Twitter: Should NFL consider draft lottery?

[popp1234]

Only, and not before, we eventually go to an all Flag Football NFL.

Wait, how much longer is Goodell at the helm?

 

[Nightman]

I generally don't care too much about the stuff the League does to try and keep itself relevant in the offseason, but if they did go to Draft Lottery, they could do it at the Pro Bowl. First move it back to the week after the Super Bowl and leave it it in Hawaii. Let all the best players get their free trip to Hawaii that they earned by being selected. All the media will be there and a representative from every team will be there as well and they could draw the ping pong balls live at halftime

It would definitely bring more viewers to the Pro Bowl and may be what it takes to save it in the future.

 

[rkell87]

How about bottom 5 teams go into a lotto for a compensatory type pick at the end of round 1?

 

[JoeyBoy718]

To be honest, I don't know if it would make much of a difference. It might even help. Lots of times, teams picking in the top 2-3 are pressured to pick certain players when they might really want someone else. And there is a lot of good talent in the 1st round. Heck, there's not much of a difference in talent between the #1 and #7 pick. Now, in the NBA, lots of years there's really only one good player. For example, this upcoming year, the difference in the value between the #3 and #4 pick will be huge.

 

[MarionBarberThe4th]

It's just a game. Mix it up, why not. Buncha curmudgeons

 

[JoeyBoy718]

I would like to see the 2nd and 4th rounds go opposite, meaning best team gets pick rd 2 pick1 (33) and worst gets rd 2 pick 32 (64)

So the worst team got picks 1, 64, 65, 128, 129, 161, 193

I wouldn't mind that idea. The bad teams get rewarded enough be getting the first picks in the draft. They have a chance at immediate franchise players like Clowney, Andrew Luck, Von Miller, Peyton Manning, etc. If you reward them with a player like that for sucking, then I don't see why you have to reward them 6 more times. I don't think a team deserves the 1st and 33rd pick. That's practically two 1st rounders. Then you have teams getting the 32nd and 64th pick. I think a team with the 1st and 64th still has better value than a team with the 32nd and 33rd.

 

[theSHOW]

I wouldn't mind that idea. The bad teams get rewarded enough be getting the first picks in the draft. They have a chance at immediate franchise players like Clowney, Andrew Luck, Von Miller, Peyton Manning, etc. If you reward them with a player like that for sucking, then I don't see why you have to reward them 6 more times. I don't think a team deserves the 1st and 33rd pick. That's practically two 1st rounders. Then you have teams getting the 32nd and 64th pick. I think a team with the 1st and 64th still has better value than a team with the 32nd and 33rd.

Yes. The trade chart shows the value is in the 1st round. If a bad team gets a reward then let it be in the 1st round... then somehow slide them back 10 spots per round as the good teams rotate to the front might be another example of how to "even" up the draft a bit more. Good teams need to be fairly compensated also when the yearly draft arrives.

 

[theSHOW]

I wouldn't mind that idea. The bad teams get rewarded enough be getting the first picks in the draft. They have a chance at immediate franchise players like Clowney, Andrew Luck, Von Miller, Peyton Manning, etc. If you reward them with a player like that for sucking, then I don't see why you have to reward them 6 more times. I don't think a team deserves the 1st and 33rd pick. That's practically two 1st rounders. Then you have teams getting the 32nd and 64th pick. I think a team with the 1st and 64th still has better value than a team with the 32nd and 33rd.

true 1, 64 is higher than 32,33 on the tradchart values. And at pick 65 Houston, lol, would have picked again.

 

[Fredd]

people are brining humor to my morning saying things like "but what if Dallas got a better pick after going 8-8"....why, oh why are you not thinking about the alternate, which means in a scenario where we moved up from 16 to 8 (for example), then 8 teams had to move back (8 to 9, 9 to 10, etc.)....and that is if ONLY one team were to move up....you are screwing the pooch if you ask me...the NFL is about parity, not making the close teams a playoff contender...they want the 2-14 teams to have a chance at the playoffs sooner rather than later...

being a sixers fan, the NBA draft lottery just screwed them a little...when Cleveland jumped over them in the lottery to get the #1 pick, they went from having the #2 and #9 picks (from a trade last year) to having the #3 and #10 picks...since the NBA player selection meeting is basically welcoming in a few good players each season, they sixers could get screwed out of one of the two best players (I feel there are only two studs)...

this isn't about "what has always been done", it is more "why mess with what works just to copy someone else"?

 

[Beast_from_East]

Then how are they supposed to get better to compete. Are you saying give the SB winner better picks as their reward.
Soon you will have a league of 2 teams.

I was thinking the same thing. How are bad teams going to get better if you give the top teams the best picks ?

Dumb idea, let's give Seattle the number one overall pick.........LMAO

 

[Nightman]

I was thinking the same thing. How are bad teams going to get better if you give the top teams the best picks ?

Dumb idea, let's give Seattle the number one overall pick.........LMAO

You obviously haven't been paying attention. It's not the Top teams. It's only those that didn't make the Playoffs. They re-order the Draft for the teams that make the Playoffs, why not for those that don't. If a 10-6 team wins the Super Bowl they get the last pick and so on.

A team like WAS has to give up 3 number ones to move up just because of the value chart. Teams like Dallas that perennially try to make the Playoffs are stuck in the Friend Zone of the Draft, no Playoffs and no studs unless they add more picks to move up. I say give everyone at least a chance at the Top picks.

Some teams will move up and some will move back, but you are not guaranteeing a huge reward for stinking it up. NASCAR changed their points system to make winning a race a lot bigger deal than just finishing in the Top 10.There should be no incentive for losing games late in the year for NFL teams when other teams are trying to make the Playoffs.

