I think it's time to pull a Euro 2016 and elevate the nr. of teams from 16 to 24.
Next Draft - Ideas and Discussions
- Thread starter Edgar Allan Pillow
- Start date
24 means group stages right? Needs to be 32 for elimination style matches.
The list filled up in about 30 mins. I'm OK if you guys wanna join me and make up The Terrible Trio.
I'd be in for it. Looks like I'll be around for a while longer than I thought I would be, so I should have time to dump into this.@Pat_Mustard always tries to fight the urge, but he gives in eventually
Are Edgar brain farts a non-negotiable part of your draft experience? Just so I know coming in to this
Are Edgar brain farts a non-negotiable part of your draft experience? Just so I know coming in to this
Brain farts? I call those unappreciated master plans! ofc they are
I'm in whatever is going on..
Brain farts? I call those unappreciated master plans! ofc they are
Then I'm definitely on board
I've witnessed a few first hand, but this is an opportunity to be a part of one.Me too...
Me too...
Let's run our own draft alongside to teach them a lesson!
sounds like a planJust expand it to 20. Then some genius will figure out the best way to go about things.
It gets trickier with any more than 16 sides.
The problem with going to 24 or 32 is twofold. First is that it could require group stages. We trialled them in the 50s draft but it was rather sluggish with the number of dead rubbers. For a 20 you could do 4 groups of 5 teams with the top 2 qualifying to give it an edge, but either way there will be flat matches and it's hard enough to generate interest and agree kick-offs at the best of times. A better alternative would be to do 5 groups of 4 teams and have the 5 first place and 3 best second place qualify for the quarters. Still that's a draft that will need 37 matches to run as opposed to the more manageable 15 we typically do at the moment.
Secondly, with a 24 or 32 team snake a turn 1 pick will vary hugely in quality and the order has the potential to really shaft some managers. Still the carnage could be nice to watch and I'm open to new ideas.
The problem with going to 24 or 32 is twofold. First is that it could require group stages. We trialled them in the 50s draft but it was rather sluggish with the number of dead rubbers. For a 20 you could do 4 groups of 5 teams with the top 2 qualifying to give it an edge, but either way there will be flat matches and it's hard enough to generate interest and agree kick-offs at the best of times. A better alternative would be to do 5 groups of 4 teams and have the 5 first place and 3 best second place qualify for the quarters. Still that's a draft that will need 37 matches to run as opposed to the more manageable 15 we typically do at the moment.
Secondly, with a 24 or 32 team snake a turn 1 pick will vary hugely in quality and the order has the potential to really shaft some managers. Still the carnage could be nice to watch and I'm open to new ideas.
I'm concerned that group stages will lose the draft momentum- drafts thrive on momentum. 32 straight knockout could work but especially with this forthcoming draft could be incredibly difficult to draft without having a very wide divergence in quality. With 32 there's by 32 x 12 players drafted which is 384 as opposed to 192.
We can have a 20 team draw. 4 teams (2, 4, 6 and 8 below) get a bye in Round 1.
Suggestions to even things out:
- The 8 teams playing the extra R1 get to draft an extra player in the initial draft i,e, they can draft 13 players instead of 12 to even things out, or
- the winners in R1 get to pick 1 reinforcement player that are not available to the Bye teams.
- The top 8 teams in drafting order (the ones who get the best picks) play the extra round.
or something like that.
Suggestions to even things out:
- The 8 teams playing the extra R1 get to draft an extra player in the initial draft i,e, they can draft 13 players instead of 12 to even things out, or
- the winners in R1 get to pick 1 reinforcement player that are not available to the Bye teams.
- The top 8 teams in drafting order (the ones who get the best picks) play the extra round.
or something like that.
im happy with just drafting.....find 3 more of that kind and you have a 20 teams draft
If it can't be extended to more players I'm happy to assist someone...
I think we could let people vote the groupstages without actually playing all games. Something like:
1. all teams provide a line-up with a short general description of their tactics
2. all teams get 100 words for specifics against each opponent in their group
3. post all line-ups/write-ups for each group in one thread and then let people vote for 2 teams, so that we get a ranking within the groups.
The 2 teams with the most votes go through, from the next round onwards normal knockout games like always.
Let's get the thread up!
The 2nd time I'm getting white washed in a final. First by harms I think and now by Stobz.
Well moving on. @Physiocrat let get your cracking.
Well moving on. @Physiocrat let get your cracking.
Group stages would be muck.
And I will not have my win detracted from, I have waited a long time for this shit.
And I will not have my win detracted from, I have waited a long time for this shit.
What's "white washed" mean? You won your final against me
I honestly don't understand why people preferred your side to mine in the SF.
