Next Draft - Ideas and Discussions

KM · Mar 26, 2016

Stobzilla said:
As far as Junkie-ing goes, I've already picked my team bar a centre back.

I need help.

You need AM?

MJJ · Mar 26, 2016

green_smiley · Mar 26, 2016

By the way, I am not playing

Moby · Mar 26, 2016

All Time Reserves Draft Signups:

1. Aldo Staine
2. Tuppet
3. Sjor Bepo & Invictus
4. Downcast
5. RedTiger
6. Stobzilla & KM
7. Skizzo & Pat_Mustard
8. Edgar Allan Pillow
9. Isotope
10. Enigma_87
11. BBRBB
12. mazhar13
13. harms
14. The Red Viper
15. MJJ
16.

Interested AMs:
1. anant

Stobzilla · Mar 26, 2016

Aye go on then @KM

KM · Mar 26, 2016

Stobzilla said:
Aye go on then @KM

Brilliant!

Moby · Mar 26, 2016

The Outcasts

KM · Mar 26, 2016

Sort out the font size ffs.

Moby · Mar 26, 2016

KM said:
Sort out the font size ffs.

Looks fine to me.

Gio · Mar 26, 2016

What's the approach here? Normal snake draft?

Ecstatic · Mar 26, 2016

Great job @Aldo

Moby · Mar 26, 2016

Gio said:
What's the approach here? Normal snake draft?

Yep.
I'll probably add a couple of restrictions maybe. Definitely cut off date of birth to say no younger than born in 1990.

Last spot left, if you are up for it. Should have some really interesting names brought up.

Downcast said:
Great job @Aldo

Thanks.

Chesterlestreet · Mar 26, 2016

@Aldo Might want to add a couple of names to that in the spirit of staging a real blockfest. I don't mean proper gems, of course, but there are some "suspects" not in that list who are just as "usual" in these drafts as some of the names listed.

I'd suggest both the other Andrade and Da Guia, for instance. No reason why they shouldn't be blocked given their relatively high status on here (especially Andrade - both of 'em could easily be classed as draft favourites).

Moby · Mar 26, 2016

Chesterlestreet said:
@Aldo Might want to add a couple of names to that in the spirit of staging a real blockfest. I don't mean proper gems, of course, but there are some "suspects" not in that list who are just as "usual" in these drafts as some of the names listed.

I'd suggest both the other Andrade and Da Guia, for instance. No reason why they shouldn't be blocked given their relatively high status on here (especially Andrade - both of 'em could easily be classed as draft favourites).

Yes I realised while building the list that there were some inclusions and exclusions that could be changed but I stuck to the theme and took the names from the first all time draft.
Nominations are subjective, I agree with yours but then it becomes trickier when people bring in more nominations and who decides whether they should be blocked or not. I asked for nominations myself but presently I'm unsure of modifying that list.

Moby · Mar 26, 2016

Tentative Start Date : April 4/5.

Chesterlestreet · Mar 26, 2016

Aldo said:
...but then it becomes trickier when people bring in more nominations and who decides whether they should be blocked or not. I asked for nominations myself but presently I'm unsure of modifying that list.

It's not a big deal - it just struck me straight away that one of the Andrades was missing. The list is so comprehensive, though, that there should be no danger of having the draft theme undermined.

I suppose you could allow each manager one nomination - or rather one block - in addition to the ones on the list. And once that is done, the list is final.

Gio · Mar 26, 2016

I'd make sure that it doesn't overlap with the current draft. I can't imagine half a dozen draft-related threads on the front page of the forum going down too well with the rest of the Caf.

Moby · Mar 26, 2016

Chesterlestreet said:
It's not a big deal - it just struck me straight away that one of the Andrades was missing. The list is so comprehensive, though, that there should be no danger of having the draft theme undermined.

I suppose you could allow each manager one nomination - or rather one block - in addition to the ones on the list. And once that is done, the list is final.

Yes, that's a better idea. We'll do that once the thing is kicked off.

Moby · Mar 26, 2016

Gio said:
I'd make sure that it doesn't overlap with the current draft. I can't imagine half a dozen draft-related threads on the front page of the forum going down too well with the rest of the Caf.

Nope, the thread will be started only once the final of the current one is done.
The reason I posted the list was that I had a bit of time on my hands right now to compile it alphabetically.
In fact only once the current draft threads have died down (not on homepage anymore) would this thread be started.

Chesterlestreet · Mar 26, 2016

Gio said:
I'd make sure that it doesn't overlap with the current draft. I can't imagine half a dozen draft-related threads on the front page of the forum going down too well with the rest of the Caf.

