36 minutes ago, Tony said:

I don't have a solution for the how you change the draft structure in pro sports, someone way smarter than me would have to come up with something, but I've long believed it's a completely unfair process that needs to be addressed. Yes, no one is holding a gun to anyone’s head to play a professional sport, but being a fan in Chicago, we've watched all of our favorite teams select players in the top part of multiple drafts that I’m 99% sure would have prospered if a different team would have selected them. The Sox have had more players than I'd like to remember that were taken high in the first round, rushed through the minors, and you can just see a lack of development at the major league level. It’s happened too many times for it to be coincidence. But the issue is those players don’t have a choice on what team is in control of that development. How many millions of dollars have they cost athletes that already have an incredibly short career span? 

I will not hold it against Carl Williams, or any parent, to ensure their son/daughter is put in the best situation possible. 

How about this. We know they top draft picks are guaranteed to go to the worse teams but guaranteed money. How about having a system more like baseball where Williams could have gone to let's say the Vikings, a good but not the best team but needs to sign a lesser deal for more years.

That way the player can choose, bad team more money, better team more money.

57 minutes ago, ptatc said:

How about this. We know they top draft picks are guaranteed to go to the worse teams but guaranteed money. How about having a system more like baseball where Williams could have gone to let's say the Vikings, a good but not the best team but needs to sign a lesser deal for more years.

That way the player can choose, bad team more money, better team more money.

While obviously not perfect (don't know if any solution is) it's for sure on the right track. To take it a step further, what if there wasn't a "draft" at all? 

Every team has the same amount of money to spend for "rookie player acquisition" and there is a period of time when it starts, just like unrestricted free agency. Players declare just like they would for the draft. But the pool becomes open and any player can talk to any team. It's up to the teams to decide if they want to employe a strategy of spending their entire sum on 1-2 players, or spread it out over 7-8 players. It also lets the players decide the situation they want to go to. 

I'm sure there are holes to this idea, but I've thought about it a bit and while there is an element to just having to see it play out to see if it works, I don't see one glaring problem that stands out that tells me it isn't doable. 

I put this in the NBA thread after the Mavericks' deal with the devil, but I still think the Professional Women's Hockey League has it figured out:

Once a team is mathematically eliminated, they improve their draft standing by winning games. 

Obviously there would still be bad teams. But #RoadToRodon, #CaptureTheFlagg, etc. would become lesser things.

1 hour ago, Tony said:

While obviously not perfect (don't know if any solution is) it's for sure on the right track. To take it a step further, what if there wasn't a "draft" at all? 

Every team has the same amount of money to spend for "rookie player acquisition" and there is a period of time when it starts, just like unrestricted free agency. Players declare just like they would for the draft. But the pool becomes open and any player can talk to any team. It's up to the teams to decide if they want to employe a strategy of spending their entire sum on 1-2 players, or spread it out over 7-8 players. It also lets the players decide the situation they want to go to. 

I'm sure there are holes to this idea, but I've thought about it a bit and while there is an element to just having to see it play out to see if it works, I don't see one glaring problem that stands out that tells me it isn't doable. 

That's pretty good. Maybe similar to baseball draft pool where the teams with the worst records get a little more to moderate the competitive balance.

1 hour ago, Tony said:

While obviously not perfect (don't know if any solution is) it's for sure on the right track. To take it a step further, what if there wasn't a "draft" at all? 

Every team has the same amount of money to spend for "rookie player acquisition" and there is a period of time when it starts, just like unrestricted free agency. Players declare just like they would for the draft. But the pool becomes open and any player can talk to any team. It's up to the teams to decide if they want to employe a strategy of spending their entire sum on 1-2 players, or spread it out over 7-8 players. It also lets the players decide the situation they want to go to. 

I'm sure there are holes to this idea, but I've thought about it a bit and while there is an element to just having to see it play out to see if it works, I don't see one glaring problem that stands out that tells me it isn't doable. 

If anything - don't make the $ equal - so you are giving more money to the worse teams - teams can trade "draft" money for the value and optimize accordingly.  It would certainly be interesting to say the least. My guess is it would end up in a bigger disparity of have and have nots in terms of players - more of the higher end prospects will get a larger swath of the pool and than a bunch of guys on minimum deals.  But essentially with a pool tied to where you would "pick" you essentially create a free market view of the draft.  

Tony - I really like the idea. I think the one inherent bias to the deal is larger market teams clearly would have an advantage because you can probably help them negotiate / obtain bigger advertising / non team related pay which would put an inherent advantage to Chicago, LA, New York, etc.  I would think you'd have to find a way to normalize for that.  

Bruh...

