|
|
Post by Admin on Jul 28, 2020 5:36:40 GMT
Draft Order
|
|
|
|
Post by Jets and Chargers on Jul 29, 2020 3:56:52 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Ryan D (Ravens & Redskins) on Jul 29, 2020 4:46:42 GMT
Good by me. I approve.
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jul 29, 2020 13:30:17 GMT
I vote no. The defenses from the 4 teams being disbanded should be part of the dispersal draft. That is how it was done in 2016. Draft picks owned by the teams being disbanded were also part of the dispersal draft. This is also inconsistent with how it was done in 2016. The Committee should explain its reasoning for changing the rules from 2016 to 2020.
Teams in the lottery, many of which did not even complete their full allotment of 16 scheduled games, should not benefit in any way from the 4 teams disbanding. This is especially true if the 4 defenses are thrown into the regular defensive draft.
|
|
|
|
Post by pbisiules on Jul 29, 2020 14:24:52 GMT
I approve
As outlined, I agree there should be one draft for defenses such as outlined in the document where the disbanded teams are receiving lottery picks for a defense.
|
|
|
|
Post by huntleybrian8 on Jul 29, 2020 15:21:36 GMT
I vote yes to the proposal
|
|
|
|
Post by Ryan D (Ravens & Redskins) on Jul 29, 2020 19:04:15 GMT
My vote is never going to be to solely benefit myself, its just not who I am. My vote will always go towards what I think is best for the league going forward. (ie, voting for generic average defenses when I had Jacksonville)
Having some experience under my belt, I think there are improvements to be made on how we did the dispersal draft previously.
Any new player, either from another league or a Strato-virgin, will have no concept of value regarding the team defensive cards because 1. They have never played or 2. We are the only draft league that uses stock defenses.
One of the most enjoyable things is drafting in the first round. This was not something provided to the prior dispersal teams - and I disagree with how that was handled. I strongly believe that each new team should get their own full compliment of picks to do with as they see fit.
I gave my thoughts to Rich for his proposal and while not all were considered, I believe his proposal is very fair and equal going forward. The ideas need to fit any future dispersal scenario, whether it may be a strong talent pool or weak. I have a hard time believing this would be an issue if there were four Poor/Poor quality defenses being dropped.
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jul 29, 2020 19:18:20 GMT
I agree with your last sentence Ryan. I just spoke to Rich and will not post any more on this topic. My vote will remain no. Thanks for the comments. I will delete my earlier comment.
|
|
|
|
Post by John on Jul 31, 2020 12:22:34 GMT
I vote yes.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pat Hoglund on Jul 31, 2020 14:52:44 GMT
I vote Yes
|
|
|
|
Post by allday28 on Aug 3, 2020 18:28:38 GMT
yes
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 5, 2020 0:43:26 GMT
yes
|
|
|
|
Post by lugoboss on Aug 5, 2020 2:33:17 GMT
I vote yes
|
|
|
|
Post by Cowboyz on Aug 6, 2020 0:36:41 GMT
I approve
|
|
|
|
Post by John on Aug 7, 2020 20:34:15 GMT
I believe the thinking is that the pool of players available in the dispersal draft is better in quality than the league average. Brent has held the Ravens and Steelers for over 2 decades and every year one or both of those defenses has been among the top defenses in the league. This upcoming season is no exception.
This way gives non-playoff teams a better shot at a better defense and the dispersal draft teams a chance also.
|
|
