Figster Posted March 31 Posted March 31 (edited) The reward you may get for being one of the best college athletes playing in your position is to end up playing for one of the worst coached and managed teams in the NFL. In many instances the best college QB's end up in places destined for failure. So why reward poorly coached and managed teams in this manner? Why do we reward the best college athletes entering the NFL draft in this manner? I get trying to even the playing field. My idea is to make teams work for the rights to the best college athletes. Show that you can coach and manage well enough to give star athletes a chance for success in the NFL. My idea is to give the best team/record to not make the playoffs the 1st pick in the draft and go from best to worst record. Teams on the brink of becoming playoff caliber getting the best college athletes available. Win, win for both the player and team. Playoff teams pick last and still go from best to worst. Stop rewarding perennial bad teams for failure. Any thoughts on this idea my fellow Bills fans? Some of my favorite posters have chimed in now and I just have one thing to say. "Ouch" Edited April 1 by Figster 1 5 1 1 2 1 5 Quote
Breakout Squad Posted March 31 Posted March 31 I firmly believe the worst team should get the 1st pick. It’s the best system for the NFL. Other sports can have their lotteries. Tanking is not the problem like it is in other pro sports. Nice example of a different system though. 1 9 3 Quote
FireChans Posted March 31 Posted March 31 3 minutes ago, Figster said: The reward you may get for being one of the best college athletes playing in your position is to end up playing for one of the worst coached and managed teams in the NFL. In many instances the best college QB's end up in places destined for failure. So why reward poorly coached and managed teams in this manner? Why do we reward the best college athletes entering the NFL draft in this manner? I get trying to even the playing field. My idea is to make teams work for the rights to the best college athletes. Show that you can coach and manage well enough to give star athletes a chance for success in the NFL. My idea is to give the best team/record to not make the playoffs the 1st pick in the draft and go from best to worst record. Teams on the brink of becoming playoff caliber getting the best college athletes available. Win, win for both the player and team. Playoff teams pick last and still go from best to worst. Stop rewarding perennial bad teams for failure. Any thoughts on this idea my fellow Bills fans? A terrible idea. A good to great QB can turn a bad franchise into a good one. See: The Bills. The NFL wants the bad teams to eventually be good. Otherwise folks stop watching. You also can’t say we’re rewarding bad teams for failure and in the same breath argue that it’s not a reward because they are bad teams and destined for failure. Pick a lane. 0/10 1 5 5 Quote
Figster Posted March 31 Author Posted March 31 9 minutes ago, FireChans said: A terrible idea. A good to great QB can turn a bad franchise into a good one. See: The Bills. The NFL wants the bad teams to eventually be good. Otherwise folks stop watching. You also can’t say we’re rewarding bad teams for failure and in the same breath argue that it’s not a reward because they are bad teams and destined for failure. Pick a lane. 0/10 Stafford is a good example... Quote
FireChans Posted March 31 Posted March 31 12 minutes ago, Figster said: Stafford is a good example... Of what? Stafford took over on a terrible team (0-16) and led them to a better win total every single year he started there. He also led them to 3 playoff appearances and 5 seasons with a winning record, and ultimately trading him got them to the NFCCG last season. So what is he a good example of? 2 2 Quote
Figster Posted March 31 Author Posted March 31 (edited) 14 minutes ago, FireChans said: Of what? Stafford took over on a terrible team (0-16) and led them to a better win total every single year he started there. He also led them to 3 playoff appearances and 5 seasons with a winning record, and ultimately trading him got them to the NFCCG last season. So what is he a good example of? Yet no championship until he is traded so go figure... ...Detroit goes further with good coaching then they ever did with Stafford... Edited March 31 by Figster 1 Quote
FireChans Posted March 31 Posted March 31 9 minutes ago, Figster said: Yet no championship until he is traded so go figure... ...Detroit goes further with good coaching then they ever did with Stafford... No championship is your definition of “destined for failure?” So drafting Josh Allen was a failure, I suppose. 2 Quote
Figster Posted March 31 Author Posted March 31 1 minute ago, FireChans said: No championship is your definition of “destined for failure?” So drafting Josh Allen was a failure, I suppose. Does Eli win a Championship with San Diego? Probably not... Not winning a Championship with Josh would be a failure ... 1 Quote
FireChans Posted March 31 Posted March 31 2 minutes ago, Figster said: Does Eli win a Championship with San Diego? Probably not... Not winning a Championship with Josh would be a failure ... Every player that gets drafted to any team and you ask, “do they win a championship,” the answer will always be probably not. Why do you think it would be better for the league if NE got the first overall pick in Trevor Lawrence and the pitiful Jags got Mac Jones? 1 1 Quote
