Would you sacrifice a year to draft Trevor Lawrence in 2021? (1 Viewer)

Would you sacrifice a year to draft Trevor Lawrence in 2021?


  • Total voters
    104

cazint

Pro-Bowler
Joined
Sep 17, 2007
Messages
871
Reaction score
411
Location
Florida
Online
Sticky Post
Since we're making various hypotheticals, what say you?

For clarity, the question assumes:
  • Brees retires
  • Joe Burrow is out of the question...meaning, we don't do some crazy trade to somehow get Burrow in this year's draft.
  • So we can either move on with TB or TH, or we can go 0-16, collect the top draft selection, and pick what many call a generational player.
I know, I know, "you play to win the game." Good for you. That choice is included in the poll.

But if you know you can get THAT player, someone who will change your franchise for 10 to 15 years, are you okay sacrificing one year to get there?

And even more specifically, this question goes to season-ticket holders: are you okay having paid $1000+ plus for that 0-16 season on the hopes that said generational talent will rock the NFL?
 
Joined
Oct 25, 2019
Messages
39
Reaction score
40
Age
24
Location
Canada
Offline
...because the first overall pick quarterback ALWAYS turns out to be a franchise HOFer.. Just ask Carolina (Cam Newton), or Tampa (Jameis Winston) or Houston (David Carr), or Oakland (JaMarcus Russell), or Cleveland (Tim Couch), or Indianapolis (Jeff George), and the list goes on...

The NFL draft is WAY too tenuous to tank a season in aims of getting one player. Jim Finks said it best when he called it a crap shoot on every player. He was talking about Troy Aikman and Tony Mandarich in particular, both considered "can't miss" prospects who would be the first and second players taken. Well, Aikman turned out and Mandarich was a total bust.

Tank a season for Lawrence? No way, no how. We've no idea how he will adjust to the NFL. He didn't adjust well to the new level of competition he faced last night. He lost his cool and started pressing badly. Now, maybe he learns from that and never has that trouble again, but maybe it's a sign of things to come in the NFL. You just can't tell, ever.
You listed Cam Newton like he’s a bust or something. He hasn’t been a bad QB for Carolina. He’s won an MVP, been to a Super Bowl and when healthy is one of the best dual threat QBs to ever play in the NFL.
 
OP
OP

cazint

Pro-Bowler
Joined
Sep 17, 2007
Messages
871
Reaction score
411
Location
Florida
Online
How that worked for Miami?

They tanked, and they are not getting Burrow.
You can dislike tanking; that is fair.

But your "argument" against it, at least as provided above, holds little merit. How did it work for Miami? Well, IF they truly were wanting to tank the season and get the #1, the 5-11 record shows how abysmal they are in that they cannot even manage to tank correctly. Had they lost ALL 16 games, they would be sitting in a better position.
 

bclemms

More than 15K posts served!
Joined
Jul 16, 2005
Messages
30,367
Reaction score
36,427
Age
12
Location
Jackson, ms
Online
Do I want to take a team that has more all pro players than any team in the NFL and try to lose as many games as possible so we can start a rookie QB the following season?

Give me some time to think about it.
 

DerrickB

Subscribing Member
VIP Contributor
Approved Blogger
Joined
Oct 2, 2016
Messages
1,378
Reaction score
1,755
Offline
If we start off 1-4, might as well.
 

LifeForceDave

Veteran Starter
Joined
Jan 3, 2010
Messages
411
Reaction score
827
Online
If we start off 1-4, might as well.
That’s what I’m saying, no don’t tank but if a fluke happens and we start off bad then yes. My biggest reason for this is Sean. I worry that once brees retires and he doesn’t have a qb with brees’ skills he will get bored and move on. Having a qb with Lawrence’s potential might light a fire under him and help keep him around.
 

RJ in Lafayette

Super Forum Fanatic
Gold VIP Contributor
Joined
Jan 27, 1999
Messages
9,778
Reaction score
7,428
Offline
No a thousand times.

First, the Saints have too much talent to tank so badly to ensure the number one pick.

Second, tanking would destroy the culture of the organization.

Third, I don'think consider Lawrence a can't-miss prospect. He was hardly sensational last night. And there is always the risk of injury.
 

tenordas

Vesti le procè flamber
VIP Contributor
Joined
Aug 31, 1997
Messages
10,599
Reaction score
4,645
Location
Houston via New Jersey, New Orleans, Baton Rouge,
Offline
You listed Cam Newton like he’s a bust or something. He hasn’t been a bad QB for Carolina. He’s won an MVP, been to a Super Bowl and when healthy is one of the best dual threat QBs to ever play in the NFL.
You're certainly entitled to your opinion of Cam. I have an entirely different one.
And as for league awards, all I can say is that Vince Young was named Rookie of the Year.
 

