Fantasy tournament: World Cup 2014
- Thread starter Polaroid
- Start date
I'll play too if there's room.
Manager list for WC All-Time All-Stars
Jayvin
TITO
Theon
NM
Aldo
Anto
Gio
Crappy
Fergus
Pol
Did I miss out on anybody?
6 vacancies left
Maybe start next week or in Jan after the festivities
Jayvin
TITO
Theon
NM
Aldo
Anto
Gio
Crappy
Fergus
Pol
Did I miss out on anybody?
6 vacancies left
Maybe start next week or in Jan after the festivities
If someone missed out. Feel free to contact me for jointly running the team. I would need someone to sound out.
Pol, I assume it is supposed to be based on WC performances? i.e. Schillaci>>>>Messi not that anyone will take notice.
Yeah Pol confirmed that to me earlier in the thread. Like the idea for a couple of reasons:
- it'll be a focused appraisal of how players have fared at the biggest tournament of all. We can consider a player at an exact point in their career
- will be easier to have those horribly difficult cross-generational comparisons
I'm in too, but we really need to get the rules clear.
Exactly, the problem is most people take one glance at the lineups and vote...
You could probably pencil me in for it. Hopefully i'll be about next week though the January start would suit me better
How about removing Messi and Ronaldo from the draft?
And perhaps No limit on nationality, to make it different to the all-time draft?
And perhaps No limit on nationality, to make it different to the all-time draft?
Yeah, although constraints are always handy, particularly to get a good spread and something representative of the theme. Remember the decades draft? The 30s (and 80s!) really made people earn their crust.
Why not make it no more than one player per tournament on the XI/squad?
Of course, some players played more than one tourno... Which brings me to another mindblower: what about choosing the specific tourno? Do away with arguments over the players' positioning and form in different tournos by specifying which one it is. It follows someone could have Pelé '58 and someone else Pelé '70. Or is that too confusing?
Definitely need some kind of restriction but That could turn into a mind feck. Matthaus could turn up in four or five teams. And even Maradona 1990 is still a better pick than most.
Of course, some players played more than one tourno... Which brings me to another mindblower: what about choosing the specific tourno? Do away with arguments over the players' positioning and form in different tournos by specifying which one it is. It follows someone could have Pelé '58 and someone else Pelé '70. Or is that too confusing?
Aye if there's a restriction you'd need to specify the tournament and only one version of each player kicking about. In that case I'd ask managers to state the tournament of the player when picking, so they can't chop and change depending on how their choice is received. Not sure how well it would work insofar as folk would think of Matthaus in 1990, rather than in another tournament. I'm quite easy either way, the advantage of the openness is it allows combinations or team units to be built.
Exactly, which is why this is going to be extremely problematic.
I'm not even convinced that it would be wrong for people to vote that way, these drafts are supposed to be hypothetical matches (that is the way I have always seen them) and a front line of Messi/Ronaldo is better than Schillaci/Klose. In a hypothetical match they would be the better picks.
I also think there is a danger that the debates/arguments in the threads could get quite tedious if its judged solely on their performance in World Cups. Linked the that, there is the possibility for a lot of bullshit to be spouted when the data we're judging on is so small. By that I mean that you could get a lot of "but X was pretty shit in that World Cup, it was far from his best performances" and its unlikely that a lot of people will be in the position to refute that claim.
That kind of links to the tedious arguments point above, "no he wasn't, he was brilliant against Holland in that game I've never seen".
Yes it will be based on WC performances and will be emphasized in poll question + OP
Managers will be reminding voters too
There will probably be some voters who will ignore all that and vote based on league/CL exploits but unfortunately we can't really prevent that.
Adding Cal and Cutch, 4 vacancies left
Yeah, although constraints are always handy, particularly to get a good spread and something representative of the theme. Remember the decades draft? The 30s (and 80s!) really made people earn their crust.
Why not make it no more than one player per tournament on the XI/squad?
Of course, some players played more than one tourno... Which brings me to another mindblower: what about choosing the specific tourno? Do away with arguments over the players' positioning and form in different tournos by specifying which one it is. It follows someone could have Pelé '58 and someone else Pelé '70. Or is that too confusing?
Good to share interesting ideas - thought of going by tourney before but what do people think of multiple Matthaus in the same match?
