KL2

Again you are just ignoring so much. So so so much. I don't get why everyone keep doing it. OK its good for morale. Who cares season over. it's done. There is zero evidence that winning the last game has any impact on the next year. Do you not agree there will be several new players here next year and several gone? So what does the previous year result have to do with anything? And if you want to argue young fine, I'll argue bad. The average NFL players career is what now like three years. These are guys playing for a bad team. Therefore many are just not good NFL players. What are the building for? for some other team? The arena league? They aren't good. That's why we won 3 games all year. If they were or had long futures in the league we sure has hell would have won more than 3 games. Winning a third game doesn't take a slow, less athletic, weaker player and make him better. Winning a third game doesn't turn Kalif Raymond into Brandon Marshall. And OK winning is important for "teaching how to win" or "building a culture." Didn't the first two take care of that? What did the guys learn from yesterday's win against GB's backups that they didn't from the first two. Pretty sure after the first one they learned it was more fun than losing. Are teams happier that they won 3 instead of two or are both pretty crappy years where you're won of the worst teams. Have you ever heard anyone ever in any sport ever go well we built the winning culture and it started when we won 3 games instead of 2, four years ago? Do you understand how stupid they would sound. Great the Lions have drafted good players at #2 before. has nothing to do with this group. And you could argue they drafted their second best player of all time at No. 1. Great the Jags might take an offensive tackle at one. Who cares? That's not the argument. Plus do you see the key phrase there? MIGHT or COULD. If you're number one you don't have to worry about it all. The fact there is no clear cut No. 1 again irrelevant. Someone is going to be a top your draft board, even a microscopic amount, but someone you think is better than the rest. That's the argument. At No. 1 I get the guy at the top of my draft board no matter. Guaranteed. Everything you're talking about is conjecture or a feeling. There is no proof at all to back up winning against another team's backups in a now-3 win season does anything to help improve performance in the future. A loss, however, does guarantee that I get the guy I feel will most help me win games next year, the year after that and the year after that. You and others are just siding with emotion and old timer clichés. Its just instant gratification while ignoring completely what is better for the long term. This is not a discussion of tanking when you might have an 8 win team. Its the difference between a 2 or 3 win season. Both a sucky and lots of people have lost jobs because of either amount. To argue its about building something is silly because most of the players that were bad which is why the team is bad will not be here when they are competitive. To the ones that are, I doubt they are gonna look back and be like good thing we won three my rookie year. Really taught me a lot about winning.

If its internal its gonna be Ben Johnson the TE coach. He coordinated the passing game when Campbell took over. For the dolphins he also coached QBs and WR so he has experience in other offensive areas.

Jim Bob Cooter

So you're guaranteed to get the guy you want. Win a game in a 2-13-1 year? why.

No. But when you're 2-13-1 what comes from winning? Does it get you into the playoffs? no. Does some mythical winning feeling carry over? no. Does it give young players a taste of winning? did the other two wins do that? Does it help the coach keep his job? nop Do you hanve a banner with three wins instead of two? no. Go ahead point out a good reason to win in a 2-13-1 season the last week other than well I liked it. I like choclate ice cream too but if you tell me to skip it one week so I get Kathrerine Mcphee to spend the night. Goodbye chocolate ice cream.

Doesn't matter. Someone has to be on top of your draft board. Why risk someone else taking that guy for a abosultely meaningless win. All you're doing today is hurting yourself in the long run. It's 2006 all over again

YES MEANINGLESS WINS THAT CAN ONLY HURT!!!!!!!!!!

So not us then....

I'm excited to get murdered by josh allen on thanksgiving

So basically the pats teams that won 98 suprebowls?

covid/crappy team byproduct

Cause you said nothing about stats "It's not like Goff QB'd a team to a Super Bowl or anything." You gave a total of one factor-- that Jared Goff had been to a superbowl. I used that one factor to point out that said one factor isn't that great. If you wanted to talk about stats in that year, maybe you should have mentioned them, instead of pointing out one and one thing only. That he went to a superbowl.

So did Rex Gossman. I don't get why people thing that is some kind of feather in the cap.

They need a massive influx of talent everywhere.

Problem is its out west. Last time we won out there I think Ike was president

Sure there is. Same way we might beat GB. THe opponent might sit everyone

Yep and missing good players is certainly gonna make us better. Your strategy is full proof! And fact is our best player or rhe last 50 years were all taken 1 or 2 overall

YES! MEANINGLESS WINS THAT COST US GOOD PLAYERS ARE AWESOME!!!!

Big game next week for the draft

Here's the list since 1970 Farve Brees Next up is probably Carr or Randall Cunningham. So two in 50 years.

yeah my comment wasn't about wearing general tiger gear hauss. It's about nobody buys merchandise that says "we finished third ut it was a really good year!" Just a way to say nobody cares/remembers any body who finishes second.

Is it. Nobody wears Tshirts for finishing 83-79. Let me put it this way, if Michigan lost saturday would anyone have said. It's OK the year was fun and at least they were in the conversation?

Probably not. But, I also understand the major flaws in that article that lacks much critical thinking. To start off it takes the entire point that the lowest guys on the totem pole should get paid more. No industry works like that. Entry level is always the lowest paid. And the union wants it that way. Then you have the issue with the "fan complaint" section, the lack of understanding of top heavy free agency, the lack of individual cap contract in baseball compared to other sports, the lack of context about why a team such as the Guardians has spent 0 dollars, the lack of understand that every sport is getting younger, an inability to understand why a team like pittsburgh doesn't spend on free agency while ignoring the fact they give out deals to homegrown talent -- much like TB but we're not gonna complain about their lack of massive FA deals. The CBA hasn't gone towards the owners favor anymore than it was years ago. The players still have a crap ton of leverage and perks. But, the author here has ignored all of the things above to whine basically about the pay gap that the UNION created.

That article makes so many false statements, stupid comments and ignores all context on nearly all of its points.