 |
|
|
|
|
|
Oleg the Finn
Headbanger
3322 posts
|
|
|
 |
Posted - 3/30/2017 8:43:41 AM |
 |
 |
2017 Realignment and Beyond
|
|
|
|
Now that we are officially entering the 2017 season, it's time to determine how we will handle the divisional realignment.
I. INITIAL IDEA
The initial idea was to do a Realignment Draft and have the four "worst" teams serve as captains who would do a schoolyard pick of the remaining eight teams. However, after doing some preliminary play testing and running through scenarios it seems that the result is actually counter to the intention of providing more divisional parity.
For the sake of discussion, let's simply assign ranks of 1-12 to the twelve teams. Teams 9, 10, 11, and 12 would serve as the divisional captains. Team #12 would pick first from the pool of 1-8 teams, and generally speaking the divisional captains would have the strategy of picking the lower ranked teams first. The result of this would be these divisions:
Division A: 12, 8, 1
Division B: 11, 7, 2
Division C: 10, 6, 3
Division D: 9, 5, 4
As you can see, the results actually go against what we are hoping to accomplish. If we look at the league in terms of three different sets of teams (1-4, 5-8, 9-12), the top seeded team would get the worst teams in the other two sets of teams (1, 8, 12). As can be seen in these breakouts, we would actually be making it even easier for the top teams.
II. REVISED IDEA
One idea to remedy this would be to do a second round reversal and have the #12 team pick first in the second round of the realignment draft. If we did that, this would be the general configuration:
Division A: 12, 8, 4
Division B: 11, 7, 3
Division C: 10, 6, 2
Division D: 9, 5, 1
This is clearly a better result as compared to using a serpentine drafting approach.
III. BUBBLE IDEA
A third idea emerged from all of this play testing: Progressive Difficulty. In the NFL, the league schedule is annually crafted so that the more successful teams have a harder schedule. This can be accomplished in Ragnarok by having a bubble approach to how divisions are organized:
Division A: 1, 2, 3
Division B: 4, 5, 6
Division C: 7, 8, 9
Division D: 10, 11, 12
Each season, the teams would be re-ranked and divisions would be realigned. The ranking would be performed by a straightforward formula that measures past performance metrics such as W-L, YTD points by starters, and/or final season positions. This formula should probably encompass the previous two years of measurements in order to reduce volatility. The result would be that based on performance, teams would annually rise or fall between divisions. This could be a brilliant idea that injects progressive difficulty while also introducing more fun and inclusion for the 7-12 teams (something that I have been advocating for 10 years). In this system, the main playoff wildcard tiebreaker for teams with the same record would go to the team in the "higher" division.
CONCLUSION
Let's take our time and really think about these possible approaches, and in particular let's try to think of any unintended consequences from each of these ideas. We want to go about this deliberately and carefully. Also, let's try to come to a consensus by June at the latest.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 3/30/2017 9:00:57 AM |
|
|
What about a 10 team, 2 division league?
|
|
|
|
Only on the assumption that we do not have TWO owners waiting in the wings. It would deepen the FA pool a bit, and allay some of the draft issues that have come up in the past.
I only mention this as another option. In response to realignment, I see the issues about drafting divisions. I kinda like the RADICAL IDEA where divisions evolve and morph each season. It would really keep each season fresh and unique, with a personality of their own from year to year.
I'm not saying 10 team league is the best, and I wouldn't die on that configuration, but the 10 existing teams seem to be locked in as lifers. And yes, I'm talking about Fantasy Football while my student directors teach my class.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 3/30/2017 9:48:09 AM |
|
|
Some initial thoughts
|
|
|
|
I would hate to lose the entire concept of the realignment draft, just because it seems like not only a creative and brilliant idea, but one that embodies everything that makes Ragnarok unique. I'd rather look at ways to tweak the realignment draft rather than try something else entirely.
I do agree that when one "mocks" the realignment draft, the comparative strengths of the divisions do not seem even enough. I also agree that the second round reversal seems to remedy this problem quite well and would be in favor of this.
It's probably also worth noting that there are a LOT of unknown factors here with any of these options. For the realignment draft, we don't know what strategies the divisional captains would use when drafting their future division-mates (which is part of what I think makes this idea so neat), and even if they were to all decide to draft the weakest available teams, their criteria could be different (for example, how much weight would be placed on the owner vs the incumbent franchise/rookie keepers?). Would some owners ignore team strength altogether and draft their closest buddies? Would they draft their biggest rivals to get two games per season against each other? Or would some owners draft teams they haven't been paired with before?
My point is--there's no set formula for this, which is really fucking cool. If the divisional captains adopt different strategies--or even if they use the same strategies but their criteria are different--the entire scenario outlined in the mock divisions goes out the window. I'd argue this is more likely than not.
So to sum up, I'd vote for the REVISED IDEA, but I'm not necessarily against any of the three. If there is a league consensus for one of the other ideas--or even a fourth idea that hasn't been tabled yet--I'll happily go along with it. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 3/30/2017 10:08:22 AM |
|
|
I'm a little confused with the first example
|
|
|
|
According to the rules page, the team with the worst overall record gets to choose their slot first for the realignment draft. If picking 4th is the most desirable position, why would that person choose to pick first? That being said just looking at it using slot numbers doesn't make 9,8,1 seem a whole lot different than 12,8,1 for the person in the 1 slot. It might look different if we see what teams are actually in the slots.
Before making any decisions, can we at least see a listing of the realignment draft standings with full records and point totals?
Of course, the assumption that we will have 1 or 2 new owners this season would change how things look. But it would still be helpful to see how it stands based on last season's owners. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 3/30/2017 10:09:25 AM |
|
|
Fuckin Koo
|
|
|
|
I agree with Sean. I would be surprised if those choosing did so in a logical, void of emotional, intelligent, predictable manner. Snake draft the divisions, make sure Splitters and Koo are in the same division, Kent goes nowhere, find another player. Peace and suck it,
Joe |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Aebleskiver
Cleats
259 posts
 |
Fu: 100.48 |
|
|
|
|
Posted - 4/5/2017 6:20:50 AM |
|
|
Revised
|
|
|
|
| I like this best too. The radical idea does away with the human element. No surprises, where's the fun in that? I also don't care about seeing any educated rankings with actual factual info. Draft from the heart brothers! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 4/5/2017 6:08:55 PM |
|
|
(Radical) Human Element vs. numbers
|
|
|
|
I was actually looking past the data. I was more excited to see a new element of each draft weekend, joining a new division each year with you lugs, maybe the same, maybe different. The human element will always be there. We would simply look forward to a new "tribe" so to speak, each year. Based on stats? Sure. But once the season starts, all that shit falls away.
