What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

which NFL teams have thrown in the towel? (1 Viewer)

grateful zed

Footballguy
afc

east is still competitive

west: raiders and broncos are on the verge

north: steelers are reeling

south: hou is done, but jax is building for next year

nfc

east: anyones guess about was

west: still cookin

north: lions are unloading, bears are just a mess

south: car is done, rest are battling,
 

BobbyLayne

Footballguy
afc

east is still competitive

west: raiders and broncos are on the verge

north: steelers are reeling

south: hou is done, but jax is building for next year

nfc

east: anyones guess about was

west: still cookin

north: lions are unloading, bears are just a mess

south: car is done, rest are battling,

Detroit will always play hard
 

Chaka

Footballguy
We were talking about this in the Raiders thread last week.

These are my thoughts:
I think there is a general misconception about tanking. Coaches don't tank, players don't tank. Their careers are too short and volatile to risk it.

Front offices tank. They do everything they can to make winning more difficult for the coaches and players.
The Panthers are playing their ###es off but there is no question the FO would rather they not win anymore, even if they will never come out and say it.

Indianapolis is tanking for sure. Probably Denver, maybe Chicago too.

But the Raiders are not tanking. Then again they maybe they don't have to tank to suck their way into a top 3 pick.
If the Raiders were tanking they would have, at the very least traded Waller to the Packers. They probably regret that decision today.
 

Jayded

Footballguy
My Texans better have done so. What is the point in trying to win this season? We have no shot of anything other than the 1.1 so get the young guys reps and hope the Browns also tank so we can double down at the top of the draft.
 

LawFitz

Footballguy
Very worthwhile thread, this. Every year we see defenses and RBs blow up during the playoff stretch of fantasy football b/c they face give-up teams. Important to identify those teams asap and flag them on upcoming schedules.

Raiders
Broncos
Colts
Packers
Rams
Bucs
Panthers

Primary suspects as of now, with the Texans, Steelers and Deadskins creeping around the give-up zone as well.
 

efactor

Footballguy
More heads have to roll in Indy. Disgraceful
Agree here

They were 3-3-1 in a winnable division when they benched Ryan. I get that Ryan was stuggling, but he's a heck of a lot better option at this point if you are really trying to compete for a playoff spot. At least let them be out of it before you start a young QB who obviously isn't ready.
 

Rubi

Footballguy
AFC: Texans took an early vacation
Colts cashed out and left the casino
Raiders seem clueless
Steelers hangin in but on the verge of leaving

NFC: Cardinals are clueless for sure
Panthers petered out long ago
Lions are,well,The Lions,but still playing hard
Packers packed it in early
Rams are still playing but just don't have "it" this year
 

Anarchy99

Footballguy
Some teams may look like they are phoning it in and are looking at travel brochures for golf getaways in January, but Tampa is currently the 4 seed in the NFC. The Rams are only a game out of a playoff spot. With the NFC being pretty top heavy, ATL, WAS, and NOS are bubbling under. With a couple of wins, even GB and CHI could get back in the race. The 4 seed is in play for any of the NFC South teams and a ton of teams are still in it for the last wildcard team.

The AFC doesn't appear to be as stacked as it did prior to the season starting. IND, DEN, and LV are sputtering and the hope that CLE could be .500 until Watson got to play hasn't come to fruition. That leaves 9 teams fighting for 7 playoff spots. The other 7 teams don't exactly seem like they are inspired at this point.
 

LawFitz

Footballguy
AFC ... 9 teams fighting for 7 playoff spots. The other 7 teams don't exactly seem like they are inspired at this point.

Of the bottom seven, bolded below are teams most in danger of quitting on their current coaching staffs IMO. Raiders and Broncos should be bold red...

Texans
Steelers
Raiders
Jags
Broncos
Browns
Colts
 

LawFitz

Footballguy
NFC bottom feeders in danger of silent quitting soon...

Panthers
Lions
Bears
Cardinals
Packers
- due to QB more than coach
Saints
Rams

Make no mistake, though. All teams, even rah rahs like the Lions fall into silent quitting risk once enough losses mount and/or confidence is lost. To Anarchy's point, above though, some quitters may still have a while to fully emerge this season. Others may be here already (cough, Raiders) or are just a week or so away.
 

Anarchy99

Footballguy
NFC bottom feeders in danger of silent quitting soon...

Panthers
Lions
Bears
Cardinals
Packers
- due to QB more than coach
Saints
Rams

Make no mistake, though. All teams, even rah rahs like the Lions fall into silent quitting risk once enough losses mount and/or confidence is lost. To Anarchy's point, above though, some quitters may still have a while to fully emerge this season. Others may be here already (cough, Raiders) or are just a week or so away.
As far as the last part goes, I openly wonder if there are other teams (cough, Patriots), that are anxiously waiting with open arms to bring in McDaniels if he gets shown the door in LV. The Raiders signed him to a 4-year contract, and BB loves to bring back experienced coaches that have left the nest (and have another franchise pay them). All they would need to do is call him a "Team Consultant" and Vegas would have to pay him the remainder of his head coaching contract.
 

themeistersinger

Footballguy
It makes no sense at all for a FO to be tanking if they don't have their own 1st round pick this year. So I can't see Denver tanking on purpose, although I can see the players giving up on the HC. Same thing for Rams, Saints or Browns.
 

