Next Draft - Ideas and Discussions

Edgar Allan Pillow said:
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 :lol:
Click to expand...

I like this too...Like playing chess with a partner you're not allowed to communicate directly with.

Third man to come in and take charge of the team once the drafting is done...
 
Edgar Allan Pillow said:
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 :lol:
Click to expand...

this is a brilliant one!
 
Chesterlestreet said:
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.
Click to expand...

No, I didn't force them to play them past R1. Also just realize I had only 1 legacy player. Having multiple Legacy is something that can be explored further. Bound to be entertaining.
 
You guys should do a draft where you pick the worst premier league players and people vote on who would lose. Have requirements such as amount of games played and never been relegated etc.

At least it'll be something different.
 
I welcome any draft with at least some rubbish players on the pitch. I wanted to vote in this one but I just had no real interest in picking holes in teams full of 11 GOATs. Much more fun when a few weak players are around and the manager has to find a way to mask over that weakness through his other picks and tactics.
 
Yeah, I agree with that. The key is to come up with a format that works - and is good fun - with that premise, i.e. the premise of having to field relative no-marks.

The sheep format is excellent for the drafting itself - but it does very little to spice up the actual matches. At best - if one might say so - it leads to heated arguments about the sheep themselves (which usually only means less focus on the overall team).

It's a tricky balance, though. For obvious reasons a totally under-starred draft will be in danger of just becoming rather dull.
 
4 clubs from 4 different countries - min of 2 players each club in your final team selection

select your clubs first, then the players

no duplication of clubs, no duplication of players

if you had 16 participants in this is 64 clubs, & no duplicates of players must get down to some weak links surely
 
bleezy said:
I welcome any draft with at least some rubbish players on the pitch. I wanted to vote in this one but I just had no real interest in picking holes in teams full of 11 GOATs. Much more fun when a few weak players are around and the manager has to find a way to mask over that weakness through his other picks and tactics.
Click to expand...
Yeah I agree. It was bit of a blooper to have no restriction in this draft in terms of time period. It sort of defeated the purpose of no-mate restriction.
 
I must say, there are some amazing ideas o here now. Well done to all of you who came up with them. :)

I think what we should bring back is a one-player-per-club draft with a blocked pool/restrictions or a Futures (youngsters-oriented) draft. I think both would be a good next step to take.
 
crappycraperson said:
Yeah I agree. It was bit of a blooper to have no restriction in this draft in terms of time period. It sort of defeated the purpose of no-mate restriction.
Click to expand...
Sorta yeah. Nice concept but probably needed more restrictions or a shorter time period. Look at the 7 remaining teams now (not counting mine of course) and they're all pretty awesome.
 
crappycraperson said:
Yeah I agree. It was bit of a blooper to have no restriction in this draft in terms of time period. It sort of defeated the purpose of no-mate restriction.
Click to expand...

No mate in a limited pool will be insanely difficult and not much fun at all. This draft deserved all time pool, though we could have done with a blocking round or two first.
 
I like the idea of lesser players but having complete liabilties can sink your team irrespective of how you set up tactically. What you want to reward is clever drafting and appropriate tactics
 
Edgar Allan Pillow said:
No mate in a limited pool will be insanely difficult and not much fun at all. This draft deserved all time pool, though we could have done with a blocking round or two first.
Click to expand...
Nah it would be great, that's the point of restrictions, to make it difficult. One of my fav. drafts still is Polaroid's WC draft which had crazy restrictions and really rewarded proper planning for that. Just look at this draft, people like Meazza were picked up in last couple of rounds, which is ridiculous. And also there was very little blow back for people who picked big names up front blocking other very good team mates of theirs.
 
Aldo said:
Yeah. That had insane restrictions nevermind the fact that the evaluation space was just WCs.

Let's have one absolutely insane restrictions one.
Click to expand...
I think Marty's idea is really good to be fair in regards to the next draft. Also I liked some of the suggestions here if we put club restrictions as well - like no more than 2 players from the same club.

Also having seeds when drawing the teams would be even better IMO. Say we have a group of first 8 and last 8 in the picking order and the ties will be drawing 8 team from the seeded teams against each other and 8 of the unseeded. Something that CL is using with champions flow.
 
crappycraperson said:
Nah it would be great, that's the point of restrictions, to make it difficult. One of my fav. drafts still is Polaroid's WC draft which had crazy restrictions and really rewarded proper planning for that. Just look at this draft, people like Meazza were picked up in last couple of rounds, which is ridiculous. And also there was very little blow back for people who picked big names up front blocking other very good team mates of theirs.
Click to expand...
The WC draft still had crazy strong teams from the first round onwards. The restrictions made the drafting fun, but the games were comparable to the ones in this draft in my opinion.

For example, I picked Schwarzenback as a sub with my 12th pick back then.
 
Physiocrat said:
I like the idea of lesser players but having complete liabilties can sink your team irrespective of how you set up tactically. What you want to reward is clever drafting and appropriate tactics
Click to expand...