Just throwing that out there... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Coach Cowher Tomlin
Football Freak
997 posts
|
Fu: 100.96 |
|
|
|
|
Posted - 4/5/2017 7:35:34 PM |
|
|
Brokeback Fantasy Football Draft Weekend Tiki Bar Extravaganza Jamboree II
|
|
|
|
| Fuck. I can't quit you guys. Mark Me down as a Lifer. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 4/5/2017 8:01:32 PM |
|
|
Welcome Back Kent
|
|
|
|
| It feels like you were never gone. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 4/7/2017 2:16:53 AM |
|
|
Division thoughts
|
|
|
|
| I think chaos is the way to go. I want to play two games against the the teams I want to beat most. Again, winning is great, but if your Sean, it's gotta feel a little empty knowing that everyone else knows that he can't hold his liquor and that is his primary advantage. So, keep winning Sean. Your my first pick. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Coach Cowher Tomlin
Football Freak
997 posts
|
Fu: 100.96 |
|
|
|
|
Posted - 4/7/2017 1:31:00 PM |
|
|
Chaos rules!
|
|
|
|
| I know who would be my first pick and it has nothing to do with stats or logic. Big surprise, huh? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 4/7/2017 1:36:31 PM |
|
|
Not responding directly to Billy...
|
|
|
|
but letting Patrick Roy do it for me:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NaiN8HjEy74 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 4/7/2017 1:45:16 PM |
|
|
Great clip!!
|
|
|
|
Here is some footage of Sean last time he had 2 beers in 1 hour. No wonder he drinks Corona light!
https://youtu.be/1-zQ7c757cs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/4/2017 9:23:06 PM |
|
|
Realignment: What is 'Fun?'
|
|
|
|
The lengthy and enthusiastic discussion about the upcoming Ragnarok realignment has been great. We've been officially talking about this since last season's draft, and with particular gusto once the offseason began. Kudos and thanks to everyone for their thoughts and input!
One of the main motivations that shows itself time and again is that we all want to have "fun." We want the realignment to be fun and we want the league to be fun.
What's odd is that we basically have two realignment proposals, and the adjective "fun" seems to have been unquestionably applied to why a schoolyard pick approach is appealing. The more that I think about it, the more I think that it's not actually "fun" at all. Once could even make a case for how it is mean spirited.
What on earth am I talking about? There's basically going to be two parts to the theoretical "fun" factor in the schoolyard pick scenario. Part One is the actual realignment draft. Part Two is the four years of living with it.
Part One will be eight (8) picks and then it is done. Five minutes and it's over for four years.
Part Two will basically distill itself down to smack talking in the vein of, "*Neener-neener*, so-and-so knocked you out of the playoffs and you picked them to be in your division!" Or, "Haha, you were picked last (i.e first)." Like, there's really no positivity or "fun" about it when it’s only serving as a vehicle for shit talking, and there's really no other play to make in terms of using the realignment draft as a source of a joke except for being negative.
I also don't really agree with the sentiment that this approach creates rivalries. To be honest, I can't think of any chapter in time where any of my divisions created rivalries for me besides as demanded by simple mathematical necessity.
And so I've been looking at the arguments in support of a schoolyard pick approach, and speaking for myself I don't think that they ring true. I think it's actually the opposite of fun and it is mean spirited in practice.
I do know what I think would be really fun, though: Being placed in a new division every season. And being placed in a division of my peers strictly based on performance.
Each season, we would have the potential to either move up or down the divisional ladder and it would mean something. I'd be excited to see what each new season will bring. I would be happy when I jumped up a rung, and even more motivated to do better if I dropped down a rung. Each season, I am placed into a group of three (3) teams who are my historical equals over the previous two seasons. I would definitely want to prove myself to be better than my objectively measured divisional peers.
Even more importantly, it would radically improve our overall game design in a few amazing and elegant ways.
1. Progressive difficulty baked into the schedule, just like the NFL
2. Fun playoffs with new blood each season
3. More talent parity when it comes to distributing the top blue chip players available in each season's draft
I strongly believe that the schoolyard pick approach is inherently broken and also mean spirited at its core. I hope that the proposal to have a ladder system is looked at with an open mind and that the huge payoffs for our league won't be discounted or dismissed. And when it comes to the "Fun" factor, I don’t even think that it's close.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/4/2017 9:52:20 PM |
|
|
"Fun"?
|
|
|
|
| Nice try. "Fun" is talking shit. "Fun" is rubbing it in. "Fun" is picking the teams you want to beat most and putting them in you're own division. Why do you think you go through all the time to create funny PowerPoint slides equating Koo to global warming? No matter who is in any division, to be successful you need 3 things: Luck, some sucker to take a bad trade at some point during the draft/season and LUCK. This is the only time of the year when we can act like "school yard" hooligans and not be shamed. Let's have FUN, walk through a screen door and pick our division. Then let's start the draft. So simple, it might just be fun. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/5/2017 8:26:02 AM |
|
|
My two cents.
|
|
|
|
I think this is a lot of speculation on what idea is best. In my other league we would randomly draw from a hat each year. Not my idea, but it seemed to be a fair solution to some complaints. After the third year we dismissed it due to the fact that Dave had picked number 12 all three years. You only get one shot for an entire year. I love the 'school yard pick' idea, but three years of anyone being picked last is not fun. Having to publicly say that isn't fun either. And, the person who made the second of last choice is the one who actually decides, but passes the buck onto the last person. This is about friendly competition and I think it could get out of hand with only one person getting hurt. It is just a thought. On the other hand, I suggested that we try the tier system for a year or two to see if we like it. It is only a one year commitment unlike the schoolyard, it should be at least three years in my opinion. If we feel it is broken, reopen the discussion. On the tier system, I would like to see some sort of group 'power' happen. Maybe, if you at in the last group, all three have to make the Saturday breakfast! If you are in the first group you get to pick your seat. ( I would love to actually take Kents seat at the poker table!) But an idea for each group would be fun.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/5/2017 11:33:27 AM |
|
|
Realignment
|
|
|
|
I have been a supporter of the Bubble idea from the beginning. I agree with Keith that the school yard pick is five minutes with one or maybe two punchline picks, then we're locked in for better or for worse. I think the fun we're talking about is the regular season matchups across 15 full weeks!