-OZ-

Footballguy
Rodgers just looks like he's fed up with playing football at this point.
Rodgers and Brady can enter the hall the same year.
There is no way in hell Rodgers will want to go into the Hall the same year as Brady. That would steal all the attention away from himself.
Which is why I’m in favor.
But yeah, maybe AAron will start for the colts next year.
 

Anarchy99

Footballguy
Rodgers just looks like he's fed up with playing football at this point.
Rodgers and Brady can enter the hall the same year.
There is no way in hell Rodgers will want to go into the Hall the same year as Brady. That would steal all the attention away from himself.
Which is why I’m in favor.
But yeah, maybe AAron will start for the colts next year.
I'm going to guess no to Rodgers to the Colts next year. GB would have to eat $40 million in cap space if they traded him (close to $100 million if they released him). The option years for Rodgers don't start until 2024, so the Packers would have to take a bath to move on from A-Rod. I guess if the Colts made GB an offer they couldn't refuse, then maybe they would consider it, but as of now, the Packers are projected to be $2 million over the cap for next season with 5 players accounting for $125 million toward the cap (of what should be a $218 million cap next year) . . . Rodgers, David Bakhtiari, Kenny Clark, Aaron Jones, and Jaire Alexander.
 

-OZ-

Footballguy
Rodgers just looks like he's fed up with playing football at this point.
Rodgers and Brady can enter the hall the same year.
There is no way in hell Rodgers will want to go into the Hall the same year as Brady. That would steal all the attention away from himself.
Which is why I’m in favor.
But yeah, maybe AAron will start for the colts next year.
I'm going to guess no to Rodgers to the Colts next year. GB would have to eat $40 million in cap space if they traded him (close to $100 million if they released him). The option years for Rodgers don't start until 2024, so the Packers would have to take a bath to move on from A-Rod. I guess if the Colts made GB an offer they couldn't refuse, then maybe they would consider it, but as of now, the Packers are projected to be $2 million over the cap for next season with 5 players accounting for $125 million toward the cap (of what should be a $218 million cap next year) . . . Rodgers, David Bakhtiari, Kenny Clark, Aaron Jones, and Jaire Alexander.

:oldunsure:
When a joke is a little too possible to be funny?
 

Anarchy99

Footballguy
Rodgers just looks like he's fed up with playing football at this point.
Rodgers and Brady can enter the hall the same year.
There is no way in hell Rodgers will want to go into the Hall the same year as Brady. That would steal all the attention away from himself.
Which is why I’m in favor.
But yeah, maybe AAron will start for the colts next year.
I'm going to guess no to Rodgers to the Colts next year. GB would have to eat $40 million in cap space if they traded him (close to $100 million if they released him). The option years for Rodgers don't start until 2024, so the Packers would have to take a bath to move on from A-Rod. I guess if the Colts made GB an offer they couldn't refuse, then maybe they would consider it, but as of now, the Packers are projected to be $2 million over the cap for next season with 5 players accounting for $125 million toward the cap (of what should be a $218 million cap next year) . . . Rodgers, David Bakhtiari, Kenny Clark, Aaron Jones, and Jaire Alexander.

:oldunsure:
When a joke is a little too possible to be funny?
Hard to tell jokes, sarcasm, and schtick on a message board sometimes.
 

btemp

Footballguy
A slight tangent, but I've become much less enamored with the idea of tanking. As someone who is analytics focused, I get the logic. But I think the team/coaches feeling like the FO is undermining them with tanking hurts more than you gain with increased draft pick value.

This is in part because draft picks are so volatile.

Really tanking is only worth it to get a QB. If you're a bottom-5 team, even an elite DE or OT isn't saving your team. And the history of top 5 teams is bleak - even after tanking for Luck, Tua, Lawrence, WInston etc.

Of the Top 5 QBs I don't know who you're happy with outside of Joe Burrow. You're 5x more likely to get a Baker Mayfield or Trubisky or Goff than a Mahomes or Allen (who were outside the top 5). I've come to suspect that a continued focus on winning even in dire odds (I think the Steelers are a good example right now) leads to better long term results than tanking.

The goal is likely to get a top 6-15 pick to get in range for the second or third ranked QB (who almost always end up better).
 

SeniorVBDStudent

Footballguy
A slight tangent, but I've become much less enamored with the idea of tanking. As someone who is analytics focused, I get the logic. But I think the team/coaches feeling like the FO is undermining them with tanking hurts more than you gain with increased draft pick value.

This is in part because draft picks are so volatile.

Really tanking is only worth it to get a QB. If you're a bottom-5 team, even an elite DE or OT isn't saving your team. And the history of top 5 teams is bleak - even after tanking for Luck, Tua, Lawrence, WInston etc.

Of the Top 5 QBs I don't know who you're happy with outside of Joe Burrow. You're 5x more likely to get a Baker Mayfield or Trubisky or Goff than a Mahomes or Allen (who were outside the top 5). I've come to suspect that a continued focus on winning even in dire odds (I think the Steelers are a good example right now) leads to better long term results than tanking.

The goal is likely to get a top 6-15 pick to get in range for the second or third ranked QB (who almost always end up better).
Mac Jones apologist? :D
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top