That's not necessarily what I mean. I picked players who fell due to drugs on purpose. Choosing them is luck you make for yourself. Tyreek Hill today is another good example. But imagine the Bucs picking 4th in 1976 and someone else gets Selmon and then 4th again the next year after 0-14. Lotteries set teams back for years unnecessarily
Using the NBA is a terrible example. They play 10 players a game. Basketball skills and size translate well from college to pro. Scouting is much more likely to "hit" than in the NFL. Hockey is also another. You only have 1 goalie and 5 to 8 skill players that have to be above average to excellent to succeed. They also are in a lower league for sometimes over a year. The skillsets like NBA skillsets are easier to predict than in the NFL. Some positions are easier to translate than others, but to say you need X and drafting top 3 doesn't mean they won't end up being a JAG or average player
You're right about every word of this. So leave the lotteries to the NBA where it belongs. Teams like the Bucs and Browns can pick at the top of the pile for 20 years and still suck. We have seen it. There is no reason to complicate matters further by introducing a lottery. Every time there's a good player like an Andrew Luck people freak out about tanking because it's easy and they're jealous a team they don't like is getting a good player. More often than not in the NFL the worst team is often so genuinely terrible they can't win if they tried and that was absolutely the case with the Colts without Manning. Now let's have em pick 4th because they suck so bad they can't even win at ping pong balls too. Lotteries encourage tanking because the regular season becomes pointless and teams tank over draft odds.
If you don't believe me ask the Buffalo Sabres about 7 or 8 years ago. They were genuinely the biggest pile of dog shit I have ever laid my eyes on and I can seldom recall a team more in need of a franchise player. You had a generational talent in Connor McDavid for whoever got the 1st overall. They didn't have to do anything to lose but threw the season anyway for lottery odds. Still lost the lottery and winded up with the whiniest bitch in the league in Jack Eichel at #2 who took his ball and left while using neck surgery as his "reason". Spoiler: they still suck. McDavid would lklely have been a champion by now in Buffalo and Sabre fans would have had their first title. Meanwhile McDavid labors in the most dysfunctional team on the league in Edmonton who already won the lottery 3 times a few years before McDavid came along and made it 4. And the Oilers are dog shit
All over ping pong balls. The NFL doesn't need it. I don't even want to imagine the Jags without Lawrence
Doctor wrote: ↑Thu Nov 23, 2023 10:09 am
Not that the Lawrence jags are anything to behold... yet. He needs moar time.
I mean you're not wrong. It's not anything truly special yet. But why would the league or the Jags be better if they get lotteried out of the #1 pick? The whole thing just feels pointless imo. I don't even like it for basketball
Bootz wrote: ↑Thu Nov 23, 2023 9:29 am
So Trask = Rodgers?
Maybe even better, who knows?
Has just as good a chance of being Jordan Love as well, but again, nobody knows.
Exactly. He could be a Hall of Famer like Rodgers, or he could be a middling starter like Love, or maybe he's horrible. Saying he's definitely one of those options betrays a posters' bias.
But he was drafted by this GM and scouting staff in the second round because they obviously saw something they liked. And yet he languishes on the bench.
Not that I'm trumpeting that Trask start over Baker at this point. That ship has sailed, and I imagine that Trask is going to leave Tampa without a start to his name.
These Are The Days wrote: ↑Thu Nov 23, 2023 9:53 am
If you don't believe me ask the Buffalo Sabres about 7 or 8 years ago. They were genuinely the biggest pile of dog shit I have ever laid my eyes on and I can seldom recall a team more in need of a franchise player. You had a generational talent in Connor McDavid for whoever got the 1st overall. They didn't have to do anything to lose but threw the season anyway for lottery odds. Still lost the lottery and winded up with the whiniest bitch in the league in Jack Eichel at #2 who took his ball and left while using neck surgery as his "reason". Spoiler: they still suck. McDavid would lklely have been a champion by now in Buffalo and Sabre fans would have had their first title. Meanwhile McDavid labors in the most dysfunctional team on the league in Edmonton who already won the lottery 3 times a few years before McDavid came along and made it 4. And the Oilers are dog shit
All over ping pong balls. The NFL doesn't need it. I don't even want to imagine the Jags without Lawrence
The interesting thing is the example you give to diminish the value of the lottery also proves that having the first pick did not help.
There is hope in every unknown. That's how hope works. Ironically it's also what powers savior dogma. Rookies are ultimate unknowns, and we cool off/bore of them the longer they are in. Despite every new OC QB pairing and new situation being an unknown of itself.
Bootz wrote: ↑Thu Nov 23, 2023 9:29 am
So Trask = Rodgers?
Did anyone say that?
You brought up Aaron Rodgers in a discussion about Kyle Trask. One could only assume you meant to make some comparison but it appears you didn't. So I'm sure you have a perfectly good explanation for why you mentioned Aaron Rodgers in a discussion about Kyle Trask. We're listening.
You brought up Aaron Rodgers in a discussion about Kyle Trask. One could only assume you meant to make some comparison but it appears you didn't. So I'm sure you have a perfectly good explanation for why you mentioned Aaron Rodgers in a discussion about Kyle Trask. We're listening.
I did. The comparison was the amount of years both QBs have sat behind a vet before getting an opportunity to start. You leapt to some other conclusion.
You brought up Aaron Rodgers in a discussion about Kyle Trask. One could only assume you meant to make some comparison but it appears you didn't.So I'm sure you have a perfectly good explanation for why you mentioned Aaron Rodgers in a discussion about Kyle Trask. We're listening.
Your fingers are typing shit on the keyboard and your brain should stop that before it gets foolish.
This is a discussion about firing Todd Bowles. The original quote was:
Grahamburn wrote: ↑Thu Nov 23, 2023 6:53 am
Aaron Rodgers sat behind Favre for 3 years.
I believe the reason someone posted that is your continued belief that NO GOOD QBs ever sat behind someone else. They all instantly start.
(I tried really hard to pull a you and put stupid words in your mouth)
You brought up Aaron Rodgers in a discussion about Kyle Trask. One could only assume you meant to make some comparison but it appears you didn't. So I'm sure you have a perfectly good explanation for why you mentioned Aaron Rodgers in a discussion about Kyle Trask. We're listening.
I did. The comparison was the amount of years both QBs have sat behind a vet before getting an opportunity to start. You leapt to some other conclusion.
So you're definitely saying Trask will be this teams starter in 2024 then, right?
You brought up Aaron Rodgers in a discussion about Kyle Trask. One could only assume you meant to make some comparison but it appears you didn't.So I'm sure you have a perfectly good explanation for why you mentioned Aaron Rodgers in a discussion about Kyle Trask. We're listening.
Your fingers are typing shit on the keyboard and your brain should stop that before it gets foolish.
This is a discussion about firing Todd Bowles. The original quote was:
Grahamburn wrote: ↑Thu Nov 23, 2023 6:53 am
Aaron Rodgers sat behind Favre for 3 years.
I believe the reason someone posted that is your continued belief that NO GOOD QBs ever sat behind someone else. They all instantly start.
(I tried really hard to pull a you and put stupid words in your mouth)
Don't fool yourself. You are not a grown man. You don't have the balls for it.
For every Aaron Rodgers there are 100 Trey Lances. The only reason he sat was he was behind a HOF QB. Trask sat behind a HOF QB for two years and they said eh, I would rather have Mayfield start. That is damning to me. Remember they traded a HOF QB because they knew Rodgers was as good as a declining Favre
Why is that damming? Baker has a ton of talent and experience, and most likely to get this offense running well by January. It's what you're looking for.
Doctor wrote: ↑Fri Nov 24, 2023 4:22 pm
Why is that damming? Baker has a ton of talent and experience, and most likely to get this offense running well by January. It's what you're looking for.
Ton of talent? Ehhhh….you need to be a serious Baker homer to believe that statement.
Granted, he’s done okay this year. He did better vs SF than Geno did last night. But he still misses a lot of throws that a guy with a “ton of talent” would make.
As I’ve said before, if you are content with 7-10 wins a year and an average offense every year, Bakers your guy. But if you want to win a Super Bowl, you need to upgrade.
I’m in the Super Bowl camp, but there are some here who want that 8-win division title so we can get trounced by the Cowboys again but at least say “Hey we made the playoffs.”
I would be fine with the Buccaneers extending Baker Mayfield's contract if there is a lacK of good quarterbacks in the draft, unless Kirk Cousins becomes available as a free agent.
Don't fool yourself. You are not a grown man. You don't have the balls for it.
For every Aaron Rodgers there are 100 Trey Lances. The only reason he sat was he was behind a HOF QB. Trask sat behind a HOF QB for two years and they said eh, I would rather have Mayfield start. That is damning to me. Remember they traded a HOF QB because they knew Rodgers was as good as a declining Favre
Favre retired after the 2007 season. Then changed his mind. The Packers didn’t want him back. They were 25-23 with him during Rodgers’ first 3 seasons.
We were 23-9 in the regular season with a Super Bowl win and another deep playoff run in Brady’s first two seasons. Obviously, we wanted him back when he un-retired. Trask be damned.
Baker Mayfield has played well enough. I don’t think there was ever any legitimate competition between he and Trask. I don’t know that Trask will ever start here. But, I don’t think that should be any reason to think he can’t be a successful QB. How can anyone say that if he never plays?
Part of the savior dogma is believing these heroes will rise to greatness regardless of franchise, roster, coaches, etc. It is their destiny. Therefore if someone hasn't risen it is all the evidence you need to prove they never had it.
