We did this very successfully two years ago, I think we should try it again. -Would like to get 11 more people for a 12 team All-Time NFL Draft -Draft serpentine style, while selecting the normal 22 offensive and defensive starters plus a punter and a kicker Select Based On -Take the player's dominance, length at his peak, and overall ability into account. This means that the guy's with the highest stats may not necessarily be the best player at the position, and someone who had one monumental season and sucked the rest of his career may not have too much value. -Size can be taken into account, but only for the era. For example, Rosey Brown was 6'3" 255 pounds which would be far undersized in todays day for an OT. But, in his era he projected to more of a 300-pounder today, so his weight cannot be used as a liability for rating. -Current players are fair game, but don't take the future into account. So if I draft Tom Brady, I can argue his stats and Super Bowl rings, but can't say "and he's going to win 2 more Super Bowls in the future." -I don't want to go too crazy with offensive and defensive sets, but for O a basic 2 RB, 2 WR, 1 TE set is fine or 2-3-0 or 1-3-1. D should be good with 4-3 and 3-4. -If it goes well enough we'll select backups as well. As for time restriction I think we can go with a 6 hour clock with no clock from 12 AM - 8 AM ET. If I remember correctly thats what we did last time. We should start the draft right after the NFL Draft, like next Monday, and then we'll be able to pass 3 to 4 weeks of no action with this draft. Questions or comments appreciated. 1) DonnieIsTheKing 2) Murrell2878 3) KurtTheJetsFan 4) masivemunkey 5) James Hasty
I will not have a team in this, but I would love to act as a judge, of sorts. I could certainly help other people with their selections and stuff. I think the earliest you should start this would be the weekend after the NFL Draft.
I wouldn't take Tom Brady at all. We saw how well he played in the SB against the Giants when he was under pressure and didn't know what the defense was going to do. If he was the greatest QB, why wasn't he able to find the greatest receiver in the biggest game? His stats are and will be forever tainted by spygate. As to why he played well this past season even though he didn't have the benefit of Belichick knowing what the defense was going to do, you have to remember that he got a ridiculous amount of time to throw to what may have been the best receiving corp. Maybe it was because his offensive line never got called for holding? Is this such a thing as being fair anymore?
The only rule I would question is whether current players should get any credit for future accomplishments. Some of the players with less than five years experience are very good but will be severely discounted if they are treated like a guy that only played a few years and were out of the league. Either way, count me in
But can we truly just hand someone like Adrian Peterson another 10 years of an NFL career at 1,000+ yards a season? He could take a hit during week 6, tear an ACL, and never be the same player again. Projections are very vague and difficult to examine.
Agreed but you can't assume he blows out the ACL automatically either. It would be more interesting in the later rounds if the current players got some credit for the upside but it should be discounted for sure.
So why dont we have a rule that the current player has to have been in the league for a certain number of years in order to be eligible for this draft?
Makes enough sense to me. I think any player with three seasons under his belt should be eligible. At least the young players would give more options in the later rounds.
I think I have a real problem with the requirement that a retired player have at least five years in the NFL. I can think of at least two players that would otherwise go early. Also, three or four years is plenty of time for a player to shine. You could consider durability to be a knock against the player but plenty of excellent players are going to be knocked out by this rule. You are also throwing out a number of AFL players that had less experience in the NFL. We can all give our feedback at the end if someone makes a pick on an unproven player but this thing could get very boring and predictable if we are going to impose strict rules without good reason.
The NFL assumed all AFL stats and records. Hall of Famers like Billy Shaw (0 NFL games) and Ron Mix (12 NFL games) are certainly going to be drafted here. What player(s) who played 4 or fewer years is going to be drafted here? The best under-5 year player I can think of off the top of my head is tackle Al Blozis who played from 1942-44 with the Giants.
The reason we'd put this rule in place is to avoid situations where people project Adrian Peterson to play 10 years. I don't see why active players have to be drafted, anyway. Just avoid the mess altogether, I say.
I don't like to name names in these situations but you guys don't seem to be leaving me much choice. While I think there are even better values that fit this case Bo Jackson was an exceptional athelete and a player worth drafting even though he played four years. I also don't see the point in eliminating a current player that belongs in the HOF while a lesser player that retired is fair game. If every player has to fit a certain mold (ex, in the HOF, 10+ years experience, no current players, x number of pro bowls) all of the GMs will target the same guys and take the fun out of it. If you have a bias against certain players than feel free to bash those picks but the real fun of these things is finding those sleepers that the other guys didn't think of but agree with after you pick them. If you place too many restrictions the creativity goes out of the process. Using your example, anyone taking AP in the first round would get laughed at anyway.