Division A: 1, 2, 3
Division B: 4, 5, 6
Division C: 7, 8, 9
Division D: 10, 11, 12
If you look at the Bubble realignment above, we always get a representative from ALL FOUR "tiers" in the Playoffs plus two bonus teams. So 10-12 is guaranteed a presence every year! It's not just the same top 1-3 or 4 owners. I know the immediate reaction is win or go home... and we've done that. You don't need to be a rocket scientist to know which owners typically post season in the winners bracket every year. But I'd also say the owners 10-12 aren't cake walks either. And their work deserves a chance to flower. The only time cake walks occur is when guys play positions with byes, or injured players. That doesn't mean we have patsy teams. We don't.
But let's look at Division A closer: Let's just say 1-3 is the Koo, Medical Center, and The Gamblers (They were 1-3, respectively last year). This scenario removes any assumption that they all would be in the playoffs (although still possible!), or have a division where they can speed out to 2-3 games and hold position to earn the pass, (again) which any team could STILL do! Stu is a badass owner. HE drafts amazing teams. But he wins our division almost every year. (I'm sure that's fun for him!) Kent never got out of the gate, and I was always one step back. He was in the driver’s seat, which is something I think we can all say is a position we don’t really want an owner to have. So let's dig deeper...
Let's look at the W-L records last year for three other teams:
Maulers: 4-9
Rush: 4-9
Mao: 3-10
In the Bubble Idea, they are a clear Division D. They all had struggles winning games for any number of reasons. But in this scenario, one of these owners gets A CHANCE to compete for a Ragnarok Championship. In this case, it would have been The Rush for more total points. And we all know, you just have to get in, and get on a streak! And luck, of course! Sure. And maybe the knowledge that a 4-9 record can still earn you a chance is all anyone needs to never give up! That's all we want, all we can ask for.
And this competition is exactly the same in all four divisions, because each year you are with two teams that have recent comparable results. Ergo, there is a new kind of fun that we have not had and that (I believe) a school yard pick will not produce. Koo had 11 wins. After that, Bass, Medical, and Gamblers had 8. If you didn't have 7 or 8 wins, you were sunk before we got to week 13.
Humor me with one more look: Based on the end of last year's W-L, let's say these were the divisions last year. The playoffs would have looked very different:
Division A
Koo
Medical
Gamblers
Division B
Rattus
Bass
Bruins
Division C
Splitters
Blast
Thunder
Division D
Rush
Mao
Maulers
Based on W-L and points, Division Winners: 1. Koo, 2. Bass, 3. Blast, 4. Rush
Wildcards: 5. Medical Center, 6. Gamblers
That's a pretty different looking bracket. And again, Medical and Gamblers might not have made out that well, if they are playing each other and the Koo twice.
To me, this looks way more “fun” than the usual suspects. Nothing against Sean and Keith, but oustide of Stu (and a guy who happened to win his first year, then shit all over it...) they have won eight out of the last 10 years. A decade of two owners. Again, I live with that just fine. But what if the Rush upsets Koo, and goes on a run and steals a cup!? That's what can and sometimes does happen in real life. And that sounds beyond FUN! The games in the losers brackets are just as high scoring as the winners brackets. Meaning, teams are competitive no matter which bracket they fall into. This way just provides a tiered LEVEL Division playing field. And every year, you are grouped with owners that provide you with competition that you have accomplished based on your recent history of success.
Whatever we decide, I will certainly get in the boat and row. But it will be hard to change my mind. I’ve thought a lot about this (obviously) and I really believe that this EVOLVES our league. It moves it forward. It really will make EVERY SINGLE GAME important, in ALL 15 WEEKS until the playoffs. We’re all worthy of the title: Ragnarok Champion. This doesn’t make it easier for us that have one or two, or never, nor does it make it impossible for the Koos and the Skullsplitters of the the league.
That’s a lot. Thanks for reading and thinking about it, rather than being blinded by a schoolyard scenario that locks us in for the next three or four years.
FOOTBALL! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Coach Cowher Tomlin
Football Freak
997 posts
|
Fu: 100.96 |
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/5/2017 12:24:26 PM |
|
|
I like the schooyard draft idea
|
|
|
|
| Why? Not out of any sense of "mean-spiritedness" proposed by a guy with an overtly racist tattoo on his arm. If I were a Captain, I would draft people I respect and enjoy competing against. My first pick would be Zach if he were still available. I love the guy and it has been great being Division rivals. I would have no problem picking Koo, because to be the best ya gotta beat the best. If the decision is to go with a system based on math (which is hard) so be it. I understand the concept of trying to increase parity and competition. I honestly don't care how it all shakes out, I'm gonna have FUN regardless. Here's my issue. Whatever Division I am in needs to come up with a kick-ass name. Not naming yer Division is lazy sad and lame. That needs to stop. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/5/2017 9:41:58 PM |
|
|
HOT TAKE - I have no opinion
|
|
|
|
| Just want to add my vote on realignment and say I legitimately don't care how it's done. Whatever way the wind blows on this is fine with me. They all seem fine. Hope you weren't burned by that hot take. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Head of Scouting
Gjallarhorn Master
529 posts
 |
Fu: 99.57 |
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/5/2017 11:18:54 PM |
|
|
Take this for what it may be worth
|
|
|
|
For the NFL to keep its fan base interested year in and out. It has developed a system that that has both kept long standing rivalries relevant as well as equaled the playing field for teams who did not live up to their fans expectations. What is this their formula that keeps millions of fans as well as we 12 coming back year after year with unbridled enthusiasm at the beginning of each new year?
We all know it, and if we look at it it really isn't that different from what Keith is proposing. Instead of realigning each year it just ranks each team within their current division and has them play their extra game against teams of equal rank.