Doctor wrote: ↑Sat Nov 25, 2023 8:29 am
Part of the savior dogma is believing these heroes will rise to greatness regardless of franchise, roster, coaches, etc. It is their destiny. Therefore if someone hasn't risen it is all the evidence you need to prove they never had it.
Herbert is what, 4-6? Makes $40M+. No playoff wins, in fact, his one playoff game was a complete collapse. It’s not always about the QB.
I look at the class of the NFL and see great TEAMS. But, I also tend to see consistently great coaching. I still don’t think Todd Bowles has what it takes. He is outmatched against the class of the league.
Doctor wrote: ↑Sat Nov 25, 2023 10:57 am
He's won 3 rings, most recently taking Andy Reid to school. But sure, he doesn't have what it takes...
I have no idea if you're being serious or not as your posts are mostly laughably optimistic however the above is just stupid. Josh McDaniels has proven to be a good to great OC yet can't do anything as a HC. Todd Bowles it can be said pretty much the same as DC and HC.
Either you are purposefully posting bs or nuance is not a specialty with you.
Doctor wrote: ↑Sat Nov 25, 2023 10:57 am
He's won 3 rings, most recently taking Andy Reid to school. But sure, he doesn't have what it takes...
Don’t start with the Bootzing. As a HC, he has shown he doesn’t have what it takes. Not sure how many more chances the guy should get. I, and many others, think he’s had enough. Time to move on.
Doctor wrote: ↑Sat Nov 25, 2023 8:29 am
Part of the savior dogma is believing these heroes will rise to greatness regardless of franchise, roster, coaches, etc. It is their destiny. Therefore if someone hasn't risen it is all the evidence you need to prove they never had it.
Herbert is what, 4-6? Makes $40M+. No playoff wins, in fact, his one playoff game was a complete collapse. It’s not always about the QB.
I look at the class of the NFL and see great TEAMS. But, I also tend to see consistently great coaching. I still don’t think Todd Bowles has what it takes. He is outmatched against the class of the league.
Herbert's a good example of a QB held back by the rest of the team (or coaching staff). He's not saving anything and likely no QB would be saving anything with that franchise.
Problem for the Bucs is will they be in a position to draft a QB who is clearly better than Mayfield. Mayfield isn't great but he hasn't been bad which means his missed some things he shouldn't have but he's also made plays a lot of QBs cannot or would not. Do I know any of the QBs is a can't miss that are in the draft? No. No one can. So losing games just to grab a guy in the draft makes no sense to me. I'm not a big Bowles fan but get the impression he'll be back unless the rest of the season goes south.
The question to ask is if Bowles were fired after this season would another team hire him to be their Head Coach. I think that answer is unequivocally “no.”
And the “he beat Andy Reid” thing is so disingenuous and clearly obtuse. We all know the Chiefs were down both of their offensive tackles.
And he’s also never won a big game with the Bucs as HC. I don’t think we’ve even beaten a team with a winning record?
It's disingenuous how we constantly shift credit around to make sure no one gets any. Or to act like one of those two wasn't gone all year and the other a few weeks already. Or how missing them didn't help Sean McDermott or Kevin Stefanski's defenses from getting slaughtered the weeks prior. Funny how that works.
Grahamburn wrote: ↑Sat Nov 25, 2023 1:34 pm
The question to ask is if Bowles were fired after this season would another team hire him to be their Head Coach. I think that answer is unequivocally “no.”
And the “he beat Andy Reid” thing is so disingenuous and clearly obtuse. We all know the Chiefs were down both of their offensive tackles.
And he’s also never won a big game with the Bucs as HC. I don’t think we’ve even beaten a team with a winning record?
Doctor wrote: ↑Sat Nov 25, 2023 7:06 pm
It's disingenuous how we constantly shift credit around to make sure no one gets any. Or to act like one of those two wasn't gone all year and the other a few weeks already. Or how missing them didn't help Sean McDermott or Kevin Stefanski's defenses from getting slaughtered the weeks prior. Funny how that works.
Their LT went out very late in the AFC Championship game. I succinctly remember thinking, “that’s really good for us.”
Grahamburn wrote: ↑Sat Nov 25, 2023 1:34 pm
The question to ask is if Bowles were fired after this season would another team hire him to be their Head Coach. I think that answer is unequivocally “no.”
And the “he beat Andy Reid” thing is so disingenuous and clearly obtuse. We all know the Chiefs were down both of their offensive tackles.
And he’s also never won a big game with the Bucs as HC. I don’t think we’ve even beaten a team with a winning record?
Doctor wrote: ↑Sun Oct 22, 2023 4:08 pm
Knee jerk much? It was a hard fought division match. Bills just lost the the 1-5 Pats. Take a deep breath.
After over a month my knee might have jerked in the correct direction, heh? Two more losses and Bowles will have led this team to another losing season.
