Abolish the Draft

[jackrussell]

Turn the tables.

Have an independent counsel slot the top 224 players.

Then let the players select the team. 7 round draft, each team can only be picked once in a round.

Matt Stafford is on the clock.

Goodell goes to the podium...."With the first pick in the 2009 team draft...Matt Stafford picks......the Miami Dolphins."

Michael Crabtree is on the clock.

 

[Q_the_man]

Turn the tables.

Have an independent counsel slot the top 224 players.

Then let the players select the team. 7 round draft, each team can only be picked once in a round.

Matt Stafford is on the clock.

Goodell goes to the podium...."With the first pick in the 2009 team draft...Matt Stafford picks......the Miami Dolphins."

Michael Crabtree is on the clock.

In a interview with President of the Miami Dolphins, Bill Parcells says his team will accept the Pick but since his team is near the salary cap and a QB on the roster they can only offer Stafford 5 years 6 million.. If Stafford refuses offer he must sit out a year, on the other hand Crabtree chose the Cowboys and recieved a 5 year 50 million contract......

 

[dogunwo]

In the MLB, since 2000, only two teams have multiple World Series appearances and only one team has multiple wins. In the past 9 years, 15 different teams have made an appearance in the World Series.

That's parity.

My post was more about the fact that there are teams that NEVER have a shot. In the NFL, any team can turn it around. Not so in MLB.

 

[MadCow]

In a recent article on ESPN.com, Malcolm Gladwell briefly talked about the benefits of getting rid of drafts in pro sports. Instead, he mad the argument that players and teams should choose for themselves. Basically, it would work the same way as national signing day in college football. It sounds like a crazy idea, but I think that there's some merit behind it.

First, it's better for the players, without question. They would get to decide what's important to them, whether it be money, location, loyalty, history, etc. If I were a star college player from FL and was being offered 5 million a year from Seattle or 4.5 million a year from Tampa, then there's a good chance that I will stay where my home is. As another benefit, with multiple bidders for their services, players would be ensured the best contract possible.

Second, it's better for the fans. Instead of having players who were chosen to be on your team, you root for players who wanted to be there. The drama and excitement of acquiring new players is still there, it's just in a different format.

Third, it's better for the teams. Instead of being punished for succeeding, good teams are still able to pursue the players who they really want. Dallas wanted Unger and Crabtree this year? It could have happened. With a hard salary cap in place, teams would still be on an equal playing field. Now, would it punish the bad teams? No, it just wouldn't reward them.

I think it's a really interesting idea.

Blasphemy!

 

[DFWJC]

I love the NFL Draft.
The other stuff that you want can worked out in free agency.

 

[masomenos]

My post was more about the fact that there are teams that NEVER have a shot. In the NFL, any team can turn it around. Not so in MLB.

And my post was arguing against that. In the past 9 years it was possible for 18 different teams to make World Series appearances and 15 teams. So, in less than a decade, half of the league made it to the final game. Of course, if you look at how many teams made it to the playoffs in the time span the number would be even higher.

Tampa, Colorado, Florida. Hell, the Mariners won 116 games 8 years ago. In 2002 and 2003 combined the Detroit Tigers won fewer than 100 games and in 2006 they were playing in the World Series.

Any team can turn it around in the MLB. Does every team do it? No.

How is a team like the Bengals and different than the Pitt. Pirates? Both leagues have teams that are terrible for long stretches of time and that's just how it has to be, based on statistical distribution. The long term (10 year) success of sports teams follows a standard bell curve. There are a few teams which constantly lose far more than they win, there are a lot of teams which have long term records slightly above .500 and there a re a few teams which win far more than the lose. That's true regardless of the sport.

 

[WarDaddy]

Only like 4 teams would survive if that was the case and the Cowboys would win every year.

Abolish the Draft? Thanks, but no thanks...

 

[Doomsday101]

I still favor the draft and letting the teams with the worst record get the top pick. The most I could see the NFL do is go from 7 rds to 3 or 4 rds. At one time we had a lot more than just 7 rds and reduced it but I don't see the league giving up the draft.

 

[joseephuss]

The USFL didn't utilize a draft when they started. I guess that turned out pretty well for them.

 

[masomenos]

Only like 4 teams would survive if that was the case and the Cowboys would win every year.

Abolish the Draft? Thanks, but no thanks...

I don't understand where this idea is coming from. No team would be able to sign the top prospect every year, they wouldn't be able to fit the contracts into the cap without releasing quality veterans. Just like no team is able to sign the top FA every year and be successful (Washington, I'm looking at you). The salary cap is still in place and a rookie cap would be in place, so there wouldn't be any teams that had economic advantages over the others.

 

[Q_the_man]

And my post was arguing against that. In the past 9 years it was possible for 18 different teams to make World Series appearances and 15 teams. So, in less than a decade, half of the league made it to the final game. Of course, if you look at how many teams made it to the playoffs in the time span the number would be even higher.

Tampa, Colorado, Florida. Hell, the Mariners won 116 games 8 years ago. In 2002 and 2003 combined the Detroit Tigers won fewer than 100 games and in 2006 they were playing in the World Series.

Any team can turn it around in the MLB. Does every team do it? No.

How is a team like the Bengals and different than the Pitt. Pirates? Both leagues have teams that are terrible for long stretches of time and that's just how it has to be, based on statistical distribution. The long term (10 year) success of sports teams follows a standard bell curve. There are a few teams which constantly lose far more than they win, there are a lot of teams which have long term records slightly above .500 and there a re a few teams which win far more than the lose. That's true regardless of the sport.

Another thing about that is MLB expanded to 4 teams in each division compared to 2, if it were still 2 teams each it would have been the Yankees and the Angels Representing the American league 80% of the time..