So, what Keith is proposing isn't unprecedented it's just a different tweak on a old familiar rule. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/6/2017 11:00:27 PM |
|
|
some more thoughts...
|
|
|
|
Sounds like we need to put this to a vote?
I’ll admit my initial reaction to grouping by “level” was a no. I’ll also admit that I find the rationale put forth by Keith, Zach, Erik, and Dave is well thought-out and logical (shocking, I know). I’m still on the side of the schoolyard bully draft, but if the majority of the league prefers this other idea, I’m definitely more comfortable with it than I was before.
Having said that, I do think it’s worth defending the realignment draft a bit more, as I disagree with some of the arguments against it (and some of the arguments for the other idea can also be applied to this one).
Candidly, the most surprising mindset against the realignment draft (at least to me) is the notion that people’s feelings could get hurt. At the risk of sounding insensitive and, well, bullyish, we’re all grown men here (to varying extents, I know), every one of us has made fun of someone else in Ragnarok for some reason or another every year, and trash talking and fantasy football go together like Keith and racist tattoos.
No matter what we do, someone is always going to finish last. To use one of Keith’s State of the League one-liners, that’s pretty much a constant. And unless I’m missing something, we don’t worry about the feelings of the 12th place finisher at the end of each season, but suddenly the chance that that person could be selected first in a realignment draft has us concerned for his emotional well-being?
But here’s the thing: I don’t think people’s feelings are even in play here, because, as has been discussed, there’s absolutely no guarantee that a realignment draft would be done in order of “owner ability.” In fact, as others have stated, it’s likely people will be using different strategies/criteria for selecting division-mates, which is both what makes this idea awesome and unpredictable, and removes the notion that the special kid in the corner is going to always be drafted last (or in this case, first). To me, at least, it’s a total non-issue.
The argument that the fallout of a realignment draft would be worse because it lasts multiple years also doesn’t hold water to me—if we wanted, we could hold the realignment draft every year, right? That way divisions would be kept fresh—as with the other idea. There’s no rule stating that we would have to wait a certain # of years each time, is there? And if it’s as fun as I think it could be, that just adds another element of fun to look forward to at draft weekend each year. Or every two years, or whatever we decide.
But again, I think the most compelling reasons in FAVOR of the realignment draft need to be restated: a) it’s an original idea that no one else is doing (and I wish I could take credit for it), b) it’s FUN, dammit!, and therefore c) it embodies everything awesome about Ragnarok—yes, even more than the other idea. Even our current methodology has a degree of randomness to it, and that randomness adds an exciting element each time we realign. Grouping by owner level removes that exciting element.
The most compelling reason in favor of grouping by owner ability would appear to be from a competitiveness standpoint—and that’s if you believe competitiveness needs to be addressed, which is an important first question to ask. If I remember correctly, the idea of the divisional realignment draft was brought up out of fun, whereas the idea of realignment by owner level has been brought up based on competitiveness.
To me, this is a separate issue, and one that may well warrant further discussion. By no means do I want to dismiss it. But changing realignment and (indirectly, but importantly) playoff criteria seems like an extreme move when there may be other ways to level the playing field, such as how draft order is determined, etc. Hell, even my (radical) two-quarterback proposal could easily be seen as a way to level the playing field, as none of us would have any initial clue what the fuck we are doing.
Look, to others’ credit, I do think we’re in a win-win situation, as both ideas are better than what we currently have in place. But in the spirit of a pre-Trump America, I think the right thing to do would be to put this to a league vote. And if grouping by owner level wins out, I’ll be happily on board.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Coach Cowher Tomlin
Football Freak
997 posts
|
Fu: 100.96 |
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/7/2017 9:14:16 AM |
|
|
Schoolyard pick every year
|
|
|
|
I stand with Koo and Billy. Taking the human element out and basing realignment on some arcane mathematical formula may seem reasonable. Hey if the goal here is parity, let's just lump Koo Keith and Stu in one Division and give the rest of us a chance. But logic and reason are not what Ragnarok is about.
Let's review our history here people. This League was built on the idea that friendly competition involved trash-talking and getting yer precious feels hurt. I remember chasing Ron around Keith's living room with a folding chair because he was being as douche. I remember Bachman tossing said folding chair across the room because he was also being a douche. Gustafson used to regularly threaten me with purple nurkles and atomic wedgies. We had two former champions quit the League (Bashers and Cottonmouths) because they couldn't take the heat. Shall we revisit the idiot that Keith and I worked with that asked our Commissioner "What are we paying you for?".The dog pile on the rabbit after that wasn't pretty. And don't even get me started on the whole Pflooger thing.
I've had cat toys dangled in my mouth and an entire game of pillow Tenga played on my head. Last year's draft introduced the exciting new concepts of tattoo trash talk and screen door dick moves.
What I am trying to say here is that FF is inherently cruel, vicious and prone to poor behavior. To quote Hunter S. Thompson "I hate to advocate drugs, alcohol, violence or insanity to everyone, but they've always worked for me."
"Nuff said", my brothers. Let's throw down. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/7/2017 10:50:28 AM |
|
|
chasing the dragon
|
|
|
|
i disagree that the league is built on "trash talking and getting yer precious feels hurt." i have no idea where that is coming from.
i do think, however, that Competition *is* a big part of this discussion and it is something that we need to take seriously and something that needs to be considered at this pivotal moment in history. i would even say that Competition should be the driving motivation for the entire realignment effort and discussion.
i've been saying for 15 years that there is something not quite balanced in our league and that we need to have more parity and more inclusion when it comes to distributing player talent. every time we've done an alignment it is with the intent of somehow trying to achieve something close to parity, and it always fails. Always. Fails. like Zach said, look at the last 10 years and you can see that there isn't balance. and it isn't because of drafting skill, people. give me an easy 3-1 divisional record every year and it's not that hard to get to 7 wins and make the playoffs. and get a nice top 6 or top 4 stud player in the following year.
we keep chasing the parity dragon, or at least i have been, and now twenty years later i finally realized that we will never catch it. we will never achieve "equal" divisions. and maybe that's ok with some people, but that's a huge flaw and it's not ok with me.