Isn't making a team like Dallas a playoff contender as good as making CLE or JAX a 6-10 team?

 

[Beast_from_East]

You obviously haven't been paying attention. It's not the Top teams. It's only those that didn't make the Playoffs. They re-order the Draft for the teams that make the Playoffs, why not for those that don't. If a 10-6 team wins the Super Bowl they get the last pick and so on.

A team like WAS has to give up 3 number ones to move up just because of the value chart. Teams like Dallas that perennially try to make the Playoffs are stuck in the Friend Zone of the Draft, no Playoffs and no studs unless they add more picks to move up. I say give everyone at least a chance at the Top picks.

Some teams will move up and some will move back, but you are not guaranteeing a huge reward for stinking it up. NASCAR changed their points system to make winning a race a lot bigger deal than just finishing in the Top 10.There should be no incentive for losing games late in the year for NFL teams when other teams are trying to make the Playoffs.

Isn't making a team like Dallas a playoff contender as good as making CLE or JAX a 6-10 team?

I am fully aware of how the NBA conducts the draft lottery and bringing that format to the NFL is just stupid.

Teams in the NFL do not tank on purpose because unlike Garrett, most coaches are fired for losing. Plus with free agency, a large portion of your players are playing for contracts and incentives.

Do you think players like Hatcher who stand to make millions on the open market is going to go half speed because the owner wants to tank the season?

So there is no need for a lottery because if it ain't broke, don't fix it. The draft had 32 million viewers so nobody has a problem with how it's done currently.

My .02

 

[Nightman]

I am fully aware of how the NBA conducts the draft lottery and bringing that format to the NFL is just stupid.

Teams in the NFL do not tank on purpose because unlike Garrett, most coaches are fired for losing. Plus with free agency, a large portion of your players are playing for contracts and incentives.

Do you think players like Hatcher who stand to make millions on the open market is going to go half speed because the owner wants to tank the season?

So there is no need for a lottery because if it ain't broke, don't fix it. The draft had 32 million viewers so nobody has a problem with how it's done currently.

My .02

You are not fully aware if you keep saying the Seahawks should get the first pick. They wouldn't be in the lottery.

The idea that teams don't tank in the NFL is silly.

 

[Beast_from_East]

You are not fully aware if you keep saying the Seahawks should get the first pick. They wouldn't be in the lottery.

The idea that teams don't tank in the NFL is silly.

Name me one team that tanked on purpose in the NFL last season. And provide some sort of article or quotes that indicate it, not just your personal opinion.

And if you say Houston, keep in mind that the coaching staff was fired so they intentionally lost knowing they would all be fired?

You seriously are going to argu that point? And if it was not Houston tanking then maybe it was the Skins that finished with the 2nd worst record. Oh wait, they didn't have a first round pick, they just lost because they suck

Do you see the problem with your scenario? Teams picking at the top of the draft tend to have new coaching staffs because, unlike Garrett, they are fired for losing. Houston has new coaching staff, same with Tampa Bay, same with Cleveland, same with Washington, ect...

No coincident that all these teams are picking in the top 10. So you expect us to believe the previous coaching staffs tanked on purpose even though it would cost them their jobs?

I don't buy it unless you got some quotes from any of these fired coaches saying they tanked on purpose.

 

[Nightman]

Name me one team that tanked on purpose in the NFL last season. And provide some sort of article or quotes that indicate it, not just your personal opinion.

And if you say Houston, keep in mind that the coaching staff was fired so they intentionally lost knowing they would all be fired?

You seriously are going to argu that point? And if it was not Houston tanking then maybe it was the Skins that finished with the 2nd worst record. Oh wait, they didn't have a first round pick, they just lost because they suck

Do you see the problem with your scenario? Teams picking at the top of the draft tend to have new coaching staffs because, unlike Garrett, they are fired for losing. Houston has new coaching staff, same with Tampa Bay, same with Cleveland, same with Washington, ect...

No coincident that all these teams are picking in the top 10. So you expect us to believe the previous coaching staffs tanked on purpose even though it would cost them their jobs?

I don't buy it unless you got some quotes from any of these fired coaches saying they tanked on purpose.

Like a team that is selling 60k+ tickets at $100 each is going to publicly admit they are not trying to win.

 

[JPostSam]

the lottery idea is asinine -- for any league. sports are not a slot machine.

further: seeding teams in the draft according to finish is meant to promote parity. gifting the first pick to the 8th-worst team directly undermines that mission.

further still: if adding an element of randomness to the draft gets your rocks off, why not randomize every pick of every round? what a hoot that would be.

 

[jday]

Just an FYI... nobody in his mentions liked the idea. lol

If it ain't broke, don't fix it. The beauty of the NFL as it stands right now is the parity. Basketball and baseball are shooting themselves in the foot because unlike football, you can pretty much predict at the beginning who is going to be there at the end. In football, because of the draft and Free Agency, teams can leap frog from the bottom to the top with one smart offseason.

 

[Doomsday]

The NBA draft lottery is horrible!

 

[Super_Kazuya]

How about an NFL version of "the wheel"?

http://grantland.com/the-triangle/t...g-good-bye-to-the-lottery-hello-to-the-wheel/

 

[gimmesix]

Not sure about a lottery, but a different system for sure.

The English Premier League is fond of saying, "We don't reward failure with draft picks. Relegation is their fate."

I'm not suggesting we kick the bottom three teams out of the NFL like they do in the EPL (which is awesome drama on the bottom end of their standings), but I don't like how we hand terrible franchises the top draft prize for their ineptitude.

Why? If you give the worst teams the best draft choices, then they have a much better chance of being competitive, which is what the NFL wants. It's not in the league's best interest for any team to be near the bottom year after year after year ... and it's not in the best interest of those teams, either.