The New Draft Format...Your Honest Opinion

[Avery]

It's pretty simple, really.

First round gets the most viewers. During the second and third, they lose viewers.

By round four, most viewers tune out since they just talk about the first day and most prospects are unknown.

I like the new rule changes for time the best - 15 minutes takes way too long per pick.

 

[THUMPER]

I really don't care about watching the draft since I watch very little college football and don't know much about individual players. Plus the times I have watched, Jerry trades down so many times when it FINALLY gets to our turn that I end up being frustrated by the whole thing.

Moving it to prime time will eliminate any possibility of me watching it (our evenings are usually booked) so now it really doesn't matter to me. In the long run it is probably better since my wife won't get on my case about wasting all day on Saturday watching other teams pick players.

I'll see who we picked online afterwards and be happy or upset but at least I won't have wasted so much time.

 

[theogt]

Not at all.

I'm glad you agree with me. It's an obvious point, and I can't imagine why anyone would disagree.

What's next? A primer on the Laffer Curve? I wonder if they teach ethics in B-Schools ...

I take it that since you didn't actually refute what I said here either, you agree again.

 

[speedkilz88]

I like it and it's not really because of moving the 1st round to prime time. It's just the two day format really wore me out. Breaking it all up some gives me time to recharge.

One thing I would like to see and am sure I won't, is to see the coverage concentrate on the actual draft picks. Every one of them. I hate seeing these guys go to ex players and just rehash the same stories over and over and miss a bunch of the picks and never see any footage on them.

 

[bbgun]

I'm glad you agree with me. It's an obvious point, and I can't imagine why anyone would disagree.

Yes, the league's motivations couldn't be more obvious, or their cover story more absurd. "Don't piss on my leg ..."

I take it that since you didn't actually refute what I said here either, you agree again.

You don't care if you're taken advantage of. I do.

 

[Hostile]

Yes, the league's motivations couldn't be more obvious, or their cover story more absurd. "Don't piss on my leg ..."



You don't care if you're taken advantage of. I do.

You encourage it right?

 

[theogt]

Yes, the league's motivations couldn't be more obvious, or their cover story more absurd. "Don't piss on my leg ..."

So why even disagree with me originally if it's such an obvious point?

More fans will watch. Thus, more fans will enjoy the draft. Pretty simple stuff to understand.

You don't care if you're taken advantage of. I do.

It's not that I care or not. It's that I don't make absurd statements that labast things like capitalism. Not a commie, myself.

 

[bbgun]

You encourage it right?

I pose seductively in front of an open window every night, but so far, no takers.

 

[Hostile]

I pose seductively in front of an open window every night, but so far, no takers.

Have you ever thought of a women's prison pen pal?

 

[Hoofbite]

I'd rather have it Friday night, Saturday and Sunday. It's gonna be one strange Sunday without the draft.

Almost as strange as the 51 other Sundays without the draft.

 

[bbgun]

So why even disagree with me originally if it's such an obvious point?

More fans will watch. Thus, more fans will enjoy the draft. Pretty simple stuff to understand.

The OP asked for our personal opinions about the new format. AFAIK, there are no right or wrong answers, just our individual preferences/biases. Not every post is an invitation to a long, grueling, pointless debate.

It's not that I care or not. It's that I don't make absurd statements that labast things like capitalism. Not a commie, myself.

http://img163.*************/img163/6404/strawman.jpg

 

[bbgun]

Have you ever thought of a women's prison pen pal?

Pen pal? Throw in some "conjugals" and we'll talk.

 

[dhaber]

I know that I'll sit there like an idiot for 3 days watching it now, rather than the two days I'm accustomed to.

 

[bbgun]

I know that I'll sit there like an idiot for 3 days watching it now, rather than the two days I'm accustomed to.

That's what they're counting on, sucker. They know an easy mark when they see one.

 

[CF74]

It's ok, kinda wish they spread it out a little more differently though with less time between each pick, maybe 5 minutes. I have a short attention span. I might only watch the 1st two days anyways...