the ladder/tier/bubble system avoids the unattainable quest altogether. we don't need no stinkin' dragon after all. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Coach Cowher Tomlin
Football Freak
997 posts
|
Fu: 100.96 |
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/7/2017 1:35:27 PM |
|
|
Re-distributing talent
|
|
|
|
While I love the idea of franchise players and the rookie rule, if we truly want to create parity I fear that we may need to sacrifice the legacy component of the League and start with a fresh slate each season. Our Draft model already favors the better teams each year. Add to that the franchise aspect and you have pretty much weighted the dice in favor of the top teams for years to come. It really doesn't matter what Division you are in if the same owners get the top picks every time and get to keep multiple blue chippers for a year or two. That system is never going to produce anything resembling parity.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/7/2017 3:08:35 PM |
|
|
Kent!!
|
|
|
|
| Excellent point!! New number analytics draft every year. No Franchise players, no rookie rule. Winner of loser play offs drafts #1. Last place drafts 6th. Winner drafts last. That sounds like FUN! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/7/2017 3:26:12 PM |
|
|
Vote
|
|
|
|
It seems like some owners have dug in on one side or the other. It seems Guys are bringing up other issues besides realignment. Unfortunately, for the owners that don't care, they are the ones who are going to push this process one way or the other, through. Let's vote and see how it falls out.
But I'll say again, the human element IS in the Bubble Idea. It's based on how WE PLAY. How we select players each week. It's based on US, not a computer. I do think there is a point to Kent and the fact that rounds One and Two are in essence "picked" before the first pick of the draft. But we can't discuss that until we resolve HOW realignment will go. If the vote goes School Yard Pick, I won't complain. I respect all of the ways and means of Ragnarok. And Sean is right, we don't have to be locked in for 3 or 4 years with anything. But regardless, if we don't all move to one side, we'll spend all summer, making this the longest thread in the history of the site, trying to convince each other.
OFFICIAL MOTION:
I move that we post a ballot for two options for realignment: Tier/Bubble and Schoolyard.
I believe everyone needs to vote, and you should not be allowed to abstain.
Do I hear a second? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/7/2017 3:29:21 PM |
|
|
Second!
|
|
|
|
| All must Vote!! All agree to go along with the results! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/7/2017 4:01:14 PM |
|
|
My thoughts on realignment
|
|
|
|
I really like both systems, but I am leaning towards the "Weighted" system based on records. My reasoning is definitely based on competitiveness factors.
I think that grouping the top teams together gives a little balance to the league for those teams getting the top draft picks. Also, grouping the bottom teams together ensures that one of them will make the playoffs. In the schoolyard system, the bottom 4 teams are guaranteed to be in divisions where both of the other teams have historically done better than them over whatever amount of time we use to do the rankings. Granted they probably would end up in that situation under a lot of different options we could use - but the schoolyard system guarantees it will happen to all 4 of those teams.
The real question is how much of a difference will or does any of this actually make? I've been meaning to go back and check the first round or two of the past few drafts to see how much those picks actually contributed to their team's success or failure that season. I haven't had the time to do that yet. If you look at last year's draft, a majority of players taken in each of the first 2 rounds didn't live up to their draft positions. But I think that may have been a bit of an anomaly.
However, competitiveness doesn't need to be the driving factor in realignment. Looking at the two other realignments, one was done randomly and one was done by matching teams that hadn't been in the same division before. I do like the Schoolyard system as being a unique way of setting the divisions. I don't think this system would really end up with hurt feelings. Seriously, how much are any of us going to be hurt by where we get drafted? If there was anything to have your feelings hurt over, it would be for ending up as one of the people who has to chose. Those people know how their past few seasons have gone, so being told that they're one of the bottom 4 teams of the past few seasons shouldn't be any kind of surprise. What we'd be doing has absolutely no correlation to being the last kid picked for kickball during recess. Some of the comments against this system seem to be assuming the worst case scenario as being the norm. I don't think that is how it would actually turn out.
The other big issue that seems to be coming out is how long do we want the new divisions to last? As originally proposed, the Schoolyard system would be 4 years while the Weighted system would change every year. I think we've all realized that neither of those systems needs to be tied the associated time frames.
Whichever system we choose, we'll need to clarify the criteria for how teams are ranked. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/7/2017 11:12:52 PM |
|
|
Can't we have both
|
|
|
|
If the issue is not necessarily the grouping realignment but, from a larger perspective, overall competitiveness, couldn't we satisfy both sides by doing the realignment draft AND coming up with a way to improve competitiveness?
(Again, that's if the majority of the league feels that competitiveness is an issue) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/7/2017 11:21:44 PM |
|
|
Both ways...
|
|
|
|
That's different from a Three way. Anything can happen if you let it.
It has stuck with me to imagine a draft where every single player goes back on the table... That does sound fun. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Head of Scouting
Gjallarhorn Master
529 posts
|
Fu: 99.57 |
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/8/2017 12:04:07 AM |
|
|
holy smokes
|
|
|
|
There is a bunch of items, ideas and issue being brought up in order to bring more competitiveness to the league. I believe this discussion is exactly what is needed if change is going to happen or if we even want change to happen.
This first step is this, an open forum to spit ball ideas. Discuss the pros and cons of each. Hopefully finding the best resolution to this quandary. Yet, not changing it so much that it completely changes the league.
I do think a vote now is too early. We haven't heard discussion from nearly half of the members. More importantly the possibility of a better solution could reveal itself by more dialogue.
But since we are spit balling how about adding a second Quarterback and Victory points? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/8/2017 8:39:39 AM |
|
|
a schoolyard pick directly undermines competitiveness
|
|
|
|
we will ALWAYS have unbalanced divisions unless we use a tiered approach. Always. and having unbalanced divisions is not competitive by definition. it certainly is not a level playing field. it's surprising that radical, fundamental changes to rules are being considered at the same time that the schoolyard pick approach is held onto like a pit bull on a baby.
it's also not even fun. maybe it's fun for the four owners making the 8 picks, but i don't think it's fun at all for the other 8 owners. and not because of mean-spiritness; it's just flat out boring. five minutes and it's over, and then we'll have the entire competitiveness of the league determined by the four picking owners. it makes no sense to me. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/8/2017 8:44:10 AM |
|
|
Agreed.
|
|
|
|
| Not to mention, Kent has already said he's picking me first. No spoilers. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/8/2017 9:02:13 AM |
|
|
Put it to a vote!
|
|
|
|
| I am done reading the same two opinions. Talk about boring. Everyone who has chimed in multiple times has expressed their opinion. All are valid. I am ready to move on as are many of you.. However, I will not let this pass without a vote. I will put up a serious poll. 2 options, and a vote by 6/20 must be tallied. I do think it's fair for whichever way we realign, it only lasts for 2 years max and then it would be reassessed. Let's stop the parliamentary maneuvering and vote. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/8/2017 9:10:43 AM |
|
|
Agreed again
|
|
|
|
There's about a third of us who never/rarely visit here, so they may need an extra poke through their email or FB. But, though Rush stated that it's too early to vote, we've danced around this pole long enough. Once we know which way we go, then all the other fallout can be discussed with a clear vision of the "lay of the land."
