I say we "Dive for a Top 5"!!!!!

[skinsfan69]

Originally Posted by mredskins

These "lose for a draft pick" always make laugh becasue you think a London Fletcher type guy lay down so that the Skins can draft some college kid that has never played a snap in the NFL. No way!

I don't think anyone is going to throw games. That's ridiculous. But at this point don't you think we need to see if Riley can play? As much as I like and respect Fletch, he's not the future here. It's time to get all these young guys on the field and that time is now.

[sportscurmudgeon]

Originally Posted by GusFrerotte

With the season looking like it is over at just over the halfway mark, do you think we just let the youngsters play on the "playground" and take the dive for a top 5 pick?

Think about what you just said...

If you play the "youngsters" that is a way to wind up with only 3-4 wins for the year so you get a "Top Five Pick". If the "youngsters" are that bad, do you want the same folks executing this "Top Five Pick" that just delivered the "youngsters" who will go out and lose games when put on the field?

Are the "youngsters" that incompetent?

[SBXVII]

Crompton, Crompton, Crompton.

lol

[mooby]

Originally Posted by skinsfan69

I don't think anyone is going to throw games. That's ridiculous. But at this point don't you think we need to see if Riley can play? As much as I like and respect Fletch, he's not the future here. It's time to get all these young guys on the field and that time is now.

Bench fletch for riley, when we have a perfectly inept mike backer next to him that needs replacing anyways? wow. What are you smoking?

[Daseal]

Lose on purpose? No.

Play all your young talent so they get both valuable game time experience and a chance for the coaches to really evaluate them. We're not going to the playoffs, see what this team has to build on so we can make better decisions down the road.

[CrazyCanuck]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

I don't think we're gonna have to try too hard to get a top 5 pick with the way things are going.

Agreed. We're a lock for the top 10. With Beck in there we should be able to reach the top 5. Just keep Rexy on the bench... if Good Rex shows up we might win a couple by accident.

[SirClintonPortis]

Originally Posted by sportscurmudgeon

Think about what you just said...

If you play the "youngsters" that is a way to wind up with only 3-4 wins for the year so you get a "Top Five Pick". If the "youngsters" are that bad, do you want the same folks executing this "Top Five Pick" that just delivered the "youngsters" who will go out and lose games when put on the field?

Are the "youngsters" that incompetent?

Learning curves can be climbed. The only ones who are stupid are the ones who deny the existence of learning curves.

[LBrown43]

Originally Posted by mooby

I say if you are a pro athlete, it would be extremely embarrassing if at any point you thought about not giving 100% on the field, especially if you are getting paid a lot of money to do so.

I also say it's pathetic that as a fan you would actively root for this team to lose games for a higher draft pick next season. Name one instance, in the entire history of the big 4 sports leagues in the US, where a team that looked like it was tanking the season actually landed the higher draft pick next year that brought the team good fortune, meaning championships and not just regular season wins, for the next decade.

Well there is always this:
1983 to 1988: The Pittsburgh Penguins/Mario Lemieux sweepstakes The team had the league's worst record in both the 1983 and 1984 seasons, and with the team suffering financial problems, it again looked as though the Penguins would fold. Mario Lemieux, one of the most highly touted NHL draft picks in history, was due to be drafted in the 1984 NHL Entry Draft. Heading towards the end of the season ahead of the New Jersey Devils, who were placed last, the Penguins made a number of questionable moves that appeared to weaken the team in the short-term. The Penguins posted three six-game winless streaks in the last 21 games of the season (out of which they won only three) and earned the right to draft Lemieux amidst protests from Devils president Bob Butera.[4] Pittsburgh coach Lou Angotti later admitted that a conscious decision was made to finish the season as the team with the worst record, stating in an interview with the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette that a mid-season lunch prompted the plan, in light of the fact that there was a high chance of the franchise folding if Lemieux was not drafted.[5] In particular, Angotti gave the example of a game the Penguins were winning 3–1, at which point general manager Eddie Johnston asked the coach "what are you doing?" in the first intermission of the game that was eventually lost 6–3.

