Would you rather see your team go through a disappointing/so-so losing season (let's say 6-10) and end up with, say, the 7th pick in the draft?

Or would you rather see them go 0-16 and guarantee the #1 pick.

Let's assume there's a guy in the upcoming draft that is a can't miss prospect at a position where your team is lacking.

Are those 6 wins "worth it" enough to miss that guy in the draft? What if you went 4-12? Would the 4 wins be worth it?

I say this because I want the Seahawks to tank the entire season and leave no chance that they miss out on Jake Locker.














This has nothing to do with college football as you aren't "rewarded" at all for having the worst record.

Screw getting the first overall pick. There hasn't been a can't miss prospect since Peyton Manning over 12 years ago, and there's been plenty of busts at the same time. It's a pretty rare occurrence, and the amount of money you have to sink on a guy who hasn't played a down of NFL football is ridiculous.

I'm very proud that the Broncos have gone the longest of any team without having a top ten pick.

Top draft picks are way too expensive and often times don't pan out. Take it from a Lions fan.

OK let's assume the NFL gets a handle on the contracts and guaranteed money for the top picks. Let's say they can get some kind of rookie scale similar to the NBA and the $$$ comes back down to earth. Now what? 4-12 and the 5th pick...or 0-16 and a guarantee on the guy you REALLY want?

0-16 no.
Now if the difference is 3-13 and 4-12, then im okay with rooting for the loss.
BUT trust me (again- Lions fan) that 0-16 is rough to deal with. real rough. My daughter was walking, and talking before the lions won a game in her lifetime. 16 months without so much as a win is not fun.

Fair enough. As a casual pro fan, I don't think that extra win or two is important in the grand scheme of things. I realize it's a "WIN NOW" league, but some teams just have to be realistic. If the 49ers step it up this season, then I think the Seahawks are one of those teams that needs to ask themselves "what good does a losing season do us?" Compared to "What good does it do us to get a local QB who goes #1 in the draft, has his head on straight, is a freak athlete, is a stand-up guy, and would pull in tons of new fans?"

I just don't think I can be convinced that running out a 5-win team this year accomplishes something better than 0 wins.

Obviously if you're just a casual fan, then you wouldnt be able to be convinced, because you don't actually care about a specific organization the way that someone really follows the team does.

I would rather have a pick in the range you described than #1. Having the #1 pick is actually kind of awful.

So you would prefer mediocre season after mediocre season?

The alternative I'm proposing is ONE horrible season as a stepping stone toward (theoretical) longterm success.

the talent difference between #1 and #7, except in very rare cases, is not going to be a deal breaker. A good organization will usually make the right picks, no matter where they are in the draft to stop mediocrity from being a long term thing.

I'm sure you're right about that. I'm talking about a specific situation where the player in question is local, loved, and really damn good. AND the team needs someone who plays his position.

Lose 16 games, draft Locker, reinvigorate the team.

Win 5 games, suffer through the next decade with Charlie Whitehurst and then whoever they replace him with.

And then watch Locker either...

A) Drift off into obscurity with the Raiders

or

B) Enjoy great success on another team outside of Seattle

(Kinda like when the Mariners passed on Tim Lincecum from UW...and have been kicking themselves ever since)

FTFY.

I know you're a Locker homer and would like to see him stay in Seattle from a fan's perspective, but there's always more than one way that a team can get better, and it doesn't always involve the first overall pick.

EDIT:
This won't happen, since thankfully the Patriots have their first round pick.

Tim Lincecum wasn't the first pick...I'm saying don't pass on the hometown hero. Because if they do have success, it will be appreciated more. Let's say that Luck and Locker are absolutely even in EVERY aspect of their game. Let's say they will both go on to have the exact same winning percentage for their pro career. The Seahawks will benefit more by having Locker in a Seattle jersey rather than Luck. They just will. People here love him. In my experience there are a lot of Husky fans who could give two shits about the Seahawks...and they would become converts (myself included).

Thread title should be "Question for NFL fans willing to deal with an unrealistic homer"

Thats impossible. There is no way they can be even in every aspect. And as it seems, there is enough pressure in being a top 5 QB pick. The added demands of playing in your home town just increase that. It also eliminates any opportunity for the coach to wait till mid season to start a guy.

the fact is, any QB who takes a moribund franchise and makes them a winner is going to be equally loved over time.

This thread sounds like bammer was drinking with some buddies on saturday.. and started talking about how the seahawks should lose all their games to get locker- and his buddies were like "dude, you dont even care about the hawks, shut up!"

Besides, this is a dumb year to even consider it, given that Mallett is probably better than locker anyways

Also...Aaron Rodgers? Kevin Kolb? Sometimes it's better to draft a guy a little later and let him develop before throwing him out there.

lol

wasn't rodgers bottom of the first round?