Was it confirmed that the mods aren't keen on too much draft activity?

Was mentioned a few pages back.

Moby · Mar 26, 2016

Chesterlestreet said:
Was it confirmed that the mods aren't keen on too much draft activity?

Was mentioned a few pages back.

It shouldn't be an issue. The concerns are usually raised during the time matches are going on, as a few threads can pop up.
Once the current one is done, and the threads have died down, it will only be the draft thread running for a while, so there won't be many threads cluttering the homepage till the matches start.
I also recommend keeping the thread titles of draft matches as short as possible. The current ones are too long and look worse than they should.

Chesterlestreet · Mar 26, 2016

Aldo said:
I also recommend keeping the thread titles of draft matches as short as possible. The current ones are too long and look worse than they should.

Good point. They're a bit of an eyesore, alright.

No need for it either, the involved/interested parties know what it's about anyway.

In fact, there's no need to include manager names in those thread titles at all: "X Draft q-f 3" is enough.

Moby · Mar 26, 2016

Chesterlestreet said:
Good point. They're a bit of an eyesore, alright.

No need for it either, the involved/interested parties know what it's about anyway.

In fact, there's no need to include manager names in those thread titles at all: "X Draft q-f 3" is enough.

Yep, I'll try this out in the next one.

Physiocrat · Mar 26, 2016

Yep. One block per drafter and can't be born later than 31st December 1989.

@Aldo

Have you any thoughts on how to spruce up the match threads?

Skizzo · Mar 26, 2016

Physiocrat said:
Yep. One block per drafter and can't be born later than 31st December 1989.

@Aldo

Have you any thoughts on how to spruce up the match threads?

You can only argue your points by drawing diagrams in Microsoft Paint.

Moby · Mar 26, 2016

Physiocrat said:
Yep. One block per drafter and can't be born later than 31st December 1989.

@Aldo

Have you any thoughts on how to spruce up the match threads?

I have a couple of ideas, and some interesting discussion has taken place on this. More input is welcome till the draft starts.
At the moment, I don't mind having a set layout - of sorts - for the team write up. e.g. you have to submit your team sheet in the following format:

Name - Position - Role

e.g.
Facchetti - Left-Back - Attacking Wing-Back
or
Schuster - Central Midfielder - Creative Playmaker

This forces a manager to precisely state what every single player's tactical role is in the team. Normally the "Tactics" part can consume content that should belong to Player Profiles, and is of little use in the match up. Instead of saying "my player won these many trophies and was so great at this etc" you rather talk about his projection in the said matchup and that is one way to enforce that.

Physiocrat · Mar 26, 2016

I like that idea. It makes your whole system very clear.

If you did that you could also make the opposing manager guess each other's set-up with the same format and make them submit it to. This would allow genuine curve balls to be played.

The only limitation I can think immediately is if you played Vogts as a man marker on Cruyff for example there's no indication on what he'd do in possession. So with man markers you could put a dual-role in.

Moby · Mar 26, 2016

Excellent upgrade to that, @Physiocrat . We can definitely have two roles - on and off the ball.

Physiocrat said:
It makes your whole system very clear.

Absolutely, moreover it will expose tactically weak teams even more. An out of position player or a player playing a role ill suited to his playing style would stick out like a sore thumb in the team sheet and can be easily pointed out. More emphasis on tactical side of the game and you won't be able to get away with flawed tactics.

Šjor Bepo · Mar 26, 2016

Physiocrat said:
If you did that you could also make the opposing manager guess each other's set-up with the same format and make them submit it to. This would allow genuine curve balls to be played.

The only limitation I can think immediately is if you played Vogts as a man marker on Cruyff for example there's no indication on what he'd do in possession. So with man markers you could put a dual-role in.

The only problem is, what happens if you miss completely opponents tactic but even after doing so you have the better team and tactical advantage....how will or how should the voters react with you missing opponent tactic and your opponent got it right. And there are plenty of tactics where its irrelevant how your opponent plays, you will try to impose your style of play.

KM · Mar 26, 2016

Aldo said:
I have a couple of ideas, and some interesting discussion has taken place on this. More input is welcome till the draft starts.
At the moment, I don't mind having a set layout - of sorts - for the team write up. e.g. you have to submit your team sheet in the following format:

Name - Position - Role

e.g.
Facchetti - Left-Back - Attacking Wing-Back
or
Schuster - Central Midfielder - Creative Playmaker

This forces a manager to precisely state what every single player's tactical role is in the team. Normally the "Tactics" part can consume content that should belong to Player Profiles, and is of little use in the match up. Instead of saying "my player won these many trophies and was so great at this etc" you rather talk about his projection in the said matchup and that is one way to enforce that.

