Jump to content

Scott's IMD Discussion Thread


Recommended Posts

I've enjoyed doing the other one a good deal, but with all the inactive and slow GMs, the fun is slowly dwindling down.  As we've talked about, I liked to start another one of these (we will still be finishing the other one!!!  Robb worked extremely hard putting it together, it's not his fault the GMs decided to not participate). 

This one will be ran basically the same way.  I'd like your input on any changes you think should be made.

There will be no free agency period.  Who you have on your roster now is who you will have heading into the draft.

Each GM will control 2 teams.  This seems like a good bit of work to me, but I think we will survive.  With 16 active GMs, this will surely fly by.

One of the teams that you will control will be the one you're controlling in the current IMD (this is unless you specifically tell me you don't want that team, which a couple of you have). 

I will create a sign-up thread closer to time.

Feel free to give some feedback on how you'd like this to be ran.

BTW, teams will only have 2 hours on the clock.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 117
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Scott24Falcs (3/22/2008)
Norwood32 (3/22/2008)
SIGN UDFA!!!

I've been toying with that idea since you mentioned it a while back.  I'd like to keep the whole signing aspect as simple as possible.

I'd like some feedback on how we can make it just that.

I had the Points idea but i don't think that's gonna work. Um..... Flip a coin?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

first off there should be a limit to how many udfas we should be able to sign. do we want to try with 3 or 5? it shouldnt be any higher than 5. but 3 sounds like a good number.

then, we could either do the commissioner deciding thing where they see where the guy would most likely go, meaning where he would have the best shot at making the team or getting PT on special teams or winning a backup job.

or, we could flip a coin or something. but after teams get 3 then it should be easier for the other teams to add udfas.

this is a great idea though, i love udfas. :laugh:

but i suppose it shouldnt be required to take 2 teams. i have the time to take 2 teams as long as i can pm my picks in early since i have school every week day. however if you dont want to i dont see why we couldnt have a couple with only 1 team as long as they were active. jmo, but im not running this show.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Scott24Falcs (3/22/2008)
I agree, I think 3 UDFAs is a good number.  I kind of like the idea of letting the commisioners decide where that player has the best chance of making the roster and succeeding.  But I'm open to any ideas....

Mr. Offseason, you still want to be the co-commish right?  If not, let me know.

You know 5 ain't a bad number either... just saying;) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Norwood32 (3/22/2008)
Scott24Falcs (3/22/2008)
I agree, I think 3 UDFAs is a good number.  I kind of like the idea of letting the commisioners decide where that player has the best chance of making the roster and succeeding.  But I'm open to any ideas....

Mr. Offseason, you still want to be the co-commish right?  If not, let me know.

You know 5 ain't a bad number either... just saying;) 

Let's compromise.......4  ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Scott24Falcs (3/22/2008)
Norwood32 (3/22/2008)
Scott24Falcs (3/22/2008)
I agree, I think 3 UDFAs is a good number.  I kind of like the idea of letting the commisioners decide where that player has the best chance of making the roster and succeeding.  But I'm open to any ideas....

Mr. Offseason, you still want to be the co-commish right?  If not, let me know.

You know 5 ain't a bad number either... just saying;) 

Let's compromise.......4  ;)

DEAL!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Scott24Falcs (3/22/2008)
I agree, I think 3 UDFAs is a good number.  I kind of like the idea of letting the commisioners decide where that player has the best chance of making the roster and succeeding.  But I'm open to any ideas....

Mr. Offseason, you still want to be the co-commish right?  If not, let me know.

as a matter a fact i do. ;)

if you ever got on aim i would have told you that before, but thats another story. :laugh:

and i have no idea what we should do about the ufas that are still out there floating around in nothingness. it might be best just to ignore them and go with the teams as they are. another signing period could really complicate things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unless everyone wants to keep their current team, I vote that we switch the teams around...

The reason for this is because I personally (dunno bout everyone else) have researched the **** out of my team and the prospects that fit the areas of need on my team. I'd much rather not just go through a rehash of my previous draft, and this would be a golden opportunity for everyone to learn about a new team and the prospects that that team would be scouting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mr. Offseason (3/22/2008)
Scott24Falcs (3/22/2008)
I agree, I think 3 UDFAs is a good number.  I kind of like the idea of letting the commisioners decide where that player has the best chance of making the roster and succeeding.  But I'm open to any ideas....

