Tanking?

Originally posted by midrdan:

I can't wait for us to go out and beat the Chargers on Sunday.

I like you.

Originally posted by BigBug415:

How bout we believe in CJ and back this team 100%.
🤘😡🤘

I used to believe in Santa and the Tooth Fairy

Only losers take the defeat and tank for the rest of the season. I really dont get the tanking logic. Only a bunch of losers would just wants to lay down and get rammed by all the teams, 3 freaking weeks into the season.. Wake the fahk up FAITHFULS. We believe and stay FAITHFUL to this team no matter what, good or bad. So what? They're in a rebuilding mode two years in. Patience is a virtue. Our time WILL come, just be patient and support the freaking team. No matter how much you cry about what's going on rite now, it won't change anything. So do yourself a favor and save yourself from high blood pressure and just SUPPORT THE FAHKING TEAM. At the end of the day, your crying opinion doesn't matter to the FO and the team. Just saying..

After week 2 I thought we were maybe a 6 or 7 win team, so yeah... no need to tank. We're probably gonna finish with maybe 4 wins

TANKS FOR NOTHING? LOSING TO WIN
February 7, 2016 ANTHONY CASTROVINCE

Losing is hard, it is painful, it is humbling and, unfortunately, it is unavoidable in many instances. Show me a professional sports team that reaches the playoffs every single season, and I'll show you one you likely orchestrated on your Xbox. To embrace true fandom is to embrace the notion that sometimes you'll be rooting for the wrong laundry.

Tanking? That's something else entirely. Tanking is an affront to fandom. Tanking is the physical and psychological embrace of losing now for the sake of some real or perceived gain later. To tank is to purposefully and tactfully stink, to put no effort toward fielding an entertaining or even interesting product, to willfully watch yourself fall "from high in the rafters," as Bruce Springsteen once sang of a crooked boxer. The Colts, Cavaliers and Sabres tanked -- i.e., did poorly for a whole season on purpose -- to draft Andrew Luck, LeBron James and Jack Eichel, respectively.

And tanking is also a big topic in the sports world right now.

At their recent meetings, in advance of the sport's next collective bargaining agreement, Major League Baseball's owners reportedly discussed the topic at length, out of concern for teams deliberately fielding losing efforts in order to improve their draft position. The discussion is rooted in the recent rise of the Astros and Cubs, both of whom finished in last place -- no closer than 25 games back -- in their respective divisions in 2011-13, as well as the current, clear line of demarcation between the contenders and the also-rans in the National League.

Meanwhile, in the NBA, Philadelphia 76ers GM Steve Hinkie's "process" is code for a tank job of two-plus season that has only in recent weeks begun to yield anything resembling respectable results.

In the NFL, the phrase "Suck for Luck" took on a life of its own during a 2-14 Indianapolis Colts season that landed them Andrew Luck with the No. 1 pick in the draft. And you could say that the Carolina Panthers were actually the first team to "Suck for Luck," as they went 2-14 in 2010, only to see Luck decide to stay in school for his senior year. They "settled" for Cam Newton, who just guided them to Super Bowl 50.

The line between tanking and rebuilding can be blurry

A rebuild is judicious. A tank job is egregious.
The difficulty is determining the difference between one and the other.
For example, are the Golden State Warriors -- the defending champions and darlings of the basketball world -- a product of a shrewd rebuild or deplorable tanking?

Maybe it's a combination of the two.

In the period from 2008-09 to 2011-12, the Dubs had winning percentages of .354, .317, .439 and .348. Not exactly banner years, but also not nearly as flagrant as that of the 76ers, whose win percentage dating back to the beginning of the 2013-14 season is an embarrassing .207. The Warriors never drafted higher than No. 7 overall, and a move like the 2010 acquisition and obvious overpay of David Lee at the very least signaled an effort to improve the on-court product.

That said, it's hard not to label what happened in the second half of 2011-12 as anything other than tanking. At 18-21, the Warriors traded Monta Ellis for an injured Andrew Bogut, riling up the fan base. They also shut down Stephen Curry, benched Lee and started giving major minutes to guys like Charles Jenkins and Mikki Moore. It was a clear dive over the last 26 games of the season, all in the name of keeping their top-seven protected pick.
So where do we land on the Warriors?

The 2012 shenanigans might have been egregious, but they also worked wonderfully, as Golden State landed Harrison Barnes with that No. 7 pick. But to me, the Warriors' organizational rise still trends more toward the art of improvement rather than the science of suck, because they had to draft very well in non-obvious spots (Curry was No. 7 overall, Klay Thompson was No. 11 overall and Draymond Green was No. 35 overall).

So I'd label it a rebuild, especially when compared to what's gone on in Philadelphia with the Sixers the last few years.
http://www.sportsonearth.com/article/163874706/rebuilding-tanking-whats-the-difference-colts

Folks in here think that we'll tank by not trying...thinking we'll win 3-4 games tops. There's still gonna be a couple of teams with worse records than us in the end. There are teams in as much trouble or worse than us. Three teams have a good chance of going 0-4 after week four. As for the other 1-2 teams, some aren't that much better off...

Originally posted by dj43:
Nobody is going to tank.

First of all, these are professional players with their future on the line. If they fail here, especially if there is any suspicion of tanking, they won't get a job anywhere else.

Second, the last thing Kyle wants in what is only the 2nd year of the rebuilding process, is to give even the slightest hint of being willing to settle for anything less than the best from his players.

tanking.

This is exactly why we have Schmo Thomas instead of Myles Garrett.

I oppose the idea of tanking on almost every level. I have argued with posters here over the years who wanted to tank for various players. Interestingly I don't think any of them turned out to have much value. But tanking is just a fans wet dream. How would you like to tell Buckner or Staley that you wanted the team to tank? How do you think Richard Sherman would react if he thought the team was tanking? It simply isn't going to happen.

Great!! Competing with the Browns again and we will come in second

Tanking? It all falls on the QB. If Beathard shows improvement from his first year Shanahan's play calling will give us an edge. If Beathard is the same guy as last year we're in for a long losing streak.

I'd like to be competitive and still pick high in the draft.

Niner fans have sunk to a new low lol.

Originally posted by MarkD:

Great!! Competing with the Browns again and we will come in second

Agree. You Can't beat the Browns, they are the Champions of *tanking*.

Originally posted by Loco49er:

As others have said, no need to tank because we suck anyways. Defense is close to bottom of the barrel and the offense is about to sink with CJ. The team will be lucky to win 1-2 more games so we'll have a top five pick. Hopefully Lynch doesn't screw up, again! Also, I hope this leads to the firing of Mr Clean and forces Lynch to spend money on impact players.

Yep, even if this team goes all out to win, unlikely we'll ever get to 8-8. That would be a Jim Harbaugh/Bill Walsh coaching job.