There are 77 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

Tanking it for Clowney

IMO Trent/JH would NEVER tank and NEVER give up too much for one guy.
Not that this settles it in any way, but just thought that the timing was interesting.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/08/15/jadeveon-clowney-viewed-as-a-once-in-a-decade-nfl-prospect/
Any team that tanks for one guy has no self respect. Logically it might be the right thing to do, but principally its cowardly.
Originally posted by LasVegasWally:
No - unless Seattle is in a position to get him.

That said - in another direction, what would we have realistically have to give up in draft picks and/or trade to get him?

3 drafts
I might be wrong here, and I understand I might catch some HEAT for saying this, but... QB is the most overrated position in all of sports to me. In this day and age of football where the rules are tailored to the passing game I think you can make it to the super bowl and win without an "elite" QB. For the past two seasons we have been in the hunt with Alex Smith and then Kaep (a rookie qb basically), while teams who are supposed to have better QB's than us (Packers, Falcons, etc) are sitting at home by the NFC Championship. Then you have guys like Eli and Flacco, who most people consider to be not "top 5" winning it all. Like I said I could be very wrong but I think QB is going to become a position where teams will find a guy in the second half of the first round or early second at best and develop him to be with they want. I think the premium picks will be spent on interior positions and the occasional transcending players (Lucks, RG3s of the world).
Originally posted by Dr_Bill_Walsh:
Who needs Lombardi #6 when you can get this guy?!?!

Who needs to read the original post when you can just assume the OP is talking about the 49ers?
i do not think you come in the year looking to tank.

but if at week 13 you have the inside track on it, i see it, and would probably do it. but not just blow the games. i would treat it like september baseball. if you are dinged up, you will sit. the young guys that do not get significant time will get significant time.

edit
but i also think this should be done in average draft years.

but if you have players who are playing for bonuses you would either give it to them or let them try to earn it.
[ Edited by jdt84_2 on Aug 15, 2013 at 7:30 PM ]
Problem is, and likely a tiny one, but if your tanking for Clowney(Which I wouldn't tank for anyone, always thought it was stupid, especially when everyone wanted to see Bush in SF, I had a guy at the Bar say you need Bush, I'm like nah, we got Gore, dont need a RB.), anyway, I know he likely declares for the draft, but if he doesn't and your stuck with an average class, with no clear #1 guy, you're screwed.

The only guys worth even thinking of it, are Top QBs, like a Teddy Bridgewater. But like I said, I am against tanking for any one player.
How about we trade draft picks for him

There.

Tanking is not an option, winning #6 is!
  • LVJay
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 5,105
Harbaalke wouldn't Clown ey around like that. Besides, Niners already have a Tank (Carradine)
Probably gonna be a Raaaaaaaiiiiiduh! Or a Jet.
someone lock this stupid thread
I never said the 49ers should tank it for Clowney.I said if you were a bad to average team.A pass rush can really turn a team around.Look how Aldon Smith boosted the 49ers.The giants beat a great qb with their pass rush in the superbowl twice. LT is one of if not the most dominant players of all time If you have a chance to get a player like that and, your not close to winning a super bowl you might want to consider especially if you already have a qb.
I hope it's an AFC team
Its Oakland. Not even close Oakland may win one or two games