50s Retro Football Fantasy Draft

[Brwned]

All players born in the 1950s (1 Jan 1950 to 31 Dec 1959), are available for drafting. For the purpose of this competition, these players are considered at the level when they were in their prime. Each manager gets to pick 12 players to form a squad.

Competition format is 2 groups of 5, top 4 in each group advance to the quarters. Group winner gets to pick two players from the two eliminated teams to add to his squad, followed by the group runner-up's turn. In the knockout rounds, winner of the tie gets to add one player from the losing side to his squad. This means that by the final round, each of the two finalists will have a squad of 16 players to choose their matchday team from.

Draft rules
* Managers will take turns to draft players (first round of draft will start with Manager 1 and end with manager 10, second round starts with Manager 10 and ends with Manager 1, third round will start from Manager 1, so and so forth)
* You have 6 hours to post your draft pick. If you do not do so, the draft proceeds to the next manager in line and it is up to you to post your draft pick at your earliest convenience.
* In this competition, players are considered at the level when they were in their prime.
* When posting your draft pick, please post a picture of the player. You can also briefly explain why you picked this player.
* Once you have posted your draft pick, you have to PM the manager next in line to inform him/her that it is his/her turn
* Once the draft is complete, match threads will be started where each manager posts their match team, tactics and any persuasive arguments why their team has an upper hand over the opposition etc.

Players:

1. Brwned
2. Jayvin
3. Interval Level
4. Nani Nana
5. Duffy
6. Polaroid
7. TDon69
8. antohan
9. Gio
10. Crustanoid
    

 

[Jayvin]

Sign me up.

 

[kps88]

Is it 50s or 60s?

 

[Brwned]

50s.

60s had been done already, my mistake. I'd changed the title but forgot to change the OP!

 

[kps88]

Yep, thought as much. I'll pass on this one, don't have enough knowledge of the period.

 

[Interval]

I'll play.

 

[Brwned]

Are we happy enough having just 8 teams if there's not enough interest for 16?

 

[TheReligion]

I love these games but not really familiar with players from that era

 

[Nani Nana]

I'm in

 

[Brwned]

I love these games but not really familiar with players from that era

Just watch some of Italy/Brazil/France '82 and right there you've got about half the players!

 

[Nani Nana]

Are we happy enough having just 8 teams if there's not enough interest for 16?

I'd rather have 16 with newbies allowed to take part if needs be

They'd just have to PM someone from the mains when their turn is due. We could even give them promotion points or promote them for each victory

 

[Brwned]

There was barely enough newbies willing to do the 70s draft, iirc. Unlikely we'll get many willing to do a 50s one.

 

[Nani Nana]

There was barely enough newbies willing to do the 70s draft, iirc. Unlikely we'll get many willing to do a 50s one.

Maybe if you promise them some reputation points or whatever it's called, they'll be motivated

Otherwise yeah I don't think we'll get 16 from the mains, so 8 is fine (that's 88 players which is already quite a large pool). But if you make it 8, let's make two groups of four teams with the top two through to the semis

 

[Nani Nana]

one for the football connoisseurs this one

 

[Rood]

I think it is a bit silly to do a draft of players you havent seen play properly, could be a good trip down memory lane though - if you could find some older posters to get involved then it would be a different story

 

[Snow]

Pass on this one. I don't have the knowledge or enthusiasm to gather that knowledge for a 50's version.

 

[Duffy]

I'm up for it, sign me up!

 

[Polaroid]

Please count me in, thanks

 

[The Don]

I'd like to have a go at this.

 

[antohan]

Mmmm, not sure I'm particularly keen on the period. Willing to go for a suicidal attempt at promoting my South American chilodhood heroes

So yeah, in. I do think you will struggle to get 16 teams formed though, people will barely know most of the players and it would turn into a bit of a farse.

Stick to 8.

 

[Gio]

Sign me up

 

[Nani Nana]

16*11 = 176 players.. when the average Caf voter knows about 30 players from that era

i'm a little skeptical but there's no alternative

 

[Brwned]

Mmmm, not sure I'm particularly keen on the period. Willing to go for a suicidal attempt at promoting my South American chilodhood heroes

So yeah, in. I do think you will struggle to get 16 teams formed though, people will barely know most of the players and it would turn into a bit of a farse.

Stick to 8.

If there's enough interest for 16 - there's already 9, and Crustanoid and AldoRaine previously mentioned they'd be interested - then don't see a need to limit the numbers, personally. I'll leave it up to a vote, who would prefer it be just an 8-team tournament?

