N/S What happens when teams tank? (1 Viewer)

[Green-Ghost]

Here Boy.

I know I posted this earlier. but I forgot to ask, what happens when 2 or more teams decide they want to "Tank" for a high draft choice. HOW do you out tank another team. Especially when they play each other.

In bowling, tanking is called , "Sandbagging" and is illeagal.

Wonder what the NFL thinks of this?

 

[Bill]

It's a bit tough for the NFL to prove when it's two teams that are really pathetic.
'Tanking' might just look like their ordinary brand of performance.

 

[CaliforniaSaintsFan825]

Competition committee could look into Dolphins' tanking, but what can NFL do?

The Dolphins aren't doing their best to win this season, and that's a problem for the NFL.

sports.yahoo.com

It doesn't sound to me like the NFL has anything against the tactic. The fans and the players might have adverse reactions to it but who knows what real impact that plays. A lot of these teams that are perceived to do this are already mediocre enough that their best hopes were to go .500 and that's being favorable to them. Not giving it everything you have from a leadership stand point knowing your not going to the playoffs and knowing your job isn't on the line in an attempt to bring in cheap quality players by improving your draft position isn't that horrible of a long term plan if you can be successful without losing your players and fan base.

 

[baarbogast]

If I'm a competitor, I either take those teams off my FA wish list or Charge them 5x the going rate. By tanking they are saying they don't care about the players or even try to look like they care.

 

[CaliforniaSaintsFan825]

If I'm a competitor, I either take those teams off my FA wish list or Charge them 5x the going rate. By tanking they are saying they don't care about the players or even try to look like they care.

I think a competitor is gong to be happy to take their talented players and put them to good use before another competitor does it first. I'm not saying other teams don't raise their nose at them but, they aren't going to look gift horses in the mouth when these teams start unloading talent.

 

[SaintSpyNDallas]

I found this write-up pretty interesting and sounds on the dot to me:

"There's no explicit rule against it, no. Nothing that literally says no tanking or no intentional losing or making a half-assed effort to win or something. There are a few rules that are kind of tangentially no tanking rules though. Teams must in good faith submit accurate injury reports, so you can't, for instance, claim a bunch of key players are injured when they aren't to keep them out. The trade deadline is basically an anti-tanking rule, to keep teams out of the playoffs late from dumping players to contenders. The salary cap floor can kind of be interpreted as anti-tanking as well, though it isn't really effective enough to do that job.

But really, most of what prevents tanking in the NFL is just inherent to the league. Careers and rosters have inherently short shelf-lives. This leads to owners being impatient with GMs, GMs being impatient with head coaches, and head coaches being impatient with players. Unless you have a really substantial amount of guaranteed job security as a GM or head coach, it's generally not worth the risk to tank. You hurt your resume for a better draft pick, which you may be fired before you can spend, or, if you survive that, you may still be fired before that player develops and contributes. You'd really need a guarantee that they'll stick with you for a few years no matter what, and even then, you'd be taking them at their word. The voices of fans and the allure or ticket and merchandise sales can override a lot of promises."

I'll also add a few things. Firstly, The star player you tanked for may not want to play for your team. See Eli Manning. Secondly, with social media being what it is these days, I highly doubt a tanking team could keep their players from outing them to the public. This would start an outcry of monumental stature, possibly even leading to a class action suit by the fans basically accusing the GM of stealing their money by knowingly putting out a sub-par product.

 

[baarbogast]

I think a competitor is gong to be happy to take their talented players and put them to good use before another competitor does it first. I'm not saying other teams don't raise their nose at them but, they aren't going to look gift horses in the mouth when these teams start unloading talent.

I was speaking from the player perspective, from another teams' perspective I would scavenge galore.

 

[Paul]

I’m not saying it doesn’t happen, but it’s hard for me to believe that a group of men would purposely put up less than their best effort for the possibility of getting one good player, who may or may not be successful in the NFL. It doesn’t make sense to me.
What does make sense is that there are just some sad arse teams out there that can’t get out of their own way, are poorly coached, unprepared, undisciplined, don’t know how to close out games, make stupid mistakes every week, and their talent level just doesn’t match most opponents in that particular season. I can buy that.

 

[Merl]

I found this write-up pretty interesting and sounds on the dot to me:

"There's no explicit rule against it, no. Nothing that literally says no tanking or no intentional losing or making a half-assed effort to win or something. There are a few rules that are kind of tangentially no tanking rules though. Teams must in good faith submit accurate injury reports, so you can't, for instance, claim a bunch of key players are injured when they aren't to keep them out. The trade deadline is basically an anti-tanking rule, to keep teams out of the playoffs late from dumping players to contenders. The salary cap floor can kind of be interpreted as anti-tanking as well, though it isn't really effective enough to do that job.

