2016 Draft a Franchise: Conference 2 Divisional Playoffs

[Deflated Football]

1 minute ago, rmw10 said:

I accept any and all monetary donations.

Now we're talking...

[-Truth-]

1 minute ago, Deflated Football said:

Now we're talking...

Down to three now.

[-Truth-]

3 minutes ago, rmw10 said:

I accept any and all monetary donations.

A special somebody stopped by and gave you the first vote.

[Deflated Football]

Just now, -Truth- said:

Down to three now.

Lol! By any means necessary!

[rmw10]

3 minutes ago, Deflated Football said:

Now we're talking...

What's funny is that I actually didn't vote lol

[BOLDnPurPnBlacK]

1 minute ago, -Truth- said:

A special somebody stopped by and gave you the first vote.

It was me. Had to show some love for my division.

I will say however (yes, this is saltiness coming out subtly that ill mask as sarcastic humor) that i think my team wouldve matched up better and gotten a cpl votes.

Just sayin (whenever someone ends with "just sayin" they're 'just sayin' the statement with a smug arrogance - make sure you read it that way)

[rmw10]

3 minutes ago, -Truth- said:

Down to three now.

I was willing to accept the shutout, but I'll take that FG at the end of the game that doesn't really matter other than getting rid of that 0.

[BOLDnPurPnBlacK]

I will also say, that i dont think any of these votes should have been official without at least a majority of the participants votes being accounted for, if not all. I know some dont check in, but maybe a DM sent to every participant could have helped?

I mean, we're going to end up declaring a winner with only like 12-13 out of what, 32, actually voting.

 

Plus - shoot we spent 2 months picking the teams, and then kept the polls open for the division round for what - 24 hours?? Seems like a disservice to all the hard work we all put in.

Edited July 27, 2016 by BOLDnPurPnBlacK

[-Truth-]

Just now, BOLDnPurPnBlacK said:

It was me. Had to show some love for my division.

I will say however (yes, this is saltiness coming out subtly that ill mask as sarcastic humor) that i think my team wouldve matched up better and gotten a cpl votes.

Just sayin (whenever someone ends with "just sayin" they're 'just sayin' the statement with a smug arrogance - make sure you read it that way)

Good. It's good to see things kept interesting. Given that I just ended a post in another thread with that exact sentiment, I can sympathize lol I feel like your defense would've given my offense among the toughest times of any other unit out there. Defensive pressure, the LBs to help contain the RBs and TE and the corners to contend with the wide receivers. I was fortunate to take on a team that had a significantly later start as far as their selections went.

[-Truth-]

2 minutes ago, BOLDnPurPnBlacK said:

I will also say, that i dont think any of these votes should have been official without at least a majority of the participants votes being accounted for, if not all. I know some dont check in, but maybe a DM sent to every participant could have helped?

I mean, we're going to end up declaring a winner with only like 12-13 out of what, 32, actually voting.

 

Plus - shoot we spent 2 months picking the teams, and then kept the polls open for the division round for what - 24 hours?? Seems like a disservice to all the hard work we all put in.

Fair sentiment on all accounts.

[-Truth-]

4 minutes ago, rmw10 said:

I was willing to accept the shutout, but I'll take that FG at the end of the game that doesn't really matter other than getting rid of that 0.

You mean high-stepping it into the end zone and then going for two. I would accept no less.

[BOLDnPurPnBlacK]

Just now, -Truth- said:

Good. It's good to see things kept interesting. Given that I just ended a post in another thread with that exact sentiment, I can sympathize lol I feel like your defense would've given my offense among the toughest times of any other unit out there. Defensive pressure, the LBs to help contain the RBs and TE and the corners to contend with the wide receivers. I was fortunate to take on a team that had a significantly later start as far as their selections went.

lol glad you could relate.

Yea, i think our teams have kind of a yin and yang thing going on. Everywhere you're strong - my team has the strength to slow it down. Everywhere I'm weak, your teams weakness is the unit tasked with stopping it. So it looks to me like it really would come down to nuance, preference and some minute details. And thats the kind of match up i like.

[BOLDnPurPnBlacK]

Plus another thing I think is a bit odd with the luxury of hindsight... we're calling this 2016 DaF, and all throughout the draft everyone talked about projections - i think this guy is going to break out so i took him a bit early.... this guys getting older so he might decline so i held off a bit.... this rookie has a lot of potential....

But, then we vote the teams before any 2016 snaps have been played which means we're all really evaluating on 2015 performance and individual expectation for 2016 which can vary greatly from person to person. I thought we'd all sit with the teams we drafted all year, and then evaluate after the 2016 season and pick a winner so that there would be an aspect of who had the best foresight and who predicted the right breakout players, best rookies, etc...

Since we vote before we see it unfold none of that gets taken into account. For instance, WR is a relative weakness of my team, and voting was done prior to Josh Gordon being reinstated who i took with my 2nd or 3rd to last pick.

Its a long shot, but if he comes back and plays to pre-suspension form, I land a top 5 type receiver in the last rounds and make WR a real strength... especially if Coates breaks out like expected in Bryants role. And if Bradford plays much better in a WCO to a respectable top 15ish QB, suddenly my offense becomes pretty darn good instead of just good enough.