I created a poll yestereday and immediately took it down because it didn't have the cute ballot icon and didn't know if I could post an official vote. No matter who does it, once it's up (if Billy posts up), nobody make another similar ballot.
One vote to end it all. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/8/2017 10:23:07 AM |
|
|
You know what really undermines competitiveness?
|
|
|
|
Having Koo in this league. As long as he's here, we're doomed!
Seriously though, I expect that regardless of what change is made to increase competitiveness, the Seans, Keiths, and Stus of the world will figure out a way to succeed. While there's plenty of luck that goes into this game, those guys work hard at this basically all year long, and they're smart about it. Draft, FA, trades, starter decisions. Year after year. If we're being honest, the same cannot be said for all 12 of us, right? The result: no parity.
To be clear, I have no beef with trying to create a more competitive league. New draft orders, no franchise players, Sean's wins only count for half a win. Change is fun, particularly when done in the spirit of fun and camaraderie (though camaraderie can sometimes seem mean-spirited). So I'm all for making changes, and I look forward to the new wrinkles that change brings.
But after whatever change comes, my money will still be on the same group of guys to win it. Won't yours? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/8/2017 11:50:28 AM |
|
|
Let's muddy the waters!
|
|
|
|
Last thoughts on this. Read at your peril.
If league competitiveness is an issue, why not simply reconfigure the draft order? Is that not a more simplistic solution? Consider:
*Most leagues (especially franchise/keeper leagues) reverse the draft order so that the winner picks last.
*If we want to mirror the NFL--as has been used in various forms of support for the Weighted Realignment proposal--the league winner would pick last. The Patriots did not pick #1 in this year's NFL draft--they picked last.
*This would do a LOT more to fundamentally level the playing field than the Weighted Realignment, because it would even the quality of each team's roster so that each team would in theory have a much more even chance at making the playoffs. The Weighted Realignment would still result in the top teams drafting first, and therefore having a better chance at both the stronger rosters and best franchise players. We'd be giving the bottom teams a guarantee that one would make the playoffs, but that team would still (in theory) have a weaker roster than the other qualifying playoff teams.
*I was not in Ragnarok when our current format of having the winner draft first was implemented, but I'd imagine that one of the reasons for it was to prevent tanking. If we can trust the integrity of all 12 owners to compete the whole way through, is the possibility tanking a preferable issue to a lack of competitiveness?
In true Ragnarok fashion, we could even come up with an original way of establishing draft order that would help to ensure roster quality but not overly reward the last place team with the first pick. Someone smarter than me would probably be able to come up with a better solution, but something like:
1st pick: 7th place finisher
2nd pick: 8th place finisher
3rd pick: 9th place finisher
4th pick: 10th place finisher
5th pick: 11th place finisher
6th pick: 12th place finisher
7th pick: 6th place finisher
8th pick: 5th place finisher
9th pick: 4th place finisher
10th pick: 3rd place finisher
11th pick: 2nd place finisher
12th pick: 1st place finisher
This method would give all 12 teams something to play for. The losers' bracket would be motivated to win because they're all playing for high draft picks. The winner's bracket would still be motivated to win because of eternal glory and cash rewards. And the end result would be a draft order that prevents tanking while still taking significant steps toward leveling the playing field from year to year.
I'd much rather we do something like this than fundamentally change how our divisions are grouped and how playoff teams are selected. And it's a much easier solution.
Maybe I'm too late to the game for this, but thought I'd throw it out there nonetheless. Or take Jeremy's solution and just kick me out of the league.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Head of Scouting
Gjallarhorn Master
529 posts
|
Fu: 99.57 |
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/8/2017 7:28:47 PM |
|
|
Nice!
|
|
|
|
Now this is the type of discussion that will result in real results.
Now, lets vote on that 2 QB thing. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Coach Cowher Tomlin
Football Freak
997 posts
|
Fu: 100.96 |
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/9/2017 1:58:08 PM |
|
|
Koo's idea
|
|
|
|
| The concept of re-doing draft order makes a lot of sense. I would totally vote for that. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Aebleskiver
Cleats
259 posts
|
Fu: 100.48 |
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/9/2017 5:10:30 PM |
|
|
Bubble me
|
|
|
|
| Sorry for the tardiness here but for what it's worth and in a reversal of thought I like the bubble idea. After reading all the threads (which took a really long time) I came to the conclusion that for me sacrificing the fun and mayhem of a draft day redraft debacle by the bottom teams would be out-funned by a more competitive league with a clearer path to improve your standings from year to year. Especially if we base our rankings on a two year basis. It would be a greater point of pride for me to be in higher ranked division and if I fell off then at least I would have a better shot of climbing again. When I first got into Fantasy Football every rule we made was in an attempt to try to make our league as close to the NFL as possible. I realize that Fantasy is completely different than the NFL game but I do like to try to parallel as much as possible and giving the top teams the toughest schedule does this. I'm in with bubble. And Hillary. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/9/2017 5:14:02 PM |
|
|
Yeah Ratts!
|
|
|
|
| Nice post! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Aebleskiver
Cleats
259 posts
|
Fu: 100.48 |
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/9/2017 5:19:52 PM |
|
|
Thanks...
|
|
|
|
| And I really like the breakfast idea. And also a congressional hearing and a special council to investigate the actual type of meat that Kent is going to be feedintg us. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/9/2017 5:21:26 PM |
|
|
Right?
|
|
|
|
| Anything can be called lamb. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Coach Cowher Tomlin
Football Freak
997 posts
|
Fu: 100.96 |
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/10/2017 3:07:05 AM |
|
|
Lamb
|
|
|
|
It exists to be sacrificed.
All (or mostly all ) bullshit aside, I just wanna say that no matter how this goes down I am psyched that we are all engaged and exploring ideas that were not ever possible before. I do not understand most of them but the smart people say they are awesome so there ya have it. I love the schoolyard pick cause I'm a drama fag and it is awesome performance art. I'd love to have some actual human input into how we decide the Divisions. I'm cool with a die roll. Or a Ouiji Board consultation.
That said, I think we are all in this for the long haul. Making the League more competitive is what we have toiled so long to achieve. Keith has always tried his best to craft something other than the boring ass cookie-cutter Leagues that are predominant. We are constantly adjusting to adapt to the ever-shifting nature of the NFL. Koo's proposal of reshaping the Draft order is perhaps the single most logical proposal I've seen in how it would affect the nature of the League for Seasons to come.
We can't have tanking, but also we can't just keep giving the winners ever increasing advantages that preclude the lower tier teams from advancing.
How fucking awesome is it that we are already debating Ragnarok in June? Y'all are some crazy fuckers. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/10/2017 9:21:59 PM |
|
|
I, do, like things from both.....
|
|
|
|
But I feel the schoolyard pick needs to be in a three year cycle. This gives enough info to know how each team did. Then this info needs to be used to "draft" the other teams. This is a six year commitment. Three years to find out and three years to see how that unveils.
On the other hand, the "bubble" system is only a two year cycle. Year one to play and year two to re-align. In either choice, all we are doing is speculating what one is the best.
I propose we try the bubble system for a year and if it is a disaster we reconsider. But if it seems to play out ok, we continue it for a second year to truly know if this system works out. It is the shorter of the two. Thanks, E.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/10/2017 9:38:43 PM |
|
|
I (respectfully) disagree
|
|
|
|
If anything, I think the opposite is true. The schoolyard system is based on the "bottom" four divisional captains drafting according to their own criteria, which could differ from each other, and differ from year to year. As such, waiting 3 years wouldn't necessarily accomplish anything from an analytical standpoint b/c the factors influencing the process would be changing. Resetting this more often--even every year--would make some sense.
On the other hand, the weighted approach does have a tiered approach, where to really understand if the overall process works, we'd need a longer experiment. For example, what happens to the winner of the Teams 10-12 division in year 2? Does he continue to rise or does he return to the bottom? The only way to know if this system is accomplishing what it is intended to is to stick with it for a longer period of time.
Maybe that's just me, though? I may be on my own island on this, but as I've said, I do think the weighted realignment is still the wrong answer to potentially the right question (competitiveness). From a macro perspective, grouping teams according to performance doesn't actually improve the quality of those bottom teams--it just gives one a chance to make the playoffs. Changing the draft order WOULD improve the PARITY of ALL teams--and to me, this would solve the problem in a much simpler, tidier manner (and still allow us to do the schoolyard draft if we want!).
Again, just my two cents. Or about twelve cents by now. A rip-off no matter what. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/10/2017 9:59:44 PM |
|
|
Koo is on the money
|
|
|
|
| Has everyone voted? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Head of Scouting
Gjallarhorn Master
529 posts
|
Fu: 99.57 |
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/10/2017 10:29:37 PM |
|
|
No I haven't voted.
|
|
|
|
| For exactly the reason that you are writing these well thought out posts. As I stated earlier I would like to hear some discussion and some well thought ideas and some not so well thought out ideas. I don't believe that most of us can be pigeonholed so squarely in one of two camps. If we vote now we stop all discussion and trench our selves in to defend our vote. I really hope that by Billy's arbitrary deadline of the 20th we could have some meaningful discourse. Personally your idea of changing draft order holds the most merit. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Head of Scouting
Gjallarhorn Master
529 posts
|
Fu: 99.57 |
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/10/2017 10:33:09 PM |
|
|
Oops!
|
|
|
|
| I meant to say the Sean. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Head of Scouting
Gjallarhorn Master
529 posts
|
Fu: 99.57 |
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/11/2017 3:34:06 PM |
|
|
Not so well thought out proposal #1
|
|
|
|
| Realign divisions Alphabetically. Starting with the Asgard Thunder and working our way down to the Walter Reed Medical Center. (who by the way should be all over that expanding foam idea) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Coach Cowher Tomlin
Football Freak
997 posts
|
Fu: 100.96 |
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/11/2017 3:47:05 PM |
|
|
Completely ridiculous realignment proposal #2
|
|
|
|
| Realign Divisions based on an epic cornhole tournament! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/11/2017 9:30:27 PM |
|
|
Rule 21.1: Weighted Divisions
|
|
|
|
After an epic discussion unrivaled in the history of the league, we have enough information to make a decision. Here are the three camps, as stated in forum posts and voice discussions and elsewhere:
Weighted
--------
Eric
Keith
David
Dat
Zach
Scott
Joe
Schoolyard
----------
Billy
Zach
Kent
Noncommittal
------------
Jeremy
Stu
The majority of owners are in support of the Weighted approach and we will be making that official. Massive thanks to everyone for their thoughts and passionate commentary.
We'll now open up a second discussion thread for deciding what formula we want to use for ranking teams. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/11/2017 9:36:10 PM |
|
|
Straight Bullshit
|
|
|
|
| Poll says otherwise. Thanks Donald!! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/11/2017 9:37:18 PM |
|
|
I pledge
|
|
|
|
| To NEVER stop complaining about this |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/11/2017 9:37:51 PM |
|
|
poll is not proper
|
|
|
|
| people should also have the right to not have an opinion either way, which is not allowed in your poll. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/11/2017 9:39:06 PM |
|
|
Can't wait for all the FUN
|
|
|
|
| 👎 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/11/2017 10:25:46 PM |
|
|
FUN.
|
|
|
|
I'll tell you what's fun! I got in 2/3 camps. Whaaaaat?
Let's rank total points from all of our TE's and DF's, ...all time!
Football! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/11/2017 10:44:24 PM |
|
|
Our new League Name:
|
|
|
|
| The Schoolyard Pickers. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/11/2017 10:53:35 PM |
|
|
Zach is the best
|
|
|
|
| 🤘🏼 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/11/2017 11:27:41 PM |
|
|
Hahaha... Really?
|
|
|
|
ok. even if we're going to ignore the poll and dclare a victory for the weighted system, can we not pump the brakes and consider the (*cough* more appealing *cough*) option that i brought up (and that several people seemed to support)?
i would say that we should do the following poll:
"to address league competitiveness, which would you rather do:
(a) weighted divisional realignment
(b) revised draft order
but i'm not sure how definitive the polls are anymore.
seriously, people. the weighted divisional realignment does.not.solve.the.problem. under this change, the best teams are still going to draft first, still get the best franchise players, etc. under this change, the bottom teams do.not.get.better. we let one of them make the playoffs (with what will still be an inferior roster) and suddenly we've addressed competitiveness?
i'm a broken record at this point, but i'm not sure enough people have been listening to the music skipping. if we want to make the league more competitive, give parity to how the rosters are drafted by changing the draft order. this actually addresses the issue at the source. under this change, rosters are more equally-and fairly-balanced, and there would be no need to group divisions by success/ability/recent results.
i'm speaking especially to those listed as pro-weighted in the most recent message: if given the choice between weighted realignment and revised draft order, would you honestly still choose the former?
look--i'm not trying to be difficult, or be a dick, etc. and i didn't want to say this because i'm honestly uncomfortable doing so, but based on recent results, no one stands to lose more by changing the draft order than me. and you know what? i'd be 100% fine with that because having a competitive league with a fair playing field is infinitely more important to me than winning or getting the #1 draft pick.
if it's time for me to shut the fuck up about this, feel free to let me know. if there's one thing we do appear to all agree on, it's about being passionate about ragnarok. that in itself is pretty awesome, and that's all i'm doing here. for what it's worth (and that may not be much), my personal opinion is that we would be making a big mistake moving forward with weighted realignment, at least when a better, simpler option (in my opinion) could be available. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Coach Cowher Tomlin
Football Freak
997 posts
|
Fu: 100.96 |
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/11/2017 11:27:45 PM |
|
|
On a completely different note
|
|
|
|
| Penguins win two in a row!!! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Coach Cowher Tomlin
Football Freak
997 posts
|
Fu: 100.96 |
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/11/2017 11:33:27 PM |
|
|
Unless I'm missing something (other than most of my brain cells)
|
|
|
|
| Is there a reason we cant re-do the draft order as well as realign the Divisions? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/11/2017 11:33:32 PM |
|
|
I thought that was a "Poke The Bear" post from Keith
|
|
|
|
Not sure of the accuracy of the poll, but I'm officially against the Schoolyard Pick, BUT I would be more excited about that if there was NO Pick your Draft, FP, or Rookie Keeper. Make it pure.
I've been listening, er reading. I love the change in draft and a "full" buffet from pick 1.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/11/2017 11:40:30 PM |
|
|
You're not missing anything, Kent.
|
|
|
|
But I don't think both would be necessary to solve the problem, and in fact implementing both could swing the pendulum to the other extreme--to the point that we wouldn't even know what worked/didn't work to begin with.
But the biggest reason I can think of: there's only the need to implement one of these concepts, because only one of these concepts actually addresses the issue it's meant to address. Can you guess which one I think that is? :) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Coach Cowher Tomlin
Football Freak
997 posts
|
Fu: 100.96 |
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/12/2017 1:38:26 AM |
|
|
oh fuck it let's change everything!!
|
|
|
|
If we are gonna make such a radical shift in Ragnarok, we might as well throw the baby out with the bathwater. I love you math nerds and all, but once again I think some shit is getting way over-thunk.
As long as someone can explain the new system to me before I get too drunk when the Draft starts I'll try my best to figure it all out.
Peace, my brothers. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/12/2017 8:00:45 AM |
|
|
Am I the one who's missing something?
|
|
|
|
I only see one post from Joe (dated 3/30). Has he posted since then?
That one post days "Snake draft the divisions..." which to me indicates being in favor of the Schoolyard system. But he is listed is being for the Weighted system. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/12/2017 8:07:08 AM |
|
|
Joe voted in Billy's poll for the weighted system
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Head of Scouting
Gjallarhorn Master
529 posts
|
Fu: 99.57 |
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/12/2017 9:00:04 AM |
|
|
I think everyone needs put down their torches a pitchforks
|
|
|
|
The loudest voices of both sides of this argument have seemed to have lost the ability to listen. I know everyone cares about this league and only wants the best for it, but being doggedly determined to having ones own way without giving credence to the other point of view is myopic.
Since this last round of debate has started a few of the members have become so obstinate that they refuse to allow any new information to influence them. Rushing to a vote has that effect. However picking the lesser of two evils should not be counted as support. Only rejection of the other option.
We started having real dialog with credible alternate solutions, and now this dialog is supposed to be shut off? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/12/2017 9:02:19 AM |
|
|
You are right
|
|
|
|
| And I apologize. Let's keep talking. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Coach Cowher Tomlin
Football Freak
997 posts
|
Fu: 100.96 |
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/12/2017 10:07:55 AM |
|
|
How about this
|
|
|
|
Since everyone seems to be all riled up, what if we agree to just keep our current Divisions for this season and discuss how to move forward at the Draft when we can talk face to face and come to a fair and reasonable conclusion? I don't see the need to rush into making a permanent decision that will affect the League for years to come when clearly we do not have a consensus as to how to do that in a way that we are all comfortable with.
I also think we all need to take a deep breath and step back. We should act as friends first, competitors second. If I have offended anyone I apologize. We all care deeply about this League, which is why we are embroiled in an emotional dialogue in fucking June for heaven's sake.
Keith created this League with one goal: To be the best FF League ever, and that is exactly what we are. Along the way some tough and unpopular decisions have been made. I have been as critical as anyone at times, but in the end I have always tried to respect the fact that without the countless hours he has invested in creating and maintaining this thing we would all be on fucking crappy ass Yahoo Leagues.
I honestly don't care as much about methodology as I do about the relationships we have built over the past two decades. We should not let anything destroy that. |
|
|
|
|
|