But really, most of what prevents tanking in the NFL is just inherent to the league. Careers and rosters have inherently short shelf-lives. This leads to owners being impatient with GMs, GMs being impatient with head coaches, and head coaches being impatient with players. Unless you have a really substantial amount of guaranteed job security as a GM or head coach, it's generally not worth the risk to tank. You hurt your resume for a better draft pick, which you may be fired before you can spend, or, if you survive that, you may still be fired before that player develops and contributes. You'd really need a guarantee that they'll stick with you for a few years no matter what, and even then, you'd be taking them at their word. The voices of fans and the allure or ticket and merchandise sales can override a lot of promises."

I'll also add a few things. Firstly, The star player you tanked for may not want to play for your team. See Eli Manning. Secondly, with social media being what it is these days, I highly doubt a tanking team could keep their players from outing them to the public. This would start an outcry of monumental stature, possibly even leading to a class action suit by the fans basically accusing the GM of stealing their money by knowingly putting out a sub-par product.

About 5 years ago the league has also made an effort to have at least 1 if not the 2 final regular seasons games be division games in the hopes that they can get a match up that could determine final division standings and possibly a playoff berth.

 

[dutar76]

I think all teams actually try to win week to week, at least until the end of seasons. Late in the year they may IR some key players nursing injury or bench starters in an effort to "see young talent" (see bengals)

However, I do think GMs and HCs do sometimes shed a lot of talent early which basically puts them at a big disadvantage each game. (See dolphins)

But I think each week the coaches and players gameplan and practice to play to win at least to some degree.

 

[Bill]

I think all teams actually try to win week to week, at least until the end of seasons. Late in the year they may IR some key players nursing injury or bench starters in an effort to "see young talent" (see bengals)

However, I do think GMs and HCs do sometimes shed a lot of talent early which basically puts them at a big disadvantage each game. (See dolphins)

But I think each week the coaches and players gameplan and practice to play to win at least to some degree.

And don't forget that after we had secured Home Field Advantage throughout the playoffs, we (like all other fixed #1 Seeds) did(do) indeed 'tank' the remaining games in the sense of not doing all we could to win those few games. The reason was to keep key players healthy, but it basically became the same thing.

 

[Merl]

And don't forget that after we had secured Home Field Advantage throughout the playoffs, we (like all other fixed #1 Seeds) did(do) indeed 'tank' the remaining games in the sense of not doing all we could to win those few games. The reason was to keep key players healthy, but it basically became the same thing.

In those cases it was to evaluate 2nd and 3rd string players for future employment with the team. THAT is not tanking. Tanking is intentionally losing to better your draft position with no hope to compete in the current years post season.

 

[Bill]

In those cases it was to evaluate 2nd and 3rd string players for future employment with the team. THAT is not tanking. Tanking is intentionally losing to better your draft position with no hope to compete in the current years post season.

Well, I sure hope that we will be 'evaluating our third string players' somewhere near the end of our regular season this year.

 

[muddbug2]

How do you convince players to lose so that they could be replaced the next year?

Do they all believe it won't be them but it's the other guy who's going to be replaced?

How many players do you get from the draft? The Saints have shown that there are impact players to be found in FA.

There are many players taken that are bust, some really big ones like Ryan Leaf and that QB from LSU who I will not mention. The draft can be and is a gamble.

But if the HC and GM want to win by losing then bad game plans week to week could result in many losses without the players/fans/league really not knowing what's going on.

 

[ndcc]

Here Boy.

I know I posted this earlier. but I forgot to ask, what happens when 2 or more teams decide they want to "Tank" for a high draft choice. HOW do you out tank another team. Especially when they play each other.

In bowling, tanking is called , "Sandbagging" and is illeagal.

Wonder what the NFL thinks of this?

In my opinion, no NFL team (players) tank intentionally. They're professionals, and tanking to get a higher draft pick means that's more competition for many of them the following season. Furthermore, if they play terribly, it decreases the chance that other (more competitive) teams would be looking to add them to their roster.

...but that's just speculation on my part.

IMO, the 1996 Saints "TANKED" big time. HC Jim Mora lost the respect of the locker room, and the team just mailed it in after he ripped them a new one in the post game presser (after a loss to the Carolina Panthers). The final score was a 7-19 loss, but Mora made it sound like the Panthers beat them 55-3... sad!

Interestingly, after Mora's tirade (following game #8 of the season), the Saints would not score more than 17 points in any of their remaining games, and finished the season with a 1-8 skid & a 3-13 record. Mora walked out before the end of the season.

1996 New Orleans Saints Rosters, Stats, Schedule, Team Draftees | Pro-Football-Reference.com

Check out the 1996 New Orleans Saints Roster, Stats, Schedule, Team Draftees, Injury Reports and more on Pro-Football-Reference.com.

www.pro-football-reference.com

Tom Benson actually asked Jim Haslett to take over the team, but Haslett declined. After looking around for a HC, Benson promoted Rick Venturi (in desperation). Even though Venturi wasn't any good as a HC, he earned my respect for stepping up when nobody else would.

The big mistake Mora made was thinking that his tirade would motivate the players, similar to how they were motivated back in '87 (with his "Woulda, Coulda, Shoulda" speech). Well, it backfired big time!

Here's Mora's ("Diddly Poo") speech that completely demoralized the team for good: