1-15 teams (or worse) shouldn't get rewarded with 1st overall picks.

[Judge Fudge]

I’d have a different view. A 1-15 team would get the first 3 picks. One would have to be used for a defensive lineman. One an offensive lineman. Then the 3rd could be a skilled position, QB, RB, etc.

I Like your style.

As to topic....

I can see both sides of the arguement.

On one hand it eliminates tanking. As always, hate to bring hockey into the conversation. Their was a team in 1983 that tanked and made no effort to hide it so they could have the top pick in 1984 to pick the superstar that year.

On the other, it builds dynasty's and eliminates near playoffs from making it.

I'm Switzerland in this argument

 

[Schmoopy1000]

I Like your style.

As to topic....

I can see both sides of the arguement.

On one hand it eliminates tanking. As always, hate to bring hockey into the conversation. Their was a team in 1983 that tanked and made no effort to hide it so they could have the top pick in 1984 to pick the superstar that year.

On the other, it builds dynasty's and eliminates near playoffs from making it.

I'm Switzerland in this argument

I am curious.
Who was the Superstar?

 

[Judge Fudge]

I am curious.
Who was the Superstar?

Mario Leminux

 

[Schmoopy1000]

Mario Leminux

well played then! LOL

 

[Judge Fudge]

well played then! LOL

Yep. The NHL installed the draft lottery in 1995.

Its rules are pretty good

 

[Schmoopy1000]

Yep. The NHL installed the draft lottery in 1995.

Its rules are pretty good

I dont know enough about Hockey. How many of the next great player ends up a bust, but in football there are no guarantees. There are more busts than that one crazy true generational player. Doing a lottery in football would be mistake.

 

[Cave_Johnson]

Not sure how you'd really implement this outside of a lottery. If you put in some threshold at which teams can't get the #1 pick then you'll just see teams tank to whatever that threshold is.

I could potentially get behind something where the worst 5 teams have some sort of pseudo lottery. You'd have something random decide the first 5 pick order, but you set it up so the majority of the time the teams still pick in the normal order. Like worst team picks first 75% of the time. Leave some uncertainty so that worst record doesn't absolutely guarantee first pick.

That would just add more complexity than is necessary though IMO. I'd rather leave it as is. Bad teams and bad front offices tend to stay bad regardless of where they pick.

That said, this isn't the worst idea I've heard regarding draft changes. I've heard Dan Leb The Tard argue pretty hardcore for no draft and having open free agency for all college players and to eliminate the salary cap. That shit is stupid as fuck.

 

[redseat]

I much rather the league fix its policy of black balling players who smoke weed over players that beat their spouses and children

 

[Darrell Green Fan]

Why shouldn't the team with the worst record get the best chance to improve? It worked twice for the Colts, for one of the rare times in their lives Cardinals fans now have hope.

 

[flyerhawk]

NFL teams don't tank per se. This isn't the NBA where there are basically 8 guys on the court and a GM can basically structure it so that they are all marginal players in order to suck. You have 53 guys, most of whom are guys with careers that want to do well because it will mean more money for them.

We all knew the Jets were going to be bad this year. Their ownership is a mess and they retained a coach who lost his locker room last year. Now it is likely that they are keeping Gase to ensure they suck for the rest of the year and Gase knows he's just collecting a paycheck until he gets his pink slip after Week 17. But the players are certainly trying. None of them want to go 0-16.

 

[flyerhawk]

Not sure how you'd really implement this outside of a lottery. If you put in some threshold at which teams can't get the #1 pick then you'll just see teams tank to whatever that threshold is.

I could potentially get behind something where the worst 5 teams have some sort of pseudo lottery. You'd have something random decide the first 5 pick order, but you set it up so the majority of the time the teams still pick in the normal order. Like worst team picks first 75% of the time. Leave some uncertainty so that worst record doesn't absolutely guarantee first pick.

That would just add more complexity than is necessary though IMO. I'd rather leave it as is. Bad teams and bad front offices tend to stay bad regardless of where they pick.

That said, this isn't the worst idea I've heard regarding draft changes. I've heard Dan Leb The Tard argue pretty hardcore for no draft and having open free agency for all college players and to eliminate the salary cap. That shit is stupid as fuck.

I would be ok with a coin flip for the worst and 2nd worst team. I wouldn't support anything beyond that though.

 

[FaCe-LeE-uS]

I actually appreciate those craptastic teams picking in the top 10... their scouting departments blow so it usually helps weed out the riff-raff for the better teams picking near the mid to late portion of each round.

 

[flyerhawk]

I actually appreciate those craptastic teams picking in the top 10... their scouting departments blow so it usually helps weed out the riff-raff for the better teams picking near the mid to late portion of each round.

Yeah. There is a reason why you see the same usual suspects at the bottom. Even after they have a brief winning period they wind up sucking wind again pretty quickly.

Since 1980 the Jets have had 9 double digit win seasons.
Since 2000, the Jets have had 9 seasons of 6 wins or fewer.

 

[FaCe-LeE-uS]

Yeah. There is a reason why you see the same usual suspects at the bottom. Even after they have a brief winning period they wind up sucking wind again pretty quickly.

Since 1980 the Jets have had 9 double digit win seasons.
Since 2000, the Jets have had 9 seasons of 6 wins or fewer.

Damn thats rough for the Jets.

Typically in the 1st round there is a handful of overhyped players. But not all "busts" are a result of that. Quite often the player just lands in a bad place. Still, I am thankful for those overhyped players being taken before the 20th-32nd picks.

 

[Judge Fudge]

I dont know enough about Hockey. How many of the next great player ends up a bust, but in football there are no guarantees. There are more busts than that one crazy true generational player. Doing a lottery in football would be mistake.

Since 1995: 5, 2 for the same organization in back to back years, #1 picks have been busts with the latest being 2012.

 

[flyerhawk]

Damn thats rough for the Jets.

Typically in the 1st round there is a handful of overhyped players. But not all "busts" are a result of that. Quite often the player just lands in a bad place. Still, I am thankful for those overhyped players being taken before the 20th-32nd picks.

I do think that a lot of players are drafted into bad situations and never really recover. This is especially true of QBs but it is true of lots of players. By the time they escape it is usually too late.

 

[Anointed One]

 

[Schmoopy1000]

Not sure how you'd really implement this outside of a lottery. If you put in some threshold at which teams can't get the #1 pick then you'll just see teams tank to whatever that threshold is.

I could potentially get behind something where the worst 5 teams have some sort of pseudo lottery. You'd have something random decide the first 5 pick order, but you set it up so the majority of the time the teams still pick in the normal order. Like worst team picks first 75% of the time. Leave some uncertainty so that worst record doesn't absolutely guarantee first pick.

That would just add more complexity than is necessary though IMO. I'd rather leave it as is. Bad teams and bad front offices tend to stay bad regardless of where they pick.

That said, this isn't the worst idea I've heard regarding draft changes. I've heard Dan Leb The Tard argue pretty hardcore for no draft and having open free agency for all college players and to eliminate the salary cap. That shit is stupid as fuck.

Problem with this idea is you are just moving the line where teams are sandbagging for. Instead of #1 pick. It would be to get in the top 5 picks.

I honestly dont believe teams sandbag on purpose. To many players, Coaches, team personnel jobs are on the line.
May look at it at times when teams make business decisions. Dropping high priced players when the team sucks & no need to pay that guy, always makes it look that way. But realistically. Is a business thing, not a draft thing.

 

[Cave_Johnson]

Problem with this idea is you are just moving the line where teams are sandbagging for. Instead of #1 pick. It would be to get in the top 5 picks.

I honestly dont believe teams sandbag on purpose. To many players, Coaches, team personnel jobs are on the line.
May look at it at times when teams make business decisions. Dropping high priced players when the team sucks & no need to pay that guy, always makes it look that way. But realistically. Is a business thing, not a draft thing.

Maybe? In the scenario I'm talking about you'd still have the worst team get the #1 pick 75% of the time. The 5th worst team would have something like a 0.5% chance at #1. But yeah not sure tanking is really that big of an issue in the NFL. Best to leave it as is and keep it simple.

 

[Cave_Johnson]

I would be ok with a coin flip for the worst and 2nd worst team. I wouldn't support anything beyond that though.

Yeah, if you're going to change it a simple solution like this might be the best way to go.