(12-16-2019, 07:20 AM)The Real Marty Wrote:

(12-16-2019, 12:11 AM)TheO-LineMatters Wrote: It sucks. Had we lost this meaningless game to a bad team, we would have jumped the Cardinals, our main competition for NT Derrick Brown. We would have had about an 80% chance to land him. By winning, I'd drop that down to about 40%.

Winning and losing is a measure of what kind of team you have.  Winning means we have a better team to go into next season.  That's why winning is always better than losing.  A 7-9 team is demonstrably better than a 4-12 team.  A 7-9 team has better prospects for the next season than a 4-12 team.  

Losing means you suck.  Look at the good teams around the league.  Do they get better by sucking?  Hell, no.  We won't get better by sucking either.

Yes. The way the draft is set up, it is designed to help the teams that suck, get better. They have first shot at the best players in the draft. For the most part, teams that finish 7-9 seem to be stuck in that "wasteland" of mediocrity for a long time. I DESPISE mediocrity. Teams that hit rock bottom have nowhere to go, but up. Mediocre teams need to sink a lot lower before things get better. Sometimes you have to hit rock bottom, before you can improve.

---

(12-16-2019, 07:25 AM)Caldrac Wrote:

(12-16-2019, 12:11 AM)TheO-LineMatters Wrote: It sucks. Had we lost this meaningless game to a bad team, we would have jumped the Cardinals, our main competition for NT Derrick Brown. We would have had about an 80% chance to land him. By winning, I'd drop that down to about 40%.

Depends. I still think they'll lean towards offensive tackle.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

I doubt we get one with that first pick in round 1, because I believe Thomas and Wirfs will both be gone by the time we pick. As for the #20 selection, it depends. If USC LT Austin Jackson declares, I would not hesitate to draft him there.

---