Go the tank

[dragit]

Do you honestly think teams deliberatly "tank" games for draft picks?

There is no concrete evidence of this happening. Teams finish in low positions because of poor performances over the course of the season, plain and simple.

yes i believe… bryce gibbs cup

[ralphsmith]

West coast are the richest club in the competition, through property investments etc.

They can afford to tank.

Can we have a few years of tankage? Can we afford it? I dont know.

The concern now is that the players have really been trying their guts out to win. If they continue to not win, the rot will set in then its no longer a choice to tank.

Massive game againt the roos.

[matrix]

yeah agree tanking happens

also interested to know if there were any more father son rules at the saints
thats not many is it? (what the Dr said earlier)

[St Nick]

West coast are the richest club in the competition, through property investments etc.

They can afford to tank.

Can we have a few years of tankage? Can we afford it? I dont know.
The concern now is that the players have really been trying their guts out to win. If they continue to not win, the rot will set in then its no longer a choice to tank.

Massive game againt the roos.

We can't afford it. If we were to tank for the minimum 4 years for draft picks, we would have to play 2 home games interstate to subsidise this. One in Canberra and one in Darwin. This would be a must because I can see our membership dropping down to 25,000 during those 4 years.

[Mr Magic]

Do you honestly think teams deliberatly "tank" games for draft picks?

There is no concrete evidence of this happening. Teams finish in low positions because of poor performances over the course of the season, plain and simple.

Depends how you define 'tanking'.
I believe every player who runs out on the field tries his best to win.

BUT
I also believe that Clubs make strategic decisions to not win games when there is more upside to losing (at the end of seasons).

This can be 'arranged via :-
team selection
player positions
player instructions
and I'm sure other means at coaches' disposal.

That to me is just as much 'tanking' as players not trying.
It's tactics employed to ensure the team does not win.

[St Nick]

Do you honestly think teams deliberatly "tank" games for draft picks?

There is no concrete evidence of this happening. Teams finish in low positions because of poor performances over the course of the season, plain and simple.

Depends how you define 'tanking'.
I believe every player who runs out on the field tries his best to win.

BUT
I also believe that Clubs make strategic decisions to not win games when there is more upside to losing (at the end of seasons).

This can be 'arranged via :-
team selection
player positions
player instructions
and I'm sure other means at coaches' disposal.

That to me is just as much 'tanking' as players not trying.
It's tactics employed to ensure the team does not win.

Correct.
Players never tank. Clubs tank.
Collingwood are the classic example. Was it 2005? Half way through the season they shut shop and put players in for surgery to get them right for the next season. They played their youngsters instead. This is TANKING, and it netted them Pendleburry and Thomas. It was a strategic retreat that paid handsome dividends.

[St Nick]

Do you honestly think teams deliberatly "tank" games for draft picks?

There is no concrete evidence of this happening. Teams finish in low positions because of poor performances over the course of the season, plain and simple.

Depends how you define 'tanking'.
I believe every player who runs out on the field tries his best to win.

BUT
I also believe that Clubs make strategic decisions to not win games when there is more upside to losing (at the end of seasons).

This can be 'arranged via :-
team selection
player positions
player instructions
and I'm sure other means at coaches' disposal.

That to me is just as much 'tanking' as players not trying.
It's tactics employed to ensure the team does not win.

Correct.
Players never tank. Clubs tank.
Collingwood are the classic example. Was it 2005? Half way through the season they shut shop and put players in for surgery to get them right for the next season. They played their youngsters instead. This is TANKING, and it netted them Pendleburry and Thomas. It was a strategic retreat that paid handsome dividends.

[Mr Magic]

Do you honestly think teams deliberatly "tank" games for draft picks?

There is no concrete evidence of this happening. Teams finish in low positions because of poor performances over the course of the season, plain and simple.

Depends how you define 'tanking'.
I believe every player who runs out on the field tries his best to win.

BUT
I also believe that Clubs make strategic decisions to not win games when there is more upside to losing (at the end of seasons).

This can be 'arranged via :-
team selection
player positions
player instructions
and I'm sure other means at coaches' disposal.

That to me is just as much 'tanking' as players not trying.
It's tactics employed to ensure the team does not win.

Correct.
Players never tank. Clubs tank.
Collingwood are the classic example. Was it 2005? Half way through the season they shut shop and put players in for surgery to get them right for the next season. They played their youngsters instead. This is TANKING, and it netted them Pendleburry and Thomas. It was a strategic retreat that paid handsome dividends.

I withdraw my post.
If nexus is agreeing with me then there is something seriously flawed with my logic.

[Con Gorozidis]

If you want to see the affirmative case for going the tank look no further than West Coast 2008. 2 years after a flag - finished second last.
Nic Nat, Luke Shuey and Tom Swift thank you very much!

[Rosco]

Correct.
Players never tank. Clubs tank.
Collingwood are the classic example. Was it 2005? Half way through the season they shut shop and put players in for surgery to get them right for the next season. They played their youngsters instead. This is TANKING, and it netted them Pendleburry and Thomas. It was a strategic retreat that paid handsome dividends.

i agree. but we are playing kids this year, and almost everyone here is supporting it. this may cost us in ladder position this year, but the plan is to win long term. does tanking mean preparing for the future by sacrificing today? you'd have to say yes. is it against the "spririt" of the game? probably not.

unless of course it's the filth and they drop from two GFs in 2002-03 to 13th (8 wins) and then 15th (5 wins & priority picks) and then back to 5th in 2006 and then a prelim in 2007. i call this filthing.

[St Nick]

If you want to see the affirmative case for going the tank look no further than West Coast 2008. 2 years after a flag - finished second last.
Nic Nat, Luke Shuey and Tom Swift thank you very much!

Add to that the Judd trade which netted them picks 3 and 20 (I think) and Josh Kennedy.

[InkerSaint]

I'm sorry Con, but Ross says no.

"We've got a responsibility to keep pushing on and we haven't given away the season."

[St Nick]

I'm sorry Con, but Ross says no.

"We've got a responsibility to keep pushing on and we haven't given away the season."[/i]

That's fair enough too. BUT, if we lose to North this week then that is out the door and we go into a full on TANK for the rest of the season. Or else Lyon is history.

[InkerSaint]

That's fair enough too. BUT, if we lose to North this week then that is out the door and we go into a full on TANK for the rest of the season. Or else Lyon is history.

How's the weather in that fantasy world you live in?

[Sainternist]

Attn: Mods

How about banning this absolute squib, username:St Nick ?

Cheers

[asiu]

Why exactly ?

Banning those who have an opinion that expands and creates conversation don't seem real smart.

Ahhhh , sorry , i forgot for a moment where i am.


Looks like your gawn helen.

[Sainternist]

Why exactly ?

Banning those who have an opinion that expands and creates conversation don't seem real smart.

Ahhhh , sorry , i forgot for a moment where i am.


Looks like your gawn helen.

What was I thinking?

Sorry, I forgot that banning trolls is a bad idea.