Go go go
Sorry, it was against Joga in the euro draft.
I honestly don't understand why people preferred your side to mine in the SF.
I'd say both Pep/Busq midfield and tiki taka strategy contributed equally.
And I get the feeling some people don't think Cristiano works with Zlatan...
Nah, that's the least of your worries. It certainly is not dysfunctional. That was a crucial reinforcement round with very limited pool. Not many DM's there, but had you taken Dunga or Gonçalves, it might have been better than Busquets.
Yea, I keep having problems in midfield in the past few drafts...
Wait who wants an AM again? Didn't understand whose got one and who wants one.
I originally thought that was really bad but thinking about it with Zidane switching left it works better than I originally thought. The key thing is to sell, sell, sell your tactics, even more so than the players in some cases. This is especially the case with Pep and Busquets since most consider them both to be pivots in midfield.
I'd welcome one if anyone is interested.
@Marty1968
Put your new draft idea here, and put me into your reserve list as well. I'm really in the mood for a draft like that.
Put your new draft idea here, and put me into your reserve list as well. I'm really in the mood for a draft like that.
Will put it on here when I've sorted out all the exact rules and restrictions. Will include you on the list
Thanks, dude! I look forward to it.
@Marty1968 @mazhar13 Rather than on the criteria, I had an idea to change the drafting process.
We do the draw first! Announce the match-up's in advance, then get on with the drafting. So in essence it'll be a straight duel between 2 managers who'll draft to counter each other picks and strategy...and see who's the better drafter.
You can use this with your own criteria if you like. Thought it'd spice up the drafting process a bit.
We do the draw first! Announce the match-up's in advance, then get on with the drafting. So in essence it'll be a straight duel between 2 managers who'll draft to counter each other picks and strategy...and see who's the better drafter.
You can use this with your own criteria if you like. Thought it'd spice up the drafting process a bit.
That's not a bad idea. Not bad at all.
It's an easy-to-implement twist which could spice up a draft where the pool is a bit too familiar.
The format could - obviously - be followed throughout as well, i.e. the draw is done before the managers get to reinforce their teams.
If Marty's idea includes twists of its own (and perhaps a less familiar pool), however, it might be a good idea to keep this idea on ice - but I repeat that it's a good one and should be introduced sooner rather than later.
Another idea I had the other day is a water carrier heavy draft (theme can be anything):
Every manager has to face the challenge of a half formed team: You're stuck with a number of "legacy" style players you need to get the best out of - but then free to supplement a spine of sorts with your own picks.
The success of it would at least partly depend on having genuinely interesting legacy players (whom the managers would enjoy researching - in other words, not sheep by any stretch), but that would be a challenge for the draft master (plus a committee, likely).
The idea would obviously be to create more tricky match-ups, where the manager has to figure out ways to use players he hasn't hand picked. The caretaker draft, if you will.
Finally, I'm looking into a couple of ideas which experiment further with the voting system: Nothing concrete yet, but I will post whatever I come up with in due time.
Every manager has to face the challenge of a half formed team: You're stuck with a number of "legacy" style players you need to get the best out of - but then free to supplement a spine of sorts with your own picks.
The success of it would at least partly depend on having genuinely interesting legacy players (whom the managers would enjoy researching - in other words, not sheep by any stretch), but that would be a challenge for the draft master (plus a committee, likely).
The idea would obviously be to create more tricky match-ups, where the manager has to figure out ways to use players he hasn't hand picked. The caretaker draft, if you will.
Finally, I'm looking into a couple of ideas which experiment further with the voting system: Nothing concrete yet, but I will post whatever I come up with in due time.
I did something similar in Reality Draft. Had 3 legacy players who can't be dropped and team built around them. The feedback was good, so we could explore that further.
Considering the discussions around AM's and time wasting during draft picks....here's another weird one: The Telepathy Draft.
Small one, just 8 teams to start with. Each team will have 2 co-managers. They'll have to alternatively pick without talking to each other. No convo/talking in common threads etc. Blind picks with both trying to guess and fit with each other's draft. Can't get weirder, huh
Small one, just 8 teams to start with. Each team will have 2 co-managers. They'll have to alternatively pick without talking to each other. No convo/talking in common threads etc. Blind picks with both trying to guess and fit with each other's draft. Can't get weirder, huh
Right! I forgot about that - did you force 'em to play their legacy boys beyond the first round?
I guess what I'd really like to explore further is the pure art of composing the best team you can out of players who aren't even necessarily that much to your liking. Perhaps a highly specialized mini-draft, where a group of managers have to take charge of teams composed by others - something along those lines.
Could lead to many "poor man's Vieri" moments when people try to sell their given lot.