Merged x 1 Billion: All Things 'Suck for Luck'

He has not been signed, so why worry?

Now "if" we do win 6 games, that means we can retain some of the talent on the roster and if Kellen Moore is our guy instead of Luck, does it really matter?

 

And in any other year, you'd be correct.

If Andrew Luck did not exist or came out last year, nobody would be dreaming about the #1 pick and "Losing for Landry" or "Bad for Barkley".

But this isn't any other year. This is a once in a lifetime opportunity. If you are going to be epically bad, this is the year. I'd hate to break it to you, but we are really bad. If we signed David Garrard, we'd still be really bad. Maybe we'd win 5 games instead of 2. Either way is really bad.

So for this year, because of this unique opportunity, it is worth being epically bad.

 

ill take landry jones. honestly, just drafting a guy in the 1st round will help my sanity

there's a very good chance we dont get Luck. ill be fine with it. i just want them to draft a QB in the 1st round

 

Ok...so i'll play this game. Who are these key players that we would keep if we would win 6 games but get rid of if we won 2. Are we ditching Cam Wake, Vontae Davis, Pouncy, Jake Long, Dansby, Daniel Thomas, Devone Bess or whoever if we win 6 games but not 2?

What irreplacable player stays on a 6 win team but doesnt on a 2 win team?

 

Again Pad, what talent is going to be jettisoned at 2 wins that would be kept at 6?

Is the new coach going to think Reshad Jones is a keeper because we won 6 games, or cut him immediately if we win only 2? It makes no sense

 

Does it matter? Again, i think you fail to realize the type of prospect Luck is

 

If you're going to insult me, at least try to make some damn sense.

Where did I say I expect the roster to stay the same? I don't want the roster to stay the same. The roster is the reason we're 0-4 right now. Despite anything we as fans want the team to do, they're not intentionally sucking for Luck. They're losing because they're not good and they're not coached well.

This all goes back to the fallacy of logic that some people seem to have that people who want Luck just want to draft Luck and then forfeit the rest of our draft picks and skip free agency. This argument is reactionary and presumptuous at best and is clearly build on a false premise. I wish we could discuss this issue in a legitimate way without people bringing up these clearly facetious arguments.

 

So Pad, do the Cleveland Cavaliers regret having an epically bad season which ended up netting them LeBron?

Forget how it ended. They had 7 amazing years in exchange for one epically bad year.

Sign me up for that exchange

 

VD, SS, come to mind, Langford, Soliai, it would be far better to have a strong defensive season with a weak offense and finish 6-10 then to go 2-14, to be that bad means we start over at -0-.

 

No, I realize it. I've stated he's the greatest prospect in the history of sports. He's the LeBron James of football. That doesn't mean he'll ever be as good as QBs like Manning, Brady, Rodgers, etc.

Regardless, I believe it is cowardly to prefer to lose in order to ascertain him.

 

How it ended is precisely why they ended up with him in the first place. One player isn't changing the culture of the organization.

 

Well, if I were to insult you, I'd be far more explicit.

Suck for Luck is ill thought out, or even considered, mere mob, reactionary thinking at it's worst.

 

Can I please see this documentation that states if we don't win at least 6 games we have to cut everyone on the team but if we win 6 games we get to keep people? I'm unfamiliar with this rule, but it seems to exist as multiple people keep arguing this point.

 

Exactly. The reactionary posts are the ones that say "well Luck cant play defense" or "it wont matter if we dont have a coach" or "it doesnt matter who the qb is if the team is bad". Those are the thoughtless reactionary posts. Its like we just wanna draft Luck and than forego the rest of our draft and keep Sparano.

 

How many teams does this apply to?

 

Why would a new coach get rid of SS and VD simply because of the record?

I have no idea how good Langford or Soliai even are so it doesn;t matter, espescially considering we don't know for sure what scheme the new staff will run.

 

And your counter argument is full of logical fallacies and poorly construed premises. I guess we'll leave it at that.

 

Any team without a QB and who is currently assured of a non-playoff season.

Basically any team with 1 win or less at the quarter pole.

 

That is the Qb I'd want maynard, Jones would fit into our talent better.

What I want is a preservation of the core of the team, with an addition of a Qb, SFL does not do that, it requires a surrender, total surrender.

Something SFLers have not considered.

 

I think the premise is that the organization not doing everything they can to win immediately, its doing a disservice to guys like SS, VD, Langford, Soliai, etc. Its very rare that players from historically bad teams go out and get big paydays. If you saw that the front office isn't doing things that are obviously needed, and its taking money out of your pocket, you're not going to respect the organization.

 

Solventur risu tabulae...

