2016 Mls College Superdraft
- Thread starter franchise646
- Start date
Ohenry
Registered
This is one of the biggest arguments in favor of pro/rel and against this draft. Incenting teams to lose is a horrible entertainment model. Giving last place teams something to fight for is a fan dream.
EDIT: With pro/rel a pipe dream I'd support rewards for bottom of the league favoring the teams closest to making the playoffs. So the team that just missed the playoffs would get the first pick in the draft. The second closest team would get the next pick and so on. That way everyone has incentive to try to win games all the way to the very end. And as for the argument that this would make it particularly hard for last place teams to climb out of the bottom ... cry me a river. The league could have a special dispensation for those teams where they can pay money to the league to purchase extra TAM. So they can get out of the bottom, but it'll cost them. This is all a mental ramble, but I hate these systems that encourage tanking.
Last edited:
SpicyRoll
Registered
I believe you have a really good point here. Unlike the other main leagues in the U.S, MLS has many methods in acquiring players and their methodology extends globally due to the talent available overseas. Therefore, it's easier for teams to "climb out of the bottom" if they don't have a top pick in the draft.On the contrary, leagues like the NBA, NFL, and NHL rely heavily on the draft to develop their teams. The worst team=high pick makes sense to them.
I agree with you that the picks should be inverted and that teams who just missed the playoffs should be rewarded more than last place teams. Or at least do the "lottery" system that NBA and I believe NHL does so there's no guarantee you get rewarded for being the worst team.
Take it one step farther.... the teams that don't make the playoffs have their own play-off tournament to see who wins the first pick - this runs concurrent with the real playoffs so that fans don't lose interest. I hate the idea of a lottery because you could end of with a San Antonio David Robinson/Tim Duncan scenario - a team that really didn't deserve the first pick getting it. At least with the crappy teams having to win games to get the pick, it will cut out any shenanigans of throwing games to either have the worst record, or as FootyLovin suggested, the team that just misses the real playoffs (on purpose).
I know in the nfl, teams will never try to lose on purpose. I've been a giants fan in over the years and it been frustrating to see them just barely miss the playoffs but be high enough that they get bad draft picks. I remember watching a documentary on it and when the reporter asked if the team ever talked about losing on purpose to get better draft picks, the player said they would never talked about it in the locker room because it's their jobs to win regardless if they are out of the post season. Every team is made up of athletes and they are getting paid to win, regardless if they are doing well or not they won't throw a game because it's their jobs. And they want to keep their jobs for the next season. Yes it's frustrating if you're trying to get good draft picks but I applaud the players for trying to play. The only issue with my argument is NYC's three game losing streak at the end which made them look like they didn't care and wanted the better draft pick because everyone seemed to give up. I believe their coach was the first one to give up on them, and the players quickly followed his lead.
I agree with you as far as being against a lottery. But I'm not a fan of the playoff for the right to the top draft pick. When it's MLS Cup playoff time, the focus should be there. When your crappy team ends its regular season, it's time to let it die. I also don't think any team would choose the #1 draft pick next year (who might or might not go to Europe) over a playoff spot this year.
I agree that almost all players and teams continue to want to play well even after their playoff hopes are done. But that doesn't change the fact that the incentives are in favor of losing at that point. When you have some goal to play for, you play better. Professionalism is well and good, but it doesn't bring out your best the way a common objective will.
It would be bad if a team that failed to make the playoffs already traded its first round pick. Is it going to play hard to ensure that the team that owns the pick gets a higher place in he draft?
This could be managed with a standard clause that the pick reverts if the team gets the #1 and the trade team gets their pick the following year.
EDIT: Actually, I'd love to see the league make a standard rule in that case that top 3 picks always revert to the team regardless of trade. This would be good for competition and good for the league. So go ahead and trade for Seattle's first round pick. They are almost certainly making the playoffs and won't have a top 3. Trade for Colorado's. They'll be bottom of the table and won't have a top 3. But a team that just misses the playoffs will keep their pick for that year.
I don't think tanking is an issue in MLS at the moment. First off the super draft is boarder line pointless and teams know it. Secondly, the league and the teams are too dependent on attendance to risk loosing any fans as a result of poor showings at the end of a season. At this point MLS is nothing like the NFL or NBA. Those leagues have giant TV contracts to cover lost attendance revenue if they tank and huge generational fan bases that they don't have to worry about pissing off.
How about instead of a distracting bottom-of-the-league playoff for the draft picks they do a tie-breaker-style system? That way you reward teams who keep on trying and everyone has something to play for at the end of the season even if they're out of the playoff picture. To give everyone a chance you could even start counting from somewhere near the end of the season to get around a team being terrible early on. Perhaps the last five matches, say.
And not just for draft picks either. Maybe throw in some extra allocation money too.
And not just for draft picks either. Maybe throw in some extra allocation money too.
Anybody taken a look at this guy Cole Seiler? Seems to be a sleeper that played next to Yaro. