Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Flaxwless
So why should we back an incentive plan? What advantages does it have to overcome the fact that the rookie draft seeding is compromised.
I'm down for teams "trying" harder, never said I was against that, but I have proposed a solution that will have teams try harder AND not compromise the worst teams getting the best picks. IT DOES NOT SACRIFICE ONE FOR THE OTHER like a Toielt Bowl, extra balls does.
Really Mike... please explain your reasoning, instead of just offering your opinion.
Jake... I think the rules committee idea is bad as it will be based on subjectivity. The less sibjectivity in the better.
Also if you think I wasn't trying... when Anderson was a FA I had Eli Manning and Matt Hassellbeck playing very very well. Grant was out of my price range and I have a fairly decent RB committee and did not want to let proven RBs go to make room for Grant and his contract.
|
I don't think we need worry too much about subjectivity. If a case is brought in front of the committee, we gather the facts and throw a vote out to the league. We should require a 75% majority to convict - so its almost impossible that a gray-area type case would get penalized. If you're found guilty, you're 1st or 2nd pick becomes a 12th pick. Now, that's a reason to not tank!
If we implemented this, I can't imagine we would have to even deal with it more than once or twice. I just can't imagine teams would tank knowing that they could drop almost entirely out of the 1st round.
This is Soap Box's idea, so I know there's at least 2 of us that like this route. I really do think this is the best way - I just hate the fact that poor sportsmanship and cheating has to cause the rest of us to alter our rules. Let's just penalize the cheater.