I think it is a bit silly to do a draft of players you havent seen play properly, could be a good trip down memory lane though - if you could find some older posters to get involved then it would be a different story

What do you mean? The 60s Draft was done with players who primarily played in the mid 80s-early 90s, it's not like their was much European club football on tv back then. A number of players were picked based on their international tournament exploits, and that'll be even more true in this one. Over 90% of the World Cup matches between 78-86 are available online. It's a good period to watch, with '84 remembered as one of the best Euro's and '82 and '86 remembered as two of the best/most entertaining World Cups.

 

[Nani Nana]

If there's enough interest for 16 - there's already 9, and Crustanoid and AldoRaine previously mentioned they'd be interested - then don't see a need to limit the numbers, personally. I'll leave it up to a vote, who would prefer it be just an 8-team tournament?

How about 12 participants separated in three groups of 4 teams, we keep the top 3 of every group out of which we throw out the one team with the least points (or percentage of votes), and with the remaining 8 we get normal quarterfinals ?

 

[antohan]

How about 12 participants separated in three groups of 4 teams, we keep the top 3 of every group out of which we throw out the one team with the least points (or percentage of votes), and with the remaining 8 we get normal quarterfinals ?

Personally I have a feeling more than 8 is overkill. You will hardly find 12 top players from each position and for the most part people may remember up to 4-5 on each. I have a very hard time working out more than that number of R/L backs/wingers. It is only AM/FWD that is rather easy to remember up to 12 (i.e. 24-36) players of good standard.

I'm afraid we would end up with some pretty rubbish sides across the board and they wouldn't get much better after picking 3-4 players.

Your idea is a good one. I would just tweak it in that in the first round you get to pick one player (as the team going out is unlikely to have 6 players of good calibre) but two in each of the knockout rounds. At least then we would get a decent final.

If others want to join then 12. If we are stuck at 9 I feel so strongly about doing this generation some justice that I'd be fine opting out myself.

 

[Crustanoid]

Dammit have I missed this?

 

[Crustanoid]

I can remember the back-end of this 'generation's' careers as my first days of following football. Would be really interesting to do this. Most 9 year olds read the Beano or Star Wars comics back then - I spent more time reading this:

 

[gooDevil]

How are winners picked in the matches?

 

[antohan]

Dammit have I missed this?

No, you would be the 10th.

Let's stick with Nani's 3 group idea though.

It may be a bitch to determine who the worst third-placed team is but that is a lesser problem than diluting quality entirely.

1. All teams go through bar the fourth-placed and worst third
2. All qualifiers get to pick one from either their group's fourth-placed or the worst third (i.e. even if not in the same group as the worst third)
3. One pick only, in their qualification order
4. Second round and thereafter you get to pick two from the losing team

Everyone agree?

 

[antohan]

How are winners picked in the matches?

Each match is the subject of a poll for a certain period, usually 24 hours in the group stage.

 

[Crustanoid]

Or two groups of 5?

 

[Gio]

If we're going with 8 then it's incumbent on me as number 9 in this first-come, first-served game to step aside.

Taking an inclusive approach however it's worthwhile waiting till tomorrow to gauge how much interest there is. Essentially there is no less talent present in the 50s generation than any other and we managed fine with the 16-team approach for the 60s. Half the attraction of the competition is finding out about some of the lesser known players who were nonetheless strong in their era. Obviously with reduced awareness of this generation, perhaps the 12-team idea is a suitable compromise.

 

[antohan]

If we're going with 8 then it's incumbent on me as number 9 in this first-come, first-served game to step aside.

Taking an inclusive approach however it's worthwhile waiting till tomorrow to gauge how much interest there is. Essentially there is no less talent present in the 50s generation than any other and we managed fine with the 16-team approach for the 60s. Half the attraction of the competition is finding out about some of the lesser known players who were nonetheless strong in their era. Obviously with reduced awareness of this generation, perhaps the 12-team idea is a suitable compromise.

Crustanoid wants in anyway and someone mentioned others were interested. If we were 9 I was happy staying out anyway, order or no order.

Let's wait until tomorrow and see whether others want in before deciding on two groups of 5 or three of 4.

 

[Polaroid]

I suggest 2 groups of 6 teams, with top 4 in each group going through to the Q-finals.

QF1 - Group A 1st placed vs Group B 4th placed
QF2 - Group A 2nd placed vs Group B 3rd placed
QF3 - Group A 3rd placed vs Group B 2nd placed
QF4 - Group A 4th placed vs Group B 1st placed

Each Q-finalist can draft 2 players from a common pool of players (from the 4 teams eliminated at the group-stage). Drafting sequence is reversed from the pre-tournament draft

SF1 - winner QF1 vs winner QF3
SF1 - winner QF2 vs winner QF4

Each S-finalist can draft 2 players from a common pool of players (from the 4 eliminated Q-finalists). Drafting sequence is reversed from the Q-final draft

Final - winner SF1 vs winner SF2

Each finalist can draft 4 players from a common pool of players (from the 2 eliminated S-finalists). Drafting sequence is reversed from the S-final draft

 

[antohan]

I suggest 2 groups of 6 teams, with top 4 in each group going through to the Q-finals.

QF1 - Group A 1st placed vs Group B 4th placed
QF2 - Group A 2nd placed vs Group B 3rd placed
QF3 - Group A 3rd placed vs Group B 2nd placed
QF4 - Group A 4th placed vs Group B 1st placed

Each Q-finalist can draft 2 players from a common pool of players (from the 4 teams eliminated at the group-stage). Drafting sequence is reversed from the pre-tournament draft

SF1 - winner QF1 vs winner QF3
SF1 - winner QF2 vs winner QF4

Each S-finalist can draft 2 players from a common pool of players (from the 4 eliminated Q-finalists). Drafting sequence is reversed from the Q-final draft

Final - winner SF1 vs winner SF2

Each finalist can draft 4 players from a common pool of players (from the 2 eliminated S-finalists). Drafting sequence is reversed from the S-final draft

Works for me

 

[sajeev]

I suggest 2 groups of 6 teams, with top 4 in each group going through to the Q-finals.

QF1 - Group A 1st placed vs Group B 4th placed
QF2 - Group A 2nd placed vs Group B 3rd placed
QF3 - Group A 3rd placed vs Group B 2nd placed
QF4 - Group A 4th placed vs Group B 1st placed

Each Q-finalist can draft 2 players from a common pool of players (from the 4 teams eliminated at the group-stage). Drafting sequence is reversed from the pre-tournament draft

SF1 - winner QF1 vs winner QF3
SF1 - winner QF2 vs winner QF4

Each S-finalist can draft 2 players from a common pool of players (from the 4 eliminated Q-finalists). Drafting sequence is reversed from the Q-final draft

Final - winner SF1 vs winner SF2

Each finalist can draft 4 players from a common pool of players (from the 2 eliminated S-finalists). Drafting sequence is reversed from the S-final draft

its a good idea but too many games, and there is a likely hood of the interest dropping. however this does mean that all teams get a fair chance unlike previous drafts where it was a straight knock-out

 

[Brwned]

I'm not sure how much I like the idea of 10 teams.

We could still go with the qualification process to the next round as Polaroid suggested, but with the top 4 of a 5-team group going through. It'd mean there'd be a much smaller pool of players to choose from when going into the quarter-finals though, whoever chose 1st and 2nd would essentially have already guaranteed themselves a place in the semis, surely? In which case wouldn't it just make more sense to make it the top two of each group going through to the semis? Otherwise you'd have to cut the number of players you get to choose from the eliminated team(s) from 2 to 1 so that there'd be enough quality players left for 3rd and 4th to choose from.

144 players to choose is definitely doable as far as I'm concerned, so if we get 12 players I see no problem.

 

[Crustanoid]

I'm not sure how much I like the idea of 10 teams.

We could still go with the qualification process to the next round as Polaroid suggested, but with the top 4 of a 5-team group going through. It'd mean there'd be a much smaller pool of players to choose from when going into the quarter-finals though, whoever chose 1st and 2nd would essentially have already guaranteed themselves a place in the semis, surely? In which case wouldn't it just make more sense to make it the top two of each group going through to the semis? Otherwise you'd have to cut the number of players you get to choose from the eliminated team(s) from 2 to 1 so that there'd be enough quality players left for 3rd and 4th to choose from.

144 players to choose is definitely doable as far as I'm concerned, so if we get 12 players I see no problem.

That's what I had in mind - I think it would make it more interesting / less laborious

 

[Gio]

its a good idea but too many games, and there is a likely hood of the interest dropping. however this does mean that all teams get a fair chance unlike previous drafts where it was a straight knock-out

Aye it's the cleanest approach, but possibly a bit on the heavy side. 37 games I think, 6 more than the 16-team version, and 12 more than Nani nana's suggestion.

 

[Brwned]

Right so we've got two choices, we can either:

a) Start right away with 2 groups of 5 teams, with the top two of each going through to the semi-finals. Top two of each group pick one player from each of the 3 eliminated teams. 27 matches.

b) Start once we have two more players to make it 2 groups of 6, with the top four of each going through to the quarter-finals. Top four get to pick one player each from the 2 eliminated teams. 37 matches.

I vote a).