Mr. Offseason, you still want to be the co-commish right?  If not, let me know.

as a matter a fact i do. ;)

if you ever got on aim i would have told you that before, but thats another story. :laugh:

and i have no idea what we should do about the ufas that are still out there floating around in nothingness. it might be best just to ignore them and go with the teams as they are. another signing period could really complicate things.

I like that idea.  Let's keep things as simple as possible.  If they are still floating around, chances are they suck anyways.  :P

As soon as this Marquette/Stanford game ends, I'll get on AIM.  :laugh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Curufin (3/22/2008)
Unless everyone wants to keep their current team, I vote that we switch the teams around...

The reason for this is because I personally (dunno bout everyone else) have researched the **** out of my team and the prospects that fit the areas of need on my team. I'd much rather not just go through a rehash of my previous draft, and this would be a golden opportunity for everyone to learn about a new team and the prospects that that team would be scouting.

I like the idea of keeping the team we have now, simply because we know their needs and we don't have to do more research.  With that additional team, we will have work to do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Scott24Falcs (3/22/2008)
Curufin (3/22/2008)
Unless everyone wants to keep their current team, I vote that we switch the teams around...

The reason for this is because I personally (dunno bout everyone else) have researched the **** out of my team and the prospects that fit the areas of need on my team. I'd much rather not just go through a rehash of my previous draft, and this would be a golden opportunity for everyone to learn about a new team and the prospects that that team would be scouting.

I like the idea of keeping the team we have now, simply because we know their needs and we don't have to do more research. With that additional team, we will have work to do.

But I see that as part of the fun. Where would the fun be in going through pretty much the exact same draft prospects and trying for the exact same draft as last time...

I took this as a great opportunity to learn about a lot of the players in the draft, but consequently (being New Orleans's GM), while I do have oodles of knowledge about every CB and S prospect in this draft, I am pretty much clueless when it comes to QBs (well not really considering the Falcons' situation, but still), RBs, WRs, OGs, etc.

This really is a great way to learn about the draft and have fun while doing it. JMO, but I think it'd be terribly boring to go through it with the same team again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Curufin (3/22/2008)
Scott24Falcs (3/22/2008)
Curufin (3/22/2008)
Unless everyone wants to keep their current team, I vote that we switch the teams around...

The reason for this is because I personally (dunno bout everyone else) have researched the **** out of my team and the prospects that fit the areas of need on my team. I'd much rather not just go through a rehash of my previous draft, and this would be a golden opportunity for everyone to learn about a new team and the prospects that that team would be scouting.

I like the idea of keeping the team we have now, simply because we know their needs and we don't have to do more research. With that additional team, we will have work to do.

But I see that as part of the fun. Where would the fun be in going through pretty much the exact same draft prospects and trying for the exact same draft as last time...

I took this as a great opportunity to learn about a lot of the players in the draft, but consequently (being New Orleans's GM), while I do have oodles of knowledge about every CB and S prospect in this draft, I am pretty much clueless when it comes to QBs (well not really considering the Falcons' situation, but still), RBs, WRs, OGs, etc.

This really is a great way to learn about the draft and have fun while doing it. JMO, but I think it'd be terribly boring to go through it with the same team again.

If we get enough GM's then you can have 1 team and it doesn't have to be your previous team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm down for this, but if possible I'd like two different teams besides the one I had previously... The main reason I do these is to learn about the prospects, and if I'm drafting for different teams that opens the possibility of me learning about new guys...

I'll stick with the Steelers if need be, but I'd prefer to have two new teams... JMO...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

WTA (3/22/2008)
I'm down for this, but if possible I'd like two different teams besides the one I had previously... The main reason I do these is to learn about the prospects, and if I'm drafting for different teams that opens the possibility of me learning about new guys...

I'll stick with the Steelers if need be, but I'd prefer to have two new teams... JMO...

If no one else shares our opinions, we can switch teams :P. I want a rebuilding team/lower tier more than an established one though :P.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...