Looks like a pretty good example to prove you wrong, hell the coach admitted it later....but still hate to see the Skins lose on purpose.

[SirClintonPortis]

Originally Posted by LBrown43

Well there is always this:
1983 to 1988: The Pittsburgh Penguins/Mario Lemieux sweepstakes The team had the league's worst record in both the 1983 and 1984 seasons, and with the team suffering financial problems, it again looked as though the Penguins would fold. Mario Lemieux, one of the most highly touted NHL draft picks in history, was due to be drafted in the 1984 NHL Entry Draft. Heading towards the end of the season ahead of the New Jersey Devils, who were placed last, the Penguins made a number of questionable moves that appeared to weaken the team in the short-term. The Penguins posted three six-game winless streaks in the last 21 games of the season (out of which they won only three) and earned the right to draft Lemieux amidst protests from Devils president Bob Butera.[4] Pittsburgh coach Lou Angotti later admitted that a conscious decision was made to finish the season as the team with the worst record, stating in an interview with the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette that a mid-season lunch prompted the plan, in light of the fact that there was a high chance of the franchise folding if Lemieux was not drafted.[5] In particular, Angotti gave the example of a game the Penguins were winning 3–1, at which point general manager Eddie Johnston asked the coach "what are you doing?" in the first intermission of the game that was eventually lost 6–3.

Looks like a pretty good example to prove you wrong, hell the coach admitted it later....but still hate to see the Skins lose on purpose.

Even in this case, I doubt the players were mailing it in. Management just shipped whatever good players left out of town, and I'm ok with that. It's management's job to get as many championships as possible, whatever the cost.

[mooby]

Originally Posted by SirClintonPortis

Even in this case, I doubt the players were mailing it in. Management just shipped whatever good players left out of town, and I'm ok with that. It's management's job to get as many championships as possible, whatever the cost.

What he said. If management decides to play it like that, whatever. But good luck asking London Fletcher to miss tackles, give up big plays, etc. And it's too late to ship players out of town, so in order to secure the possibility of the first overall pick, we'd have to start cutting our good players. Either way I don't think it's feasible. And it's dumb. I will admit I was wrong, as apparently it's been done before. But I still don't like it, and 1 time out of all the times teams might've done it is not a good track record. Besides, what if you tank, and finish with the 2nd overall pick? What then?

[IrMitchell]

Originally Posted by SirClintonPortis

Even in this case, I doubt the players were mailing it in. Management just shipped whatever good players left out of town, and I'm ok with that. It's management's job to get as many championships as possible, whatever the cost.

Wrong. The Pittsburgh Penguins 100% gave up for Lemieux. It's a very known thing in the hockey world that crappy teams get reminded about every year.

The ironic part is that Lemieux was a generational hockey talent, well some argue a better talent than Wayne Gretzky prior to when he suffered cancer.. Is Andrew Luck a generational quarterback talent?

[SmootSmack]

Oh man. Someone just challenged SCP in the hockey world. Here comes an Aurele Joliat reference

[IrMitchell]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Oh man. Someone just challenged SCP in the hockey world. Here comes an Aurele Joliat reference

Heh, I'm Canadian so it's all good.

[jbcjr14]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Oh man. Someone just challenged SCP in the hockey world. Here comes an Aurele Joliat reference

[irish]

Originally Posted by IrMitchell

Wrong. The Pittsburgh Penguins 100% gave up for Lemieux. It's a very known thing in the hockey world that crappy teams get reminded about every year.

The ironic part is that Lemieux was a generational hockey talent, well some argue a better talent than Wayne Gretzky prior to when he suffered cancer.. Is Andrew Luck a generational quarterback talent?

I lived in Pgh at this time and the team was so bad it was difficult to tell how much they were "giving up". The organization knew they had to get ML to keep the franchise alive in Pgh (the rumor was they were going to Hamilton ON) and while it never seemed like they overtly tanked games there was definitely a sense of understanding that losing was more beneficial than winning.

I find it hard to believe that pros could be talked into tanking games for the sake of the team getting a higher draft pick. These pros are much more concerned with keeping thier bonafides intact so when the time comes they can catch on with another team.