Moby
Dick
Why so much outrage about the likes of Best and Cantona? They will end up being liabilities during discussions for those who picked them. It will hurt them a lot more than a few scan votes.
It’s just a game FFS, take your spirit of the draft way of thinking to things that ultimately matter.
Why so much outrage about the likes of Best and Cantona? They will end up being liabilities during discussions for those who picked them. It will hurt them a lot more than a few scan votes.
Fair bit of moaning about some of the picks, as @Edgar Allan Pillow stated should have created some minimum criteria. I think @Cal? is smart as feck to pick best and cantona and you’re all idiots for not doing it before him. It’s just a game FFS, take your spirit of the draft way of thinking to things that ultimately matter.
As mentioned earlier I would straight up not want to win unless I genuinely created the better team than my opponent. Picking players exclusively for scan voters just feels like it would be a shallow victory.Fair bit of moaning about some of the picks, as @Edgar Allan Pillow stated should have created some minimum criteria. I think @Cal? is smart as feck to pick best and cantona and you’re all idiots for not doing it before him. It’s just a game FFS, take your spirit of the draft way of thinking to things that ultimately matter.
I’m playing things differently in this draft and am building a team with very specific criteria.Some first rounds picks are surprising to say the least. George best? Roy Keane?
Ahhhhh, Peles' long forgotten substitute appearance for Burnley in 1972?Wait till I pick maradona and pele.
As mentioned earlier I would straight up not want to win unless I genuinely created the better team than my opponent. Picking players exclusively for scan voters just feels like it would be a shallow victory.
That would be pretty difficult because I’m self-employed.That’s why you’ll get stepped over for promotion at work lolzy, joking
Then you better demote yourself.That would be pretty difficult because I’m self-employed.
It was made pretty clear the players are considered at their peak during that period, not longevity.Fair bit of moaning about some of the picks, as @Edgar Allan Pillow stated should have created some minimum criteria. I think @Cal? is smart as feck to pick best and cantona and you’re all idiots for not doing it before him. It’s just a game FFS, take your spirit of the draft way of thinking to things that ultimately matter.
Again with the "masters" tag. Can we all agree that I shouldn't be labelled as such? How about "draft novice", "draft newbie" or (if you want to make me cry on derby day), "draft idiot".The spirit of the draft will not be ruined by 3 or 4 odd picks across 192 players.
If it's within rules, it's acceptable. Up to managers to highlight the deficiency. You can always tag scan voters in match thread and explain the non peaks. This was expected the moment, draft masters decided to go with no blocks, so nothing to be surprised or outraged about.
It was made pretty clear the players are considered at their peak during that period, not longevity.
Again with the "masters" tag. Can we all agree that I shouldn't be labelled as such? How about "draft novice", "draft newbie" or (if you want to make me cry on derby day), "draft idiot".
Shit stirring at its finest!Best and Cantona in the same team
Ahhhhh, Peles' long forgotten substitute appearance for Burnley in 1972?
Thanks@Arbitrium, I've deleted your post - no naming unpicked players, please.
It's a must. Dunno why it hasn't been implemented. With cut off dates you got to have minimum appearances otherwise it will be pretty confusing for voters. What he had for Seria A draft is more than enough - 40 games which covers 2 seasons minimum in the timeframe and resolves a lot of problems that can occur with the picking process.In hindsight, what could've been implemented is - say - a two season minimum or a minimum total of appearances.
But nevermind, I think Aldo's right - we'll end up seeing the proper representatives getting the plaudits. The players we're talking about here will be distractions (which is what I called them to begin with) at worst, which is fair enough - cutoffs being what they are.
I think the problem with the cut off period was that becoming synonymous for the standard for peak form on which everyone was judged.In hindsight, what could've been implemented is - say - a two season minimum or a minimum total of appearances.
But nevermind, I think Aldo's right - we'll end up seeing the proper representatives getting the plaudits. The players we're talking about here will be distractions (which is what I called them to begin with) at worst, which is fair enough - cutoffs being what they are.
This.With regards to the cut off date, the original idea was to keep 50 games as minimum but after a lot of discussion in the other thread both @BeforeKeanetherewasRobson and I decided it wasn’t worth the headache
We couldn’t keep everyone happy so decided to go with allowing people to pick who they wanted and then let managers argue it out.. Ultimately, everyone is grown up enough to make decisions here and judge players based on the criteria
And laugh at City?
And laugh at City?