 

I think this thread is in dire need of a mod. Oh, wait, there's two here already

 

LBJ did change Cleveland's culture. They were contenders 5 of his 7 seasons there.

So what are you arguing? That having LBJ for 7 years wasn't worth it? As I know you're a Heat fan, aren't you glad that we were in the lottery year and ended up with Wade? I don't even remember that season. It is simply a small blip in my memory because it ahs been completely obscured by the mostly great memories since.

 

It does not require a surrender. That is just hyperbole. The players on this team are the same regardless of six wins or 2 wins. Colombo suddenly doenst become a legitimate RT cause we win a couple extra games

 

So essentially the NFL this season will consist of a bunch of teams trying to lose? That does not sound like a real sports league.

 

Please explain this comment and how you arrived at this notion.

I like Jones as a prospect. If we end up with pick #7, I'd be ecstatic to grab him. But how on Earth does he fit "our players" better than Andrew Luck?

 

That was the NBA in 2003 Stringer.

Does anyone remember or care how Cleveland, the Heat, Denver and toronto blatantly put out crappy lineups that year?

 

I think you've got schmolioot confused for Roger Goodell. Don't worry, it happens. Yesterday I confused him for Oprah.

 

Jones can leverage the talent we have, Luck means the talent we have is really no talent at all.

 

I don't understand this Pad.

If we stumble into 6 wins or end up with two (the difference in which could be one or two plays per game) it makes no difference.

 

UGH!!!! you dont draft a franchise qb because you think it fits the talent better of a crappy team. Dear Lord, please think 5 6 7 years down the line. You draft the qb that is a franchise changer and build around him. Back before the 2007 draft i got in a big disagreement with a number of posters. I wanted to draft Patrick Willis. The main opposition to that was that we were fine at linebacker already. My arguement was think years down the road. Zach Thomas would only have a year or two left and the linebacker core we have now would be completely different a few years later so think long term. Im not saying this because i think im some draft guru, i really dont. The thing is i was thinking long term whereas the people who didnt want to draft Willis were very short sighted.

If Luck is that franchise qb, he will be for 15 years. That team down the road will be completely different than the one now. How many players are on the Pats besides Brady when they won there last superbowl. They still remain contenders

 

I'm saying that Cleveland had to get LeBron James, because they had no hope of building a winning franchise based on their own merits. The only chance they had of winning a championship was by going after a singular person. And now they are back to nothing, because all their hope was put into one man. Give me Greg Popovich over any one player.

 

Yes, the NBA in 2003. Thats essentially my point. Does anyone really respect the competitive integrity of the NBA?

 

Jones would fit the franchise though in the sense that a spread out offense is very likely to be the NFL template for a while. As far as Jones now being better, I totally agree with that. Marshall, Hartline, and Bess all run very good routes especially short. A QB like Jones would be tremendous for these guys along with perhaps a new TE and a second RB. Luck can do anything really, but his preference is heavily based on passing to TEs. That can change but so far he's shown that a place that has two very good balanced TEs would be his best setting. We are not that. We're far closer right now to Oklahoma's offense except we need a true speedster (perhaps Gates).

Long-term Luck looks better, but with Gruden coming in, Landry Jones could fit his rumored spread offense.

 

What's wrong with getting both? It's not like drafting Luck and hiring a very good coach/GM are mutually exclusive by some mysterious law of the universe.

 

It really does though, 4 wins in the NFL is a huge difference, if you have a D playing well, as we did under Saban, it makes 08 possible, if you have a D that collapses the new HC has little choice but to split resources trying to fix both units.

No 2-14 team is going to bring it's core back, a 6-10 team, with close losses, has a better shot of bouncing back.

 

Come on Stringer.

First, b-ball is completely different. And if the ping pong balls don't go Popovich's way you probably never would've heard of him. Their team was built around Duncan.

Sure, they made some nice late 1st selection like ginobli and Parker, but now that duncan is breaking down they are losing to Memphis in the 1st round.

 

And when you see Bradford having success with a bag full of nothing at Wr, Jones, and a mediocre season, with a strong D, means we do not start over at -0-.

Instead of handing off to SJax, Jones hits up DTrain for example.

SFL excludes that, if a Rb goes over 1k yds, and 2 Wr's go over 1k yds, with poor Qb play, and a D that is competent, there is hope.

 

Finishing 2-14 isn't the problem. I have no problem with being bad, and getting Andrew Luck. The problem is the organization not being committed to winning this year. Players are not going to respect that.

 

eegads, crappy analogy to begin with SB, NBA=5 starters, NFL= 25 starters.

1 player is more easily leveraged in the NBA over a Rook Qb.