Exactly. That's the tricky part.

Getting back to the sheep format again, what you get there is hardly ever challenging in an interesting way: It's basically just a handicap thing. You field a non-player, essentially – or more.

My initial thought is that the most obvious way to go is to force a significant number of water carriers on each manager: You need to deal with these water carriers and deploy them tactically rather than attempting to hide them away where they'll do the least damage.

ETA And one obvious format you can exploit to achieve this end (forcing managers to field water carriers) is the criteria one: Just operate with criteria that are hard enough. Six criteria which allow for top guns, six which all but guarantee a water carrier pick. You get your water carriers - and you reward the managers in the drafting stage itself for picking good water carriers (of which there are loads, and they hardly ever get to feature prominently in these drafts).
 
Last edited:
Aldo said:
Yeah one of the reasons I liked it was it sounded quite challenging, and can be made more difficult.
Click to expand...
Have been thinking of a few challenging restrictions to go with the idea so will make sure there is plenty of room for 'new' players to these drafts. Should make for some very good discussions and research into new players...some of which really deserve to feature in these but have never got a look in.

Like the idea of club restrictions too just need to see how it'll work with the other restrictions.
 
have you thought about some one creating a pool of players, there's plenty of tournament squad lists on wiki these days

you could be really mean & have 16 x 11 groups for each position, 1 pick from each group compulsory or something

GK, RB, CB/SW, LB, LM, RM, CM, WIDE, STRIKER - 9 anyway, bound to get 'messy' in some regard, do you do a pre Kick-off transfer windows for swaps?
 
Plenty of ways to mix things up:

U23 draft, players born after 1993
All-time women football draft
5 a side draft, fresh tactics and players
Geographical restrictions: played in Asia, Eredivisie, USA...
 
Balu said:
The WC draft still had crazy strong teams from the first round onwards. The restrictions made the drafting fun, but the games were comparable to the ones in this draft in my opinion.

For example, I picked Schwarzenback as a sub with my 12th pick back then.
Click to expand...

Not so sure. For example, I played Dunga-Silva in the quarters and gave Polaroid (who had Maradona, Eusebio, Moore, Rivaldo etc) a good game. If I am correct you played Cuelemans till quarters and he was not even picked this time.

Also players like Platini and Rijkarrd were picked but given little credit.

Teams in semis and final were very comparable to teams we have in quarters right now.
 
crappycraperson said:
Not so sure. For example, I played Dunga-Silva in the quarters and gave Polaroid (who had Maradona, Eusebio, Moore, Rivaldo etc) a good game. If I am correct you played Cuelemans till quarters and he was not even picked this time.

Also players like Platini and Rijkarrd were picked but given little credit.

Teams in semis and final were very comparable to teams we have in quarters right now.
Click to expand...
Yeah, there were a few exceptions, more or less replacements for the GOATs who didn't shine at World Cups like Di Stefano or Best. But they were few. Then you had 2 or 3 players in each team that stood out at World Cups but didn't have such an amazing career overall. But is it really such a big difference if you have the likes of Forlan or the likes of Vieri starting?

Look at Gio's team and he lost the 1st round match:
Polaroid said:
Gio. 1. Eusebio 2. Figueroa 3. Laudrup 4. Xavi 5. Keane 6. Da Guia 7. Briegel 8. Lato 9. Zagallo 10. Jorginho 11. Roma 12. Fillol
Click to expand...
Sure Lato and Zagallo didn't get picked this time, but overall it's really not that big a difference.
 
Balu said:
Yeah, there were a few exceptions, more or less replacements for the GOATs who didn't shine at World Cups like Di Stefano or Best. But they were few. Then you had 2 or 3 players in each team that stood out at World Cups but didn't have such an amazing career overall. But is it really such a big difference if you have the likes of Forlan or the likes of Vieri starting?

Look at Gio's team and he lost the 1st round match:

Sure Lato and Zagallo didn't get picked this time, but overall it's really not that big a difference.
Click to expand...

Mmm still don't agree completely. That team looks strong but you have to take into account that neither Keane nor Laudrup were at their absolute peaks at the WC. Keane was good in 94 but his peak came after that, while Laudrup too had his peak before 98. Not to mention Gio lost to Theon who had a very strong team right of the bat.

Anyway, the teams overall were strong then but still people did struggle with restrictions, especially the winner one, which was a real pain in the ass.
 
Edgar Allan Pillow said:
Are we having a women's draft?
Click to expand...
yeah.
qMHkVdYPZ156eHejSPB6q-8mPMY0d5Jsk29b80pyQw0=w705-h509-no

KAYLYN%2BKYLE.jpg


I pick Canada :D
 
Just putting this here as I was trying to work out fine details in my head, but wondered if it would even be worth trying to iron out :lol:

A squad number draft, which is basically what it sounds like. If enforced how I originally planned, it would limit teams a good amount.