3 hours ago, Chisoxfn said:

Tony - I really like the idea. I think the one inherent bias to the deal is larger market teams clearly would have an advantage because you can probably help them negotiate / obtain bigger advertising / non team related pay which would put an inherent advantage to Chicago, LA, New York, etc.  I would think you'd have to find a way to normalize for that.  

Yeah, I thought about that as well. Bad organizations would be much more likely to stay bad, and it would get tricky to manage it, but I still think there is probably some details you could add into the rules if a bunch of smart people sat in a room for a few days and hashed it out…I think it could actually work. Never will happen obviously, but I just keep going back to how archaic the idea of a draft really is. 
 

Fun offseason convo to have I guess  

“Patriots turned down offers from Bears and another team for pick they used on TreVeyon Henderson”

 

interior of our line is set for 3 years. Finally.

Colts Owner Jim Irsay passed in his sleep, 65

On 5/16/2025 at 3:43 PM, ptatc said:

That's pretty good. Maybe similar to baseball draft pool where the teams with the worst records get a little more to moderate the competitive balance.

https://awfulannouncing.com/nfl/peter-king-predicts-end-draft-in-our-lifetime.html
 

maybe it wasn’t that crazy after all?

Pacers should end this series 

1 hour ago, Tony said:

https://awfulannouncing.com/nfl/peter-king-predicts-end-draft-in-our-lifetime.html
 

maybe it wasn’t that crazy after all?

That's cool. Not surprised with the NIL movement it is bound to hit the pro sports.

Hopefully, they maintain some advantage for the teams with worse records not just the team with the most money wins.

https://www.nfl.com/news/four-time-lions-pro-bowl-c-frank-ragnow-to-retire-after-seven-seasons-in-nfl
 

Lions C Frank Ragnow is retiring after 7 years.  Lions are really gonna be in an uphill climb if they can’t keep Goff upright

On 6/2/2025 at 11:29 AM, Kyyle23 said:

https://www.nfl.com/news/four-time-lions-pro-bowl-c-frank-ragnow-to-retire-after-seven-seasons-in-nfl
 

Lions C Frank Ragnow is retiring after 7 years.  Lions are really gonna be in an uphill climb if they can’t keep Goff upright

They drafted his replacement as they knew this was coming.

Well I officially hate the Steelers this season.

16 hours ago, SoxAce said:

Well I officially hate the Steelers this season.

Being a steelers fans and a medical professional I'm stuck. Can't root for him to be bad or for him to get hurt and not play. 

I think I've settled on them still trying to win with the running game and defense and minimize any impact he can have.

Going to be a tough year warch8ng the games.

Edited June 6, 2025Jun 6 by ptatc

Yeah, I would have let him just ride out the next two years to see what happens…

 

So Johnson got a five year deal?  WOW.

$400M plus in revenue sharing?  And the Bears are looking for handout?  Get fucked Halas, heirs. And on another front, JR is crushing it even more than we thought.

Another rough day for the offense at training camp. And yes, I know all the excuses (“it’s early, new system, new HC, new players working together), but hearing Williams overthrow a deep ball, then under throw another pass, just immediately brings me back to the White Sox mindset of no one earning any benefit of doubt until they prove it. Those are only two passes - but two passes which summarize his issues. 

I’ll just settle for ONE day of, “the offense looked great today at training camp.” 

 

10 hours ago, Flash Tizzle said:

Another rough day for the offense at training camp. And yes, I know all the excuses (“it’s early, new system, new HC, new players working together), but hearing Williams overthrow a deep ball, then under throw another pass, just immediately brings me back to the White Sox mindset of no one earning any benefit of doubt until they prove it. Those are only two passes - but two passes which summarize his issues. 

I’ll just settle for ONE day of, “the offense looked great today at training camp.” 

 

Im in the - not counting anything until I see real sustained in season success. With that said - man my first impression of Ben Johnson is legit. I’ll also say I’m hoping Caleb responds to the challenge he’s getting - can tell Caleb didn’t have same expectations set on him last year or in college. Ben expects a lot more and it will be interesting to see if Caleb is willing to do what it takes or if he is content as he already has made a lot of money.

8 hours ago, Chisoxfn said:

Im in the - not counting anything until I see real sustained in season success. With that said - man my first impression of Ben Johnson is legit. I’ll also say I’m hoping Caleb responds to the challenge he’s getting - can tell Caleb didn’t have same expectations set on him last year or in college. Ben expects a lot more and it will be interesting to see if Caleb is willing to do what it takes or if he is content as he already has made a lot of money.

Dude has probably a billion dollars in lifetime earnings ahead of him if he lives up to his ceiling.  If he is content after only his rookie contract, he was never going to be good.