The current format almost punishes someone trying to do some research and pick under the radar guys who are primed to breakout in 2016, and benefits those who select the established, well-known guys who could be approaching the down turn in their career.

Coleman, Doctson, Treadwell could all stink and Tajae Sharp goes for 1400 yds and 10 TDs... but since we all know the rd 1 guys those teams have a higher vote-ability right now, but the 2016 reality could shake out completely different.

 

Likewise JPP could fall off a cliff, Harrison could suck in a 4-3, Amerson's last year could be a fluke, Talib could still get brought up on charges and miss some of if not all of the season, etc... which takes my D from ferocious to mild.

And I dont know why ppl were like aww shucks my guy just announced his retirement if we're judging every other player on what they did in 2015 or this truly immeasurable fantasy idea of what each of us thinks a guy might do in 2016 before it happens. well that guy could suddenly un-retire.

 

I guess - this might not be the spot for this - but maybe just a suggestion post for next years. What im trying to say is i think this year shouldve been called the 2015 DaF, or if its going to stay as an exercise of picking a team for the upcoming year then the voting should be held off until we have some actual data and games to base it on from the upcoming year.

Still really enjoyed it and look forward to participating again if the invite is extended.

Edited July 27, 2016 by BOLDnPurPnBlacK

[harfordravenfan]

Can't speak for everyone but I have every intention to revisit the DaF teams at the end of the year. Especially since I drafted such a young team

[-Truth-]

7 minutes ago, harfordravenfan said:

Can't speak for everyone but I have every intention to revisit the DaF teams at the end of the year. Especially since I drafted such a young team

I do the very same the year after for sure.

[BOLDnPurPnBlacK]

13 minutes ago, harfordravenfan said:

Can't speak for everyone but I have every intention to revisit the DaF teams at the end of the year. Especially since I drafted such a young team

Oh I plan to, too. Im sure everyone will.

But, the true "winner" (and, no, im not taking it all that serious... but if we are going to call it competition with voting and everything, might as well make it the best it can be) is who gets these votes. But, these votes can only be based on what we know of the players from 2015 and this fleeting, highly variable and unreliable idea of what each individual "thinks" they will do in 2016.

If we're all going to revisit at the end of the year (and thats what we all really care about anyways - seeing which of the later picks we nailed and which we misjudged) why not just hold off on the voting until then, anyways?

 

Edited July 27, 2016 by BOLDnPurPnBlacK

[Mt. Crushmore]

On July 26, 2016 at 8:57 AM, rmw10 said:

I was willing to settle it via sword battle, but Crush decided otherwise

Seems reasonable.

On July 26, 2016 at 8:51 AM, BOLDnPurPnBlacK said:

Booooo... filing a petition to remove you as Commissioner for that farce of a tie breaker.

Sorry, best method I could think of. 

11 hours ago, ludy51 said:

AP's fumbling issues always show up around this time of year

An underrated bad aspect of his game is he is pretty unproductive running out of shotgun formations.

6 hours ago, Deflated Football said:

You guys are all mean 

Did they deflate your football?

2 hours ago, Deflated Football said:

Who has PayPal so I can get five more votes...

This CoCo member is open to monetary payment...Need to compete with Goodell's salary somehow!

[BOLDnPurPnBlacK]

19 hours ago, Mt. Crushmore said:

Sorry, best method I could think of. 

I know - it was really the only fair method. Was just eating some sour grapes.

[BmoreBird22]

On 7/27/2016 at 4:21 PM, harfordravenfan said:

Can't speak for everyone but I have every intention to revisit the DaF teams at the end of the year. Especially since I drafted such a young team

I do this. You'll be surprised every single year at where guys get drafted.

[BOLDnPurPnBlacK]

14 hours ago, BmoreBird22 said:

I do this. You'll be surprised every single year at where guys get drafted.

That was my point - its difficult to sniff out the breakout type players in the late rounds.. i mean thats the real talent in an exercise like this.

By doing the voting now, its basically dependent upon other voters sharing your opinion that it was a great player who will break out and therefore boost your overall team and your chance of winning.

However, if we waited to vote until after the season - everyone would know that the flier on Josh Gordon in the last rounds was a great pick if he returns to form and puts up 1200 yds and 10 TDs (not likely but just an example), or when Villanueva starts every game for Pitt and becomes a top 10 starting LT in the league thatll be a position of strength instead of a weakness.

But right now, those are looked at as weaknesses or holes while in reality in the 2016 season they could become strengths. And i think the players who had good foresight in their drafting should be awarded for doing so.

Plus the guys who took well-known rookies probably get some props in the voting, but what if Coleman and Doctson bust. They looked like positives now and helped get votes, but could end up being terrible picks.

 

Again, not that im taking this voting all that seriously... just think since we spend so much time selecting the teams and most of us are proud of our selections that the vote should A) happen after we have data to actually evaluate these fantasy 2016 rosters, B ) the polls should stay open longer than 24 hours so more time can be spent evaluating and C) more than 10-12 votes should be necessary to win since at least 32 people were involved in the game. At least a majority should be necessary.

Sorry for reiterated stuff ive already said in a lengthy post.