You can't pick players who wore the same number for their club teams. So for example Cristiano wore number 7, so would block any player that also wore number 7 for a club team. However, he also wore number 9, so he also blocks everyone that has worn number 9 for their club team. Weighing out the pros and cons of going for a goat player who wore a "common" superstar number, blocking players for you later. Could also be tweaked to include internationals, or just limit it to one number per player. So you could choose CR7 or CR9, and keep the other number open.
 
montpelier said:
4 clubs from 4 different countries - min of 2 players each club in your final team selection

select your clubs first, then the players

no duplication of clubs, no duplication of players

if you had 16 participants in this is 64 clubs, & no duplicates of players must get down to some weak links surely
Click to expand...

This could be great.
 
Skizzo said:
Just putting this here as I was trying to work out fine details in my head, but wondered if it would even be worth trying to iron out :lol:

A squad number draft, which is basically what it sounds like. If enforced how I originally planned, it would limit teams a good amount.

You can't pick players who wore the same number for their club teams. So for example Cristiano wore number 7, so would block any player that also wore number 7 for a club team. However, he also wore number 9, so he also blocks everyone that has worn number 9 for their club team. Weighing out the pros and cons of going for a goat player who wore a "common" superstar number, blocking players for you later. Could also be tweaked to include internationals, or just limit it to one number per player. So you could choose CR7 or CR9, and keep the other number open.
Click to expand...

You'd limit it to actual squad numbers, I presume? As in, official squad numbers as announced by the club before each season. 'Cause otherwise it might be extremely hard to research beyond the fact that so-and-so undoubtedly wore number 8 on many occasions.

It could certainly work and might be fun to try. I would question, however, how limiting it would actually be in terms of avoiding star studded teams.
 
Chesterlestreet said:
You'd limit it to actual squad numbers, I presume? As in, official squad numbers as announced by the club before each season. 'Cause otherwise it might be extremely hard to research beyond the fact that so-and-so undoubtedly wore number 8 on many occasions.

It could certainly work and might be fun to try. I would question, however, how limiting it would actually be in terms of avoiding star studded teams.
Click to expand...

Yeah it would be limited to official squad numbers, that way it would be verifiable, and not "oh well he wore 11 in a pre season tour of Bangalore".

I haven't properly fleshed it out in terms of how restrictive it would be, perhaps I overstated it. I might take a look at the teams in the current draft and see how many overlap squad numbers. Another restriction can always be added, if necessary.

Edit: Just quickly scanned Joga's squad, and Law, Puskas and Maradona would block each other, and Zizinho and Stoichkov too. Didn't even look at the defenders yet.

I do agree that with squad numbers sometimes going quite high, there should be a good amount of options though. Hmmm.
 
Last edited:
I don't even participate in these - but I've come up with 2 ideas. :lol:

I think a Champions League winner draft would be nice - so from 92' onwards - could also include UEFA/Europa cup winners. It'll have a mixture of quality players and include some sub-par players, which would make it more of a challenge.

The other one is a bit different, but would work well with my above idea (as it would be relatively recent and a mixture of average and great players would make it challenging) - A director of Football and manager game - so basically you have 8/16 payers be the director of football - and 8/16 managers. The DOF's do the draft picks and the managers, who get randomly assigned to one of the teams after the final picks, get given a team, and it is their job to field the best tactics and do the best write ups.
 
Golden Nugget said:
I don't even participate in these - but I've come up with 2 ideas. :lol:

I think a Champions League winner draft would be nice - so from 92' onwards - could also include UEFA/Europa cup winners. It'll have a mixture of quality players and include some sub-par players, which would make it more of a challenge.
Click to expand...
Yeah we did a similar, but the reverse almost - a post-92 CL draft where you had to have x number of non-CL winners in your team.

I liked the Manager draft concept, particularly where you had a couple of participants vying for the same players, but with many players overlapping many managers. Something similar would be interesting, perhaps using nations, leagues or clubs to create a new slant on it.
 
Golden Nugget said:
I don't even participate in these - but I've come up with 2 ideas. :lol:

I think a Champions League winner draft would be nice - so from 92' onwards - could also include UEFA/Europa cup winners. It'll have a mixture of quality players and include some sub-par players, which would make it more of a challenge.

The other one is a bit different, but would work well with my above idea (as it would be relatively recent and a mixture of average and great players would make it challenging) - A director of Football and manager game - so basically you have 8/16 payers be the director of football - and 8/16 managers. The DOF's do the draft picks and the managers, who get randomly assigned to one of the teams after the final picks, get given a team, and it is their job to field the best tactics and do the best write ups.
Click to expand...

I like this. It's very close to what I've been tinkering with myself.

There are question marks, obviously: The dynamics of this half-and-half model might be tricky. I think, for one thing, you'd need to get the drafting part done quickly - with plenty of momentum. As half the players aren't involved in that part, you need to get it done swiftly.

One may also consider ways in which the DOFs could play some part in the later stages: No concrete ideas on my part, but something might be dreamed up there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.