Figster Posted March 31 Author Posted March 31 3 minutes ago, Jay_Fixit said: I think this is a terrible idea. Star collegiate athletes probably think the current Drafting procedure is terrible. I'm just trying to fixit Jay ; ) Quote
Figster Posted March 31 Author Posted March 31 11 minutes ago, FireChans said: Every player that gets drafted to any team and you ask, “do they win a championship,” the answer will always be probably not. Why do you think it would be better for the league if NE got the first overall pick in Trevor Lawrence and the pitiful Jags got Mac Jones? For the league, Trevor Lawrence, or Buffalo? Do you think losing a perennial Super Bowl contender helps the league? I would say yes on the 1st two... Quote
FireChans Posted March 31 Posted March 31 10 minutes ago, Figster said: For the league, Trevor Lawrence, or Buffalo? Do you think losing a perennial Super Bowl contender helps the league? I would say yes on the 1st two... Yeah, you’re wrong. The idea of parity is what gets fans buying tickets for crappy teams. It’s far worse for the league if crappy teams are crappy in perpetuity without the hope of getting a top flight player, namely QB. Your idea takes that all away, just so the #1 pick gets to go to a better team AND make $40M on their first contract. Who cares? The #1 pick already makes the most money. Why turn the NFL into college football where the same 3 or 4 teams are the best for 20 years? And yes, 1000% dynasties rising and falling helps the league. Because the league is a zero sum game. Every year a team wins 13 games, that means 13 teams are losing. Look how many Jags games are empty nowadays that they got Trevor. There’s your answer to what’s “better for the league.” 3 Quote
Figster Posted March 31 Author Posted March 31 (edited) 13 minutes ago, FireChans said: Yeah, you’re wrong. The idea of parity is what gets fans buying tickets for crappy teams. It’s far worse for the league if crappy teams are crappy in perpetuity without the hope of getting a top flight player, namely QB. Your idea takes that all away, just so the #1 pick gets to go to a better team AND make $40M on their first contract. Who cares? The #1 pick already makes the most money. Why turn the NFL into college football where the same 3 or 4 teams are the best for 20 years? And yes, 1000% dynasties rising and falling helps the league. Because the league is a zero sum game. Every year a team wins 13 games, that means 13 teams are losing. Look how many Jags games are empty nowadays that they got Trevor. There’s your answer to what’s “better for the league.” Parity achieved through draft picking order rarely happens IMO. Good players end up going to bad system matches and teams because of poor management IMO. Edited March 31 by Figster Quote
FireChans Posted March 31 Posted March 31 2 minutes ago, Figster said: Parity through draft picking order is an illusion IMO. Good coaching and management creates the proper setting for athletes to succeed in the NFL. Your opinion is wrong. Jags record 3 seasons before picking Lawrence: 5-11 6-10 1-15 Jags record since picking Lawrence: 3-14 9-8 9-8 Yes Urban Meyer sucked as a coach. Yes Doug Pederson is better. But the Jags are better now than the garbage they were before probably 90% because of Lawrence. Hell, he had the team 66% better despite worse coaching. Bengals record 3 seasons before picking Burrow: 7-9 6-10 2-14 Bengals record since picking Burrow: 4-11 (Burrow hurt) 10-7 12-4 9-8 (Burrow hurt) Did Zach Taylor wake up and learn how to coach after the 2-14 season? Or do we think maybe Burrow by himself is worth about 8 wins? We could do this all day with the top QB's drafted. It's obvious. Sure, some of the QB's bust. Some folks even argue that the teams "ruined" the players. But they really don't. McVay made Goff look better than what he is. Jeff Fisher obviously made him look worse. But Goff is who Goff is, which is a good starter in the NFL, but not in the upper echelon. He never will be. Justin Fields will almost certainly never be good, and probably never would have been good. He may have looked better than what he was in Chicago with awesome coaching, but he wouldn't have been good. Mac Jones will never be good. He was made to look better than he was in 2021 with a team built around his strengths, but you can only hide a bad QB for long. And now we all know he sucks. Because he sucks. Brock Purdy is decent. But his system makes him look great. Just like the system made Jimmy G look great, when he wasn't. It doesn't make them better players. They are who they are. No matter how great Brock looks up 30 against a bad team with Shanahan, he's still closer to Mac Jones than Josh Allen. The game changers at QB, the guys who can turn around a franchise, sometimes despite bad coaching or management, are by and large picked in the top 10. Therefore, it makes total sense that the bad teams that may or may not have bad coaching/management get first crack at them. This is the whole point of the draft. Why should a team like the Bengals who lost their superstar QB to injury and barely missed the playoffs get that shot instead? It makes no sense. 2 1 Quote
