If the committee is kicked out, I am voting against @Physiocrat in all games 
Last edited:
League drafting thread
- Thread starter P-Nut
- Start date
- Status
You could have a poll for all games but there would be loads of options.
If the committee is kicked out, I am voting against @Physiocrat in all games
The gratitude I get for trying to increase player numbers.Puskas would never work as a lone striker
Puskas would never work as a lone striker
Have you done any other drafts recently with no managers involved in the discussion? If so, what has the feedback been like? I kind of like the idea, as an experiment if nothing else.
I presume neutrals can still discuss in the match threads.
I presume neutrals can still discuss in the match threads.
To my knowledge, we have never done any drafts without manager discussion.
@Moby has been practicing for it
Still at it, is he? I've pulled one or two myself, to be honest.
I suppose a possible danger is that overly competitive managers may pester neutrals with PMs, trying to swing the discussion or explain themselves, etc.
But I've often thought that the managers habitually contribute less genuinely interesting points during matches than the neutrals. They add tension (and meltdowns) , though - which can be a good thing, of course.
But as an experiment - yeah, why not.
Im still for committe idea, people complaining yet most of the match threads end up at first page....imagine a thread for 6, 7 games. Who the feck would debate in it? Ohh and the other drafts would be live in the same time....id vote for the most simple option and thats results only.
Think you need a format that allows you to run this thing in the background, as it were, if you're going to have a full league with something like twenty teams.
You need a format which requires a minimum of effort from everyone involved, really. Otherwise, after a few weeks, you'll start to see managers not being arsed to submit anything, etc.
The FM thing is probably the ideal format for something like this, since it doesn't require any effort at all beyond the start-up phase.
You need a format which requires a minimum of effort from everyone involved, really. Otherwise, after a few weeks, you'll start to see managers not being arsed to submit anything, etc.
The FM thing is probably the ideal format for something like this, since it doesn't require any effort at all beyond the start-up phase.
will I have to do a write-up and stuff?
I would've been up for this to be honest, if there's someone motivated enough to run it. Just do one or two rounds per week — and none of the committee stuff. I think it'll become boring otherwise, as we'll know the views of the committee after, say, 3 or 4 rounds and it will become repetitive.
You'd need new write-ups from the managers every round, though - if not it'd be a bit...odd. The charm of the league format is that you get to tweak the team slightly depending on the opposition. And there's a danger of any number of managers simply losing interest after a few rounds, especially if they keep losing (games, I mean).
Then again, you could scrap write-ups (or make them 100% optional, I suppose), just post line-ups/formation pics on a regular basis and let people vote. That wouldn't require a huge amount of work.
Would be interesting enough to see how it all ended.
Yeah, obviously you'd have the substitutions, but I thin that it'll be obvious which teams are rated higher and without the changes inside the committee it'll be a bit predictable
Realistically, I think it'd work best as a version of the FM idea - that is, as something which just runs on automatically (almost) - in the background, threads going up with polls, minimum requirements on all involved.
Managers could effectively drop out entirely without consequence, as a default write-up (player roles explained, if necessary, that sort of thing - very brief) + formation pic would always be available to whoever agrees to keep the thing updated.
Might allow managers to submit tweaks if they want to (but not required) - or not (but this really wouldn't mean much more work for the updater, just operate with strict deadlines for submissions, if they're not met, the default is posted).
As an experiment, I'd like to see it. Would be interesting to see how much of an interest was kept up - it could even turn a bit exciting towards the end if the race is tight.
Just a basic outline once a week. No more than a couple of lines
Yeah FM would be miles better, but no one wants to run it so this was the closest I could get.
The injuries should make the team's change quite a lot week to week. And after everyone has played each other once, there will be a transfer round to freshen things up for the return fixtures.
It would become stale after a week or 2 with no injuries. 4 or 5 games in you'd know who had the best side.
Possibly, yes.