So basically you want to football manager the game then?

Šjor Bepo · Mar 26, 2016

KM said:
So basically you want to football manager the game then?

no need for this fm style introduction but you need to say what you want from your player and what role do they have in your team. For example i put the mix of player profile/tactical role in my OP and it isnt to long, in fact think i have among shortest tactical OP in our junkie community

The Stain · Mar 26, 2016

Tactics/player roles in the write-ups are a step forward. Would get rid of the "make-it-up-as-you-go-to-suit-your-argument" posts. Just make a template for each manager to follow.

Then there could be a mod like Chester proposed that would take the opposing managers questions and make the managers adress the question marks.

Almost think there are too many posts in the match threads these days and this could cut down that aspect which i think would be good. Would possibly make scan voters/draft managers want to read the write-ups more and make a decision based on that. Don't really need player profiles and loads of videos in the match threads. They can and usually are submitted in the draft thread anyways.

Šjor Bepo said:
how will or how should the voters react

If you have the better team but the opposition got their tactics right that would make the game more even, just like in reality. Tactics play a huge part in football so why shouldn't they in the drafts?

Šjor Bepo · Mar 26, 2016

The Stain said:
If you have the better team but the opposition got their tactics right that would make the game more even, just like in reality. Tactics play a huge part in football so why shouldn't they in the drafts?

You didnt understand what i tried to say.....let say us two play the game, we put opposing tactics in our OP and i got it right while you missed it completely.
At the end of the day, you have the better team and even though i got your tactics right you still have the tactical advantage over me.....so me guessing your tactic and you missing mine was totally irrelevant. Its not important if you know your opponent tactics if you dont know how to stop it.

The Stain · Mar 26, 2016

Šjor Bepo said:
You didnt understand what i tried to say.....let say us two play the game, we put opposing tactics in our OP and i got it right while you missed it completely.
At the end of the day, you have the better team and even though i got your tactics right you still have the tactical advantage over me.....so me guessing your tactic and you missing mine was totally irrelevant. Its not important if you know your opponent tactics if you dont know how to stop it.

The tactics that you submit should be most important. Not sure what advantage it gives, guessing the opposition instructions more correctly, more than you can set up your team to counter them in your main tactics part. It would be up to each of the voters to decide i suppose.

Enigma_87 · Mar 26, 2016

The Stain said:
The tactics that you submit should be most important. Not sure what advantage it gives, guessing the opposition instructions more correctly, more than you can set up your team to counter them in your main tactics part. It would be up to each of the voters to decide i suppose.

To be fair I'm not sure that would work at all. If that was the case even in equal teams if you have the better midfield you'll win that advantage and the game respectively as you'll impose your tactics having most of the ball and make the opposition style and tactics irrelevant.

It doesn't work like that in real life as you can see in game positional changes, players interchange, switching formations and positions. It's not like impossible to switch during the game and you can even see this in the first 5 mins of the game depending on how the opposition set up

Moby · Mar 26, 2016

KM said:
So basically you want to football manager the game then?

Somebody gets it!

Yes, that was the idea. I was even thinking of adding the complete FM Team Instructions sheet as the template - so you need to specify paramets such as tempo, width, directness, what have you. It shouldn't be a big deal. It would make everyone not only be careful about the tactics but also show the rest of us how clear they are about it. At least in the upcoming one I am very open to try it out and I don't think many would have any issue. If anything it relieves us from writing essays to describe the same things and as someone said, scan/casual voters would find it way easier to read and reflect it in their votes.

The guessing the oppo part is more debatable and how much emphasis must be given to correctly guessing your oppo is something that can be discussed. That might be tougher to enforce and could be left out of the first trial of this system. But the instructions for your team - surely that should and possibly would be enforced.

Moby · Mar 26, 2016

Most importantly, it encourages a lot more discussion revolving around the match situation than stuff like x>y or X vs Y is a mismatch so I win. Sure those are all still part of the match arguments. Another reason is, I've seen at times that in a match, a manager who was careful in precisely elaborating his tactical side of the team vs one who just didn't get a disadvantage, because he bothered to talk about his tactics against which people raised questions, whereas the one who didn't say anything would have people just assuming according to their own preference on how that team would work and hence not raise any questions about it. That doesn't make sense, and once you are forced to detail your tactics you are more liable to any feckups and mistakes will be held against you.

Template or not, no write up is going to be accepted without precise tactical instructions. It's the primary job of a manager.