Figster Posted March 31 Author Posted March 31 (edited) 9 minutes ago, FireChans said: Your opinion is wrong. Jags record 3 seasons before picking Lawrence: 5-11 6-10 1-15 Jags record since picking Lawrence: 3-14 9-8 9-8 Yes Urban Meyer sucked as a coach. Yes Doug Pederson is better. But the Jags are better now than the garbage they were before probably 90% because of Lawrence. Hell, he had the team 66% better despite worse coaching. Bengals record 3 seasons before picking Burrow: 7-9 6-10 2-14 Bengals record since picking Burrow: 4-11 (Burrow hurt) 10-7 12-4 9-8 (Burrow hurt) Did Zach Taylor wake up and learn how to coach after the 2-14 season? Or do we think maybe Burrow by himself is worth about 8 wins? We could do this all day with the top QB's drafted. It's obvious. Sure, some of the QB's bust. Some folks even argue that the teams "ruined" the players. But they really don't. McVay made Goff look better than what he is. Jeff Fisher obviously made him look worse. But Goff is who Goff is, which is a good starter in the NFL, but not in the upper echelon. He never will be. Justin Fields will almost certainly never be good, and probably never would have been good. He may have looked better than what he was in Chicago with awesome coaching, but he wouldn't have been good. Mac Jones will never be good. He was made to look better than he was in 2021 with a team built around his strengths, but you can only hide a bad QB for long. And now we all know he sucks. Because he sucks. Brock Purdy is decent. But his system makes him look great. Just like the system made Jimmy G look great, when he wasn't. It doesn't make them better players. They are who they are. No matter how great Brock looks up 30 against a bad team with Shanahan, he's still closer to Mac Jones than Josh Allen. The game changers at QB, the guys who can turn around a franchise, sometimes despite bad coaching or management, are by and large picked in the top 10. Therefore, it makes total sense that the bad teams that may or may not have bad coaching/management get first crack at them. This is the whole point of the draft. Why should a team like the Bengals who lost their superstar QB to injury and barely missed the playoffs get that shot instead? It makes no sense. Without injury Joe Burrows and the Bengals in all likelihood would be drafting near the end of the 1st round. Bad example IMO. Trevor Lawrence almost makes my argument for me IMO. To good to be watching the playoffs instead of participating IMO. 9 - 8 record doesn't get the job done. Edited March 31 by Figster 1 Quote
FireChans Posted March 31 Posted March 31 2 minutes ago, Figster said: Without injury Joe Burrows and the Bengals in all likelihood would be drafting near the end of the 1st round. Bad example IMO. Without being the worst team in the NFL, they wouldn't have Joe Burrow at all!. Trevor Lawrence almost makes my argument for me IMO. To good to be watching the playoffs instead of participating IMO. 9 - 8 record doesn't get the job done. They made the playoffs, and won a game against Herbert (another top 10 QB drafted on a bad team) his second season, and only missed the playoffs this season because he got hurt. In any case, your plan still wouldn't work. What would happen is a team with a franchise QB that barely missed the playoffs (Bengals/Jags last season for example) would get a top 3 pick, and they would trade it for multiple first rounders to a really bad team without a franchise QB. So what you'd really be doing is sending a prospect like Caleb or Jayden Daniels or Drake Maye to a bad team made even worse with depleted draft capital in the future. The system works. Your system does not. 1 1 1 Quote
Aussie Joe Posted March 31 Posted March 31 The whole point of the draft is to give the shyte teams some hope to improve … 1 Quote
Doc Posted March 31 Posted March 31 2 hours ago, Figster said: The reward you may get for being one of the best college athletes playing in your position is to end up playing for one of the worst coached and managed teams in the NFL. In many instances the best college QB's end up in places destined for failure. So why reward poorly coached and managed teams in this manner? Why do we reward the best college athletes entering the NFL draft in this manner? I get trying to even the playing field. My idea is to make teams work for the rights to the best college athletes. Show that you can coach and manage well enough to give star athletes a chance for success in the NFL. My idea is to give the best team/record to not make the playoffs the 1st pick in the draft and go from best to worst record. Teams on the brink of becoming playoff caliber getting the best college athletes available. Win, win for both the player and team. Playoff teams pick last and still go from best to worst. Stop rewarding perennial bad teams for failure. Any thoughts on this idea my fellow Bills fans? And more money. Don't cry too hard for them. 1 1 Quote
Figster Posted March 31 Author Posted March 31 Just now, Doc said: And more money. Don't cry too hard for them. Good point, thanks Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.