well in Madden. Mostly the experience and film that can be gained from playing to win comes to mind. For the coaching staff, how could they validate their coaches styles and schemes etc if they aren't playing to win the game, how would they know what to change unless they believe blindly their are great at their jobs and ideas.  Wins generate huge levels of income for the entire Jacksonville franchise as well as gain media attention that could attract future FA's and coaches to a winning program. There are others but I'm at work .

---

I think people are misunderstanding what I'm trying to get at. Never once have I, nor will I argue that a team ought to intentionally lose games. What I'm trying to understand is how fans reconcile the dilemma present at had--do they relish in the short-term success (that appears to be largely inconsequential because the team is obviously not capable of competing for a super bowl) despite the negative consequences it has on the long-term trajectory of the team, or do they hope for a a better draft pick, which bares more favorably on the long-term success of the team but flies in the face of their short-term success?

 

It seems like an double edge sword that every fan of sports teams have to deal with. How do you reconcile the contrast between what is good for the heart and what is good for the mind? Sorry if some of you are so sensitive you cannot consider the question rationally, I wasn't trying to offend anyone, just curious about people's thoughts.

Yes, we relish it because we're very used to picking in the top of the draft and NOT used to winning. This fan based is starved for wins. If the team loses and we so happen to get a higher draft pick, great, but the point of being a fan isn't wanting for the draft, it's wanting for the wins. It's a ridiculous concept. WE WANT TO WIN

---

If this team finishes 8-8 I'll jump for joy, playoffs or not.

---

THERE IS A SKELETON INSIDE OF YOU.

 

RIGHT NOW. THIS IS NOT A JOKE.

Should the team keep losing for all eternity to assure top draft picks, or is there going to come a time when they might have to win some games in your world? 

 

I'll take the wins.  Good teams aren't concerned about getting "top draft picks". 

That's what I'm saying too. The draft picks should result in the wins, not the other way around. He's trying to claim lose to get the draft picks. Backwards thinking. 

---

Of course there are meaningless wins, I cited a perfect example earlier in the thread. If the Colts had won another game, its not like the trajectory of the team was going to change for the better. Just look at last year, the Texans won their last game to elevate them to 9 wins. How has that affected the trajectory of the team this year? It seems their progress stagnated because they weren't able to inject anymore top talent to the roster. Look at the 49ers, Saints and Browns of last year. Your success doesn't 'carry over' in some magical way. The Panthers have continued their winning ways because they have a supremely talented roster, not because they 'built momentum' from the year past. You don't have to look hard to find examples on the other side of the coin--the Bucs went from 2 wins to competing for the playoffs largely due to the play from top pick Winston. Or how about the Colts when they got Luck? The answer to long term success is acquiring talent, and you best raise your chances of doing so at the top of the draft, not the middle.

When it comes to getting your QB, you might have a point. The Jags don't appear to be in the QB market, however. Remember, as good as JJ Watt has become, he went 11th overall. It boils down to having above average scouting. Chances are that several teams picking ahead of you in the draft will make mistakes. If you consistently do a better job scouting, you'll be fine. Dave Caldwell has a pretty good track record in that arena to date. I'll take the wins and the prime time games that go along with them.

---