Another idea I discussed with Theon - We can go by continents. At any one time, there cannot be more than 6 players from 1 continent for the 11 on the pitch. For players that represented nations from different continents, the nation which the player first represented at the WC applies.
In that sense though it's just another all-time draft. If it's having the World Cup spin then the likes of Scillachi need to be given credit for the form they were in during the World Cup. In practice I can see the vote splitting. Polaroid will emphasise the critera in the OP, the managers will argue the toss based on Messi's form in '10 or Scillachi's in '90, and folk will glance at the line-ups and vote for the more familiar XI.
I don't think I'm capable of being a manager on this but I could be an assistant. Only if it starts a week from now. Tests will be over then.
In some ways it possibly is, but its the only way I see it working.
It isn't really that its another all time draft that is the issue. The issue is that its another 'draft', by which we mean picking teams for hypothetical football match. As long as that is what a draft is - which I think it always is - then the issues above are always going to be there I think.
In a hypothetical football match Messi will always be the better option than Klose, for example.
The most fun part is the draft and if it is a mindfeck all the better! No, seriously, I would say you can't have the same player picked several times (e.g. one team having 5 Pelés
) but the one per WC makes sense, in which case if you try to squeeze Maradona as a 1994 player then... you have "Maradona 94", not "Maradona 86". I reckon that's fair.I know, that's what you sacrifice. But without something forcing you to pick over several WCs it will be quite boring very quickly with some staying true to the theme and others pandering to the masses (or their own WC experiences, mind).
The most fun part is the draft and if it is a mindfeck all the better! No, seriously, I would say you can't have the same player picked several times (e.g. one team having 5 Pelés
I thought it was more of a limit to the pickings. Maradona in the 1990 would mean he would be your pick for the 1990 WC. However, his WC performance would be valued as overall. It would be too complicated to vote on a whole team of players, each valued for a single tournament. No one who's voting would be able to comprehend that. You wouldn't be able to pick '94 Maradona and make people disregard '86 Maradona.
Well yes I think the best thing about the all-time decades draft was the spread of eras teams were built from.
Suppose you could also have a 1930-1970 and 1974 - 2010 split, e.g. minimum of five starters from both eras. And if someone bridged both then you had the choice. The main risk being it might get a bit woolly and nebulous with the pre-TV era players, but that's always the case with any cross-generational draft.
It isn't a particularly significant constraint. The beauty with constraints is it forces you to dig deeper. In this case, into WC history and the players that shone in the various tournaments.
Alternatively you could focus on trying to replicate Brazil 82/70, etc. but do we learn anything from it????
That was the reason I liked that idea.
As a world cup draft I think it would be great if there was the potential to recreate some of the great world cup teams rather than simply individual world cup players.
So for example Brazil 1970 or the 1982 Brazil midfield, team up Neeskens and Cruyff again for example. Try and get an all Italian defence, things like that. If you have too firm a constraint then you can't make/recreate the great world cup teams and partnerships
Yeah, I know. That's the voting side though and I primarily look at constraints that make the drafting more fun. There must be a balance, I agree.
Another option is establishing beforehand which WC a player is linked to (e.g. if you pick Maradona 86 is out) but that would require producing a list of truckloads of players!!!!
I think it's fair to say though it only really applies to a few token cases. Say you pick Beckenbauer, whichever World Cup you go for has tonnes of talent. Any of the Dutch players from 74-78 could easily fall under either. It is Maradona not taking up an 86 slot which would be a bit strange. That said, plenty of talent and outstanding performances in any of the WCs he played. I may be overcooking this.
One player per WC makes sense though.
Yeah, although constraints are always handy, particularly to get a good spread and something representative of the theme. Remember the decades draft? The 30s (and 80s!) really made people earn their crust.
Why not make it no more than one player per tournament on the XI/squad?
Of course, some players played more than one tourno... Which brings me to another mindblower: what about choosing the specific tourno? Do away with arguments over the players' positioning and form in different tournos by specifying which one it is. It follows someone could have Pelé '58 and someone else Pelé '70. Or is that too confusing?
Not really fond on that idea, but am open to having to specify a particular WC for each player picked, without anymore duplicates knocking about. It might be good in preventing the 'stat battles' that seem likely to occur and instead focus it more on the in game tactics.
As for constrictions, perhaps we could do a winners/non winners limit with a continent stipulation added?