But it seems very unrealistic to keep a high maintenance draft running on for as long as it'd take to wrap up a full league.
If you want to do a league, you have to do it simple. Again, the FM concept in some form. Wouldn't generate high interest throughout, but that's not expected in the first place - it's just a bit of fun on the side.
FM was great for the managers but for me running it it took up so much time I was unable to complete the second season (much to @antohan dismay before he could win the CL
)I think ideally there would be 3-4 people with FM that could run the sim and pass along the save files so its not so much work for one person
It's only 1 teamsheet a week with a couple of lines on your set up. Should take no more than 10 mins every week.
I also don't mind doing away with the committee, just seemed like the best way to ensure a result each week, as I can't imagine everyone wanting to vote each week on possibly 6/7 games (especially if we're excluding playing managers, as they'd be able to influence results of those around them)
@harms just to clear up the committee thing a little more.
Each member of the committee would be assigned a couple of games a week. So your games would be judged by a different person constantly, should remove the predictability a little bit as one member might love one side, whilst another hates it.
Each member of the committee would be assigned a couple of games a week. So your games would be judged by a different person constantly, should remove the predictability a little bit as one member might love one side, whilst another hates it.
Given it's a league, are we having an option of a score of a draw?
I guess what I suspect is that a lengthy draft that requires constant commitment from the managers (even if it's not a lot of work, as such) is vulnerable to - well - managers dropping out, losing interest, etc. A lot of matches could end up being pointless/walkovers.
Anyway, you mentioned injuries - how would that be implemented? Random draw? Or would all teams suffer injuries per default (draw which player the manager loses) regularly?
Yeah, I guess the "no effort" part would be true only for the managers.FM was great for the managers but for me running it it took up so much time I was unable to complete the second season (much to @antohan dismay before he could win the CL
I think ideally there would be 3-4 people with FM that could run the sim and pass along the save files so its not so much work for one person
I'm not familiar with the specifics of FM - you can't just start a simulation and let it run? You have to, well, do something frequently in order to run it?
A league is actually a format where the old "multiple scores" poll might make sense. Didn't work too well in regular drafts, but in a league it could. You'd also get GD.
Edit I'm talking about the model with poll options like:
0-0
1-0
0-1
etc.
That's a good idea, however we'd really have to go the committee route otherwise we'd have to do an individual match thread per game which would be crazy work over that time period. You could get people to vote by comment with scores instead but then you'd have to tally them all.
Where does everyone stand on the committee? I'm not against it per se.
Committee is the best way of doing it. Keeps the turn around quick and draft fatigue doesn't have a chance to set in as it undoubtedly would if the standard voting systems are used.
Here and accounted for. Leave it to the experts lads.
Yeah, okay, I’m on board with the committee. Would make sense to implement draws there as well - not as a multiple poll option but as an option for the committee.
Yeah draws will be an option.
The basic premise is that the weeks games will be split between the committee members. With each member deciding how their chosen games will play out. They should then be able to assign a score, and how they think the goals would likely come about.
I'll then update a thread each week with a small match report for each game.
@P-Nut can we just start this? and start it like a normal draft not with those 3 options in OP
Normal draft will take forever with 23 players each to pick. People will be bored senseless by the end@P-Nut can we just start this? and start it like a normal draft not with those 3 options in OP
just until we start another draft, 4 rounds for example and if another draft isnt close to starting like now then we can prolong the normal draft for few more rounds.
Let's stick to what I planned for the first 4 rounds. If no draft is close to starting then we'll open it up afterwards. Means a few of the GOATs should be blocked and make the transfer round interesting midway through.
@P-Nut An idea for match reports if it is not too much extra work is a man of the match award. More defensive players that otherwise wouldn't get the limelight could be well recognised here
Such a shame. All draft related questions and none about how his honeymoon went.
So what you mean to say is, has @P-Nut produced the new Garrincha yet?
Can we draft the first 11 the normal way then use the other system for the last 10?
- Status