Day 1: Rounds 1-2
Day 2: Rounds 3-4
Day 3: Rounds 5-7

 

[theogt]

The OP asked for our personal opinions about the new format. AFAIK, there are no right or wrong answers, just our individual preferences/biases. Not every post is an invitation to a long, grueling, pointless debate.

When you reply to some I said, particularly when doing so in a line by line fashion, I tend to think you're actually replying to what I said, not what the OP said.

http://img163.*************/img163/6404/strawman.jpg

And when I explained to you the connection between what you posted and capitalism, you glossed over it, as you often tend to do. Here's a picture for you:

If you can just ignore the arguments, they'll all go away.

 

[Hostile]

I know that I'll sit there like an idiot for 3 days watching it now, rather than the two days I'm accustomed to.

Me too, and I will cook football stuff for 3 days instead of 2.

I will predict it right now, this will be a great Draft. I'm talking about the coverage. Better than they've ever had.

 

[bbgun]

When you reply to some I said, particularly when doing so in a line by line fashion, I tend to think you're actually replying to what I said, not what the OP said.

My first post didn't address anyone in particular. Like everyone else, it simply answered Hos's question. Yet somehow, I and I alone had to "defend" my point of view because a certain someone just couldn't control himself. Again.

And when I explained to you the connection between what you posted and capitalism, you glossed over it, as you often tend to do.

I tend to "gloss over" posts that deliberately put words in my mouth. Once more, for the learning impaired: Capitalism good, certain capitalists bad. Crazy, no?

If you can just ignore the arguments, they'll all go away.

Who started the argument? Oh right. Keep on keepin' on.

 

[theogt]

My first post didn't address anyone in particular. Like everyone else, it simply answered Hos's question. Yet somehow, I and I alone had to "defend" my point of view because a certain someone just couldn't control himself. Again.

You replied to what I said. Whether you made a slip of the tongue because you felt you had to defend yourself is irrelevant. Obviously you later agreed with me, as you clearly admitted. I'm just curious as to why you disagreed initially. At least I have to commend you for changing your tune so quickly when it became apparent how wrong your were. Sometimes you don't even do that.

I tend to "gloss over" posts that deliberately put words in my mouth. Once more, for the learning impaired: Capitalism good, certain capitalists bad. Crazy, no?

Your original statement wasn't specific. It was about as broad as it gets -- something to the effect of ANY system based on greed. I'm sure you'd like to narrow that statement now after its absurdity has been shown.

Who started the argument? Oh right. Keep on keepin' on.

You did. You made the argument that any system based on greed was somehow intolerable. I was simply replying to the argument with counter-arguments.

 

[bbgun]

You replied to what I said.

Um, only because you stuck your nose in (again) at post #21. Again, not every post requires a response from you, especially in a thread as trivial as this one. If Hos asked us what our favorite flavor of ice cream was, you'd make me defend "chocolate." Sadly, some people are just trouble-seeking *****. If you've confronted or replied to any posters in this thread besides myself, please forward their names.

Whether you made a slip of the tongue because you felt you had to defend yourself is irrelevant. Obviously you later agreed with me, as you clearly admitted. I'm just curious as to why you disagreed initially. At least I have to commend you for changing your tune so quickly when it became apparent how wrong your were. Sometimes you don't even do that.

No disagreement. We both agree that the NFL is manipulating the draft schedule in deference to the almighty dollar. You're cool with it; I'm not. Big deal. So why are we still talking about this?

Your original statement wasn't specific. It was about as broad as it gets -- something to the effect of ANY system based on greed. I'm sure you'd like to narrow that statement now after its absurdity has been shown.

On the contrary, it was very specific. In fact, it specifically omitted the word "capitalism" or any attacks thereon, so you had no choice to invent some out of hand. If you can't win, then cheat.

You did. You made the argument that any system based on greed was somehow intolerable. I was simply replying to the argument with counter-arguments.

Intolerable? Who said that? I'm simply calling a spade a spade. They have the right to soak the fans, and I have the right to object. Similarly, you have the right to shamelessly shill on their behalf.