Moby · Mar 26, 2016

Enigma_87 said:
It doesn't work like that in real life as you can see in game positional changes, players interchange, switching formations and positions. It's not like impossible to switch during the game and you can even see this in the first 5 mins of the game depending on how the opposition set up

It's pretty debatable and depends on what we are talking about. I agree anto went a bit too far at times when he said that you'd lose the game before you can make the change, etc, but there's some truth to it. Better if we talk in examples:

Say you started with a man marker to mark a specific player and that player doesn't start - obviously you are fecked if that marker doesn't contribute much else in the game. It happened in the EURO draft against @Joga Bonito (I think) who was expecting me to start Albert and had a detailed tactic on stopping him, but he wasnt on the pitch. At the same time, he made a valid point in that match up that while I surprised him by not starting Albert, he was at the same time one of the best players in my team and his absence directly would result in my attack being less effective. So it's tricky which way to go.

On the other hand, if you went wrong with minor details of the oppo say you expected them to play a high line and they didn't, sure you can adjust to that during the game. To enforce that, you'd have to submit a 'Plan B' to cover the tactics you think the oppo can go either ways with.

Anyway, this one is for the future, possibly not the upcoming one. It's an interesting one though.
The upcoming one will just have your own tactical layout.

Enigma_87 · Mar 26, 2016

Aldo said:
It's pretty debatable and depends on what we are talking about. I agree anto went a bit too far at times when he said that you'd lose the game before you can make the change, etc, but there's some truth to it. Better if we talk in examples:

Say you started with a man marker to mark a specific player and that player doesn't start - obviously you are fecked if that marker doesn't contribute much else in the game. It happened in the EURO draft against @Joga Bonito (I think) who was expecting me to start Albert and had a detailed tactic on stopping him, but he wasnt on the pitch. At the same time, he made a valid point in that match up that while I surprised him by not starting Albert, he was at the same time one of the best players in my team and his absence directly would result in my attack being less effective. So it's tricky which way to go.

On the other hand, if you went wrong with minor details of the oppo say you expected them to play a high line and they didn't, sure you can adjust to that during the game. To enforce that, you'd have to submit a 'Plan B' to cover the tactics you think the oppo can go either ways with.

Anyway, this one is for the future, possibly not the upcoming one. It's an interesting one though.
The upcoming one will just have your own tactical layout.

Well depends what criteria you put in. If we talk about real life examples then this example can't happen really. You know the team sheets in advance both yours and the oppositions, so you have still time to make a change prior the match kicks off. If we want to stress on more realism then 1 hr before the game you have to submit your team sheet. In that case you can reshuffle players positions and not man mark anybody.

Based on those team sheets and starting 11 you can adjust your strategy and tactics as well but you'll always know in advance who you are up against.

Joga Bonito · Mar 26, 2016

Aldo said:
I have a couple of ideas, and some interesting discussion has taken place on this. More input is welcome till the draft starts.
At the moment, I don't mind having a set layout - of sorts - for the team write up. e.g. you have to submit your team sheet in the following format:

Name - Position - Role

e.g.
Facchetti - Left-Back - Attacking Wing-Back
or
Schuster - Central Midfielder - Creative Playmaker

This forces a manager to precisely state what every single player's tactical role is in the team. Normally the "Tactics" part can consume content that should belong to Player Profiles, and is of little use in the match up. Instead of saying "my player won these many trophies and was so great at this etc" you rather talk about his projection in the said matchup and that is one way to enforce that.

I recall @Chesterlestreet doing something in a similar vein in the latest sheep draft, with his formation pic also tallying with the players roles. Was a pretty refreshing, short and sweet take on the usual conventional write-ups.

https://www.redcafe.net/threads/the...eet-vs-enigma-red-tiger.413041/#post-18583206

Next Draft - Ideas and Discussions

I’m afraid I just blue myself

New Member

:lol:

Dick

Adores babies

I’m afraid I just blue myself

Dick

I’m afraid I just blue myself

Dick

★★★★★★★★

Cutie patootie!

Dick

Man of the crowd

Dick

Dick

Man of the crowd

★★★★★★★★

Dick

Dick

Man of the crowd

Dick

Man of the crowd

Dick

Has No Mates

Full Member

Dick

Has No Mates

Dick

Wout is love, Wout is life; all hail Wout!

I’m afraid I just blue myself

Wout is love, Wout is life; all hail Wout!

Soccer Manager's Highwayman

Wout is love, Wout is life; all hail Wout!

Soccer Manager's Highwayman

You know who

Dick

Dick

Dick

You know who

The Art of Football