LuvNOLA

WHO DAT
VIP Subscribing Member
Platinum VIP Contributor
Joined
May 3, 2010
Messages
1,943
Reaction score
1,388
Offline
"Sacrifice" a season for an unknown QB who hasn't played a down yet in the NFL?

No way.
Oh hell no. A skinny tall string bean with hippie hair??????!!!!! He may not even make it in the NFL. And last night he couldn’t hit the side of a barn on too many of his throws.
 

Surviving Saint

NFL Fan
VIP Contributor
Joined
Feb 10, 2004
Messages
11,777
Reaction score
5,809
Age
42
Location
West Monroe, La, via Cajun country
Offline
But if you know you can get THAT player, someone who will change your franchise for 10 to 15 years, are you okay sacrificing one year to get there?

And even more specifically, this question goes to season-ticket holders: are you okay having paid $1000+ plus for that 0-16 season on the hopes that said generational talent will rock the NFL?
First absolutely. If i know I'm getting a franchise player that will be great for the next 15 years, I wouldn't have to think about it. You do it.

Second, season ticket holders would deal with it. There is a waiting list and one 0-16 year for a generational type talent to keep this team competitive isn't much.

Hypothetically If we somehow get Burrow, we are set back for years because of what it cost to draft him. Tanking last year would have been the right thing to do if we are willing to get him at huge cost because tanking costs nothing.
 

Saintslfc13

ALL-MADDEN TEAM
Joined
Apr 7, 2004
Messages
2,584
Reaction score
1,860
Age
30
Offline
The Saints will have too much talent still on the roster post-Brees to tank.

Teams that tank do it because they know they're rebuilding, they know at best they're a 6-10 type team, so taking a dive to secure a top 5 or even #1 overall pick is the best strategic choice. Either they trade back and get more picks to use to rebuild, or they land a top 5 college talent.

As long as the Saints manage their roster and cap properly, they'll still be a 10+ win talent team with a strong offensive line, good defense, elite WR and RB. Those kinds of teams don't tank.
I think this is biggest reason why it's not a viable proposition for us. We've got a talented team, we went 5-0 with our back up who is admittedly really good for a back up and probably will start again somewhere but he's not exactly Steve Young waiting behind Joe Montana either. He's good QB who was put into a position to succeed by his coach gameplanning to use the talent around him as effectively as possible and allowing him to play his game which is to not make very many mistakes that will cost you football games. It also didn't always look pretty, which we know Payton truly prefers (sometimes to his and our detriment but that conversation has been had in other threads). We're not a bad football team, we're a good football team that had a bad game and ultimately we still could've won that game despite all the miscues and the overall horrid first half from the defense and first 3 quarters for the offense. I didn't see much out of Green Bay or Seattle for that matter that tells me we couldn't have beaten them had the WC game been a wake up call rather than a loss. Alas it wasn't to be this season, but we certainly shouldn't write next season off to tank for a QB who does tick a lot of boxes but who ultimately might not pan out.

You can dislike tanking; that is fair.

But your "argument" against it, at least as provided above, holds little merit. How did it work for Miami? Well, IF they truly were wanting to tank the season and get the #1, the 5-11 record shows how abysmal they are in that they cannot even manage to tank correctly. Had they lost ALL 16 games, they would be sitting in a better position.
That's the other issue with tanking. At certain point all of these guys are professional football players and professional football coaches in a league where your job isn't guaranteed from one season to the next unless you're in that top 5% of players. With Coaches there's even less leeway. Their pride competitive instincts are going to kick in at some point. Maybe they're really upset they're expected to lose and want to show out so some other team that wants to win trades for them or offers them a big contract. Even if the HC gets a verbal agreement from the owner that he's allowed to tank, fan pressure can make that agreement worth absolutely **** all once the season ends. As a Coordinator or Position coach you're definitely not guaranteed another year. It also brings into question locker room culture, winning and losing are contagious, if you have players that are okay with tanking a year of their career in order to put their faith in a rookie QB then are those the players you really want on your team? What about the players without multi-year deals? Are they supposed to be okay with tanking and just hope they get re-signed or given another shot elsewhere? Longevity as an NFL player isn't a guarantee, you're literally one injury away from being considered damaged goods by the vast majority of teams and that's true for ALL players, hell it's part of why we got Drew Brees in the first place. Other teams might not want you if you were part of that tanking squad. Then from the other side of it, top free agents might not want to play for a franchise they know decided to tank a season, what if they do it again because the guy doesn't pan out? They're gonna waste a year of their prime for that?

I think the Dolphins were in tank mode, and I think at some point these guys had enough and decided to try to win some football games and pulled it off.

The only way to effectively pull off tanking that I can think of would be to willingly sign a bunch of guys that truly have no business being on a NFL roster to short contracts and then attempting to blow it all up the year you get your guy, but even if you do that you've not no guarantee you're going to get any talent around that guy after that year is over. Plus, there's still always a chance that someone with a harder schedule is just as bad, if not worst, than your team is.
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)



Headlines

Top Bottom