There was an entirely different draft idea which would cater for that pretty well: one country per manager. Say you have Brazil, you can pick any Brazilian and no one can pick ahead of you. The tension of drafting goes out of the window, but you get a shot at producing All-Time All-Star National XIs.
A workaround could be to have two managers for the bigger countries (screwing each other up), which would make it more competitive for others. I volunteered to do Uruguay then, would love to see Hungary in it, although it basically is Hungary 54.
You could pick Maradona and when you put him in your list you specify the year in brackets.
Snow: Pele (70), Maradona (86), Ronaldo (02) etc. Wouldn't be any bigger problem to keep track off than the one player per nation thing going on in this thread.
I also like the idea of 5 players starting from 1970 and earlier and 5 players after 1970.
That's not a bad idea at all. I would merge it with Gio's and that would also have my concerns deal with:
- At least 4 non-winners
- At least 5 pre-1974 (if they played on either side the one with more WCs prevails, e.g. Beckenbauer is pre-74 while Rivelino is 74 and on as he played 70, 74 and 78).
Yeah, that was the idea. A bit convoluted when it comes to voting, like the pre/post better, see above.
Could be good, I think it will be fun for all the contestants but we'll all to have to accept a few odd voting patterns popping up etc once the games get going and not take it all too seriously. Will need a decent amount of time to prepare for the games too.
Just an option, can understand if people don't want to because it's sometimes hard enough gathering general info on some players, never mind narrowing it down to specific world cups, but the lack of a nationality constraint should make the players picked less obscure etc.
Not sure if its been said and thinking out loud but what about one player from each country, and 2 players per decade. Players that span between 2 decades can count towards either (eg: matthaus can be 80s or 90s).
30s - 1930, 1934, 1938
50s - 1950, 1954, 1958
60s - 1962, 1966
70s - 1970, 1974, 1978
80s - 1982, 1986
90s - 1990, 1994, 1998
00s - 2002, 2006
That would be a squad of 14. Reinforcements then have to take the place of an existing squad member
30s - 1930, 1934, 1938
50s - 1950, 1954, 1958
60s - 1962, 1966
70s - 1970, 1974, 1978
80s - 1982, 1986
90s - 1990, 1994, 1998
00s - 2002, 2006
That would be a squad of 14. Reinforcements then have to take the place of an existing squad member
I prefer the 5 pre/post 1974 idea for the ability to recreate some world cup partnerships or try and get a nationality theme running though the team e.g. an All Brazilian attack or something. It is different to the other two 'All Time' drafts that we did, as in each of those it was more about the individuals.
One per country completely shoots down partnerships as much as one per WC.
I like what you've done there grouping WCs by decade, two players from the 30s may be an issue with 16 teams (32 players, loads of crap and complete unknowns will be needed). Maybe 1 for the 30s though and 13 picks altogether?
I think some sort of rule must be in place with this spanning stuff. Let's face it, it's usually better players that span several WCs and decades, why should they be more flexible? Screw that, if you want prime quality it must cost as much as anyone else to fit in. In the case above, again, it could be which decade the player payed more WCs in. In the event of a draw the earlier one counts (usually the one when they are in their prime, e.g. Matthaus in 80s).
I like what you've done there grouping WCs by decade, two players from the 30s may be an issue with 16 teams (32 players, loads of crap and complete unknowns will be needed). Maybe 1 for the 30s though and 13 picks altogether?
I think some sort of rule must be in place with this spanning stuff. Let's face it, it's usually better players that span several WCs and decades, why should they be more flexible? Screw that, if you want prime quality it must cost as much as anyone else to fit in. In the case above, again, it could be which decade the player payed more WCs in. In the event of a draw the earlier one counts (usually the one when they are in their prime, e.g. Matthaus in 80s).
You know what's really boring? I can see all this patnership thing wind up being Xavi-Iniesta or Pirlo-Gattuso-de Rossi, or all five.
How about the decade rule posted by cutch and then amended by antohan, with a 2 per country nationality limit, which would allow theon to have his fun matching players from the same team to some extents?
The nationality thing set at two is arbitrary. Doesn't really serve a purpose in that it is broad enough not to act as a constraint and narrow enough to stop muppet dreams crystalising.
I liked your non-winner criterion myself.
4 non-winners + 2 per decade except one for the 30s World Cups (maybe at least one for each decade should start?).