Would you want an NFL draft lottery?

Starting in 2019, yes.

 

No. This isn't the NBA.

 

This is such a tricky question.

Ideally you'd like a lottery system that only includes really bad teams and yet gives incentives for them to try to compete at the end of the year when otherwise their games are hopeless low attendance affairs.

However, setting the lottery at a fixed number of teams with these type of incentives would also encourage mediocre teams to tank in the final quarter of the season to qualify under whatever the lottery bracket was. Trying to get in the bracket would become a race to the bottom for a lot of 4-9 teams in December.

The same system that gave incentives for terrible teams to win at the end would encourage bad teams to lose out.

A system that might be worth exploring would be something like: the bottom 5 teams at the end of the year all get an allotment of balls in the barrel based on several factors over the course of the year. They get balls equal to the inverse of their league standing at the end of the year: 10 balls for last place, 8 for second to last, 6 for third to last, 4 for fourth to last, 2 for fifth from last. They also get 2 balls for each win in games 13 to 16 and 1 ball for each win in games 9 to 12.

2015 Lottery Chances:

Bucs: 2-14 1st Place - 10 balls.
Jaguars: 3-13 3rd Place - 6 balls, win game 12 - 1 ball, win game 15 - 2 balls, total 9 balls.
Raiders: 3-13 4th Place - 4 balls, win game 11 - 1 ball, wins game 13 and 15 - 4 balls, total 9 balls
Titans: 2-14 2nd Place - 8 balls.
Jets: 4-12 5th Place - 2 balls, win game 10 - 1 balls, wins game 14 and 16 - 4 balls, total 7 balls.

Then you just pick five balls out of the barrel for 1st through 5th picks. The Raiders and Jets late heroics and generally better play after mid-season might well be rewarded with a better pick than they actually got.

A team trying to tank 4-9 into a lottery pick by going 0-3 at the end would probably have only 2 or 3 balls in the lottery and might miss out anyway.

There would be no functional difference between 3-13 worst and 0-16 worst from the standings baseline but the 3-13 team might well get an extra point or two from second half wins.

A team that was worst in the standings and won their last game would lose no balls under the system unless they got jumped by more than one team. The team that jumped them would gain no balls in the system since a win would have given them the same number of balls as moving from 2nd position to 1st.

 

no way

 

I will say its annoying the that during years we go like 4-12, its usually the same garbage teams that always secure top 5 picks like the Browns, Jaguars, Rams, 49ers etc. I don't know how they keep getting supposedly the best talent in the draft class year in and year out and they still suck.

 

I'd much rather see rule changes that didn't favor the all pass offense. There are 32 teams, maybe 6-8 very good QB's, another 6-8 good QB's and a whole lotta suck after that. Take away most of the bullshit PI calls, the flag football QB calls and teams will lean be more balanced. You won't have 2-3 offensive players eating up 40% of the cap. Every team with an average QB, a decent Rb and good coaching, would be in the running.

Rule 2. If your teams finishes in the bottom 3 more than 3 years in a row, the owner must sell the team.

I don't know that any team having the 1-3 picks, has made any use of them. Most bad teams are bad for a reason....management sucks.

 

Simple. Start calling offensive PI more. Take away the BS pick play crap. Stop calling defensive PI every single time there's any kind of contact.

 

How about make hitting a "defenseless receiver" a fine instead of a penalty. The guy who delivers the hit gives $20k to the guy he hit, no penalty yardage assessed, no loss of down. --Let the safety position exist again, instead of the center fielder position.

 

No. Lotteries can - and are - rigged. And it's a real kick in the teeth to fans of a team that has the most losses to watch their team wind up with the 5th pick. For all the talk of "tanking", I don't know if it's ever really happened - at least on the field of play. You can say that team that cuts most of their vets and high priced talent is "tanking", but the remaining players and the coaches are still going to play hard.

If a team is going to get the #1 pick, let them do the old fashioned way: earn it.

 

I give you credit for creative thinking. But you still need an above average - at least - QB to win consistently.

Along the lines of rule changes though, what I would like to see is:

1. Get rid of the spiking rule to stop the clock. Under the old system this would either be intentional grounding or a fumble. I HATE this tactic!
2. "The ground can't cause a fumble". Bullshit! If you're tackled and hit the ground and the ball immediately pops loose, that's fumble! Most here are way to young to remember a RB named John David Crow who many considered on a par with Jim Brown, BUT, he had a reputation for fumbling - and this was back when the "ground" could cause a fumble. If he played after they changed the rule he might've actually become as good as Brown.

I love offense, but the way they've changed the rules has made an imbalance, which is why the Jets insistence on trying to build a great defense is so stupid.

 

The only way to tank in the NFL is to strip your team of talent like we have this year. When the players are on the field they are trying their hardest to perform and produce wins.

It's too dangerous to have players out there not trying their hardest.

Stripping rosters down like we have can set a team back a long time if the rebuild is not done correctly.

That's why I think the NFL is fine with teams 'tanking,' because it can be so hard for teams to dig out of that that they just salute you and say good luck if that's the way you want to do it.

No need for a lottery. The NBA needs it because it's easy for players to deliberately lose games, miss shots, etc. without a massive risk for injury like there is in the NFL.

 

The NFL doesn't have a problem with tanking...and the NBA is so dependent on top players that the only way to compete for a championship is to tank and get a top player in the draft...the league is very predictable you can guess the champion in 2 tries every year.

 

I would stop being a fan if this was done. Just look at how messed up the NBA is with their whack lottery process. The same teams that were bad pre lottery are the same team in the lottery every year. Philadelphia has had the top pick 3 years straight. Look how Cleveland just happened to get LeBron then back to back 1st round picks. Bad teams during the season know they stink start unloading talent and then losing on purpose. The NBA needs to fold up a few franchises. That would make the league more competitive. Sacramento being one of them. Back in the day every team had at least 3 stars on their team. You knew you were gonna get Jabbar, Dandridge, Robertson hen you went into Milwaukee or Chamberlain, West and Goodrich in LA.

 

What about the other side of tanking, where quality teams with everything wrapped up rest starters and treat weeks 16-17 like pre season? That's a form of tanking. Sure they earned the right but sometimes this approach enables another team to waltz into the playoffs that may otherwise have faced resistance.

And the whole tank/rebuild strategy often fails and leads to nowhere anyway. What were the Raiders on their 4th rebuild now until finally getting it right?

And the long term goal of tanking is to win, win in the future, and win often. In the early stages of it substandard talent will be on the field. But unless the league can somehow prove games are being thrown...then it's not a tank. Because whatever crap players are out there...they are playing hard and trying to win.

 

One year the Nets who had Brook Lopez and little else had the worst record in the league. They didn't tank, they just weren't very good. John Wall was the point guard that could help the Nets get back on their feet. Thanks to the lottery, the Wizards got Wall and the Nets stayed mired at the bottom.

Watching this horribly coached and depleted Jets team the last thing I want right now is a lottery in the NFL.

 

I'd like to see a weighted lottery where teams where worst records have higher chances of top picks but it's not guaranteed. Tanking isn't good for the sport and I'm assuming it brings lower TV rankings too. Plus we all know that coaches and roster bubble players MUST play to win because nobody is guaranteed a spot next year. Creates a weird reality where players/coaches are encouraged to pursue wins but their management is purposely not supporting them.

You also create this environment where some fans start rooting against their teams.

Also, I feel that the reason some teams are always drafting at the top of the first is terrible management. I don't want the best college talent wasted every year in shit organizations without getting the proper chance to develop.

 

If so then none of them were really stars.

 

No. Worst should pick first.