Potential Future Rule Change

[sportznut]

I'm all for a lottery draft, especially if the NFL does it.


That said, I think you need to be careful on accusing people of purposely tanking. Purposely tanking, in my opinion, would be not starting the best player on your roster.


As I feel that this might be directed towards my season, let me point out. The Packers haven't made more than a couple draft picks in the past few years. I was always trading them away, knowing that one day, my all veteran team would need to be dumped. I did that last spring, simply because I couldn't compete. So, no young tallent, and trading all the veterans that had any value... ends up 0-16. I also, am not going to take the time to sign a bunch of guys to make my ratings a 3.7 instead of a 2.1 I just can't see that as worth the effort.

No, I'm not singling anyone out at all. As I mentioned, this has been going in since the beginning of these leagues.

I know from a personal standpoint in all the leagues I've been a part of over the years, the plan has always been to win. I've had great teams, and some bad ones. In some of my leagues, we have now implemented a lottery system for this very reason.

It makes everyone continue to be competitive since you can't just get rid of everyone. We obviously see a lot more 0-16 teams than you'd ever see IRL, and I think that's a problem.

[Onyxgem]

tanking doesn't always help either.

Indy is 0-16 in affl. i dont think he has any of his own draft picks anyway. So the loses don't effect him

Exactly i didn't plan on this season to turn out this way at all, but having a butt load of FA's at the end of last year and then Warner retiring didn't help things at all then add in some major injuries and figured it was best to try to rebuild after the draft i had last year rather than hang with the guys i had and win 3-4 games...sometimes it is better do have a plan for the future instead of hang around and win 3-4 games a year...

[redsoxfan31x21]

I really like Ben's idea as well, you should be able to produce at least a few wins in 3 years, maybe base that number different off of how the team did before inheriting it, like if you inherit a 0-16 team maybe you only need 7 or 8 wins in 3 years. Or if you inherit a 2 win team, you need 10 wins or something to that extent.

I'd definately be against the lottery idea though. No disrespect, i just hate how the NBA does that, if you have the worst team, you deserve the first pick.

[sportznut]

I really like Ben's idea as well, you should be able to produce at least a few wins in 3 years, maybe base that number different off of how the team did before inheriting it, like if you inherit a 0-16 team maybe you only need 7 or 8 wins in 3 years. Or if you inherit a 2 win team, you need 10 wins or something to that extent.

I'd definately be against the lottery idea though. No disrespect, i just hate how the NBA does that, if you have the worst team, you deserve the first pick.

None taken. That's what these forums are for. Sometimes you agree, sometimes you don't.

The only issue I take is with anyone trying to compare this to real life situations. GMs of 0-16 teams IRL get fired. GMs of historically bad teams get fired. They don't here, which makes throwing away a season, much, much easier than real life.

I get the idea behind rebuilding. I've had to do it myself in various leagues, but what I'm talking about is the GM who purposely tanks to get better draft picks. That is different than rebuilding altogether.

Whether you trade off all your vets or not, you should always be trying to win as many games as humanly possible. Just my .02

[larry linke]

I am not a fan of "hard fast number rules". That being said, if a team fails to become competitive, it hurts the entire league. I feel that if the commish feels that a team is being mismanaged, the commish should form a board and discuss the matter. The offending GM should get the chance to defend himself, and the board could decide to terminate the GM, place him on probation, or take no action.

Larry
Minnesota

[redsoxfan31x21]

sportznut, and by trying to win as many games as possible would be ''required'' by meeting that limit of so many wins in three years or you get ''fired''. That would simulate real life more on losing gm's getting ''fired''.

[Adam K]

I am not a fan of "hard fast number rules". That being said, if a team fails to become competitive, it hurts the entire league. I feel that if the commish feels that a team is being mismanaged, the commish should form a board and discuss the matter. The offending GM should get the chance to defend himself, and the board could decide to terminate the GM, place him on probation, or take no action.

Larry
Minnesota

I agree, but. it is not fair to kill GMs just because of their record. It can be difficult to win without a starting QB in this league and some teams can carry two NFL starters.

I think if you can use the system - if the GM fails to win, but is honestly trying and logging in regularly, he should be allowed to continue managing his team

[dhaeman]

I'm against the lottery system but am ok with some sort of winning requirement.

[Shagg]

I've had alot of 1st round picks the last few seasons and have kept some and traded most away. I like my squad right now and feel like I'm starting to build something better. That said I haven't tank anything in the seasons I've been here but I will admit that I've let some players go I should have kept. The same can be said for alot of GM's here. It's a crapshoot and not everyone can be 12-4. Some teams just needed to maintain others have had to completely overhaul their team I see nothing wrong with that.

[Strategist]

I've had alot of 1st round picks the last few seasons and have kept some and traded most away. I like my squad right now and feel like I'm starting to build something better. That said I haven't tank anything in the seasons I've been here but I will admit that I've let some players go I should have kept. The same can be said for alot of GM's here. It's a crapshoot and not everyone can be 12-4. Some teams just needed to maintain others have had to completely overhaul their team I see nothing wrong with that.

Most people are talking about a team over a 3 yr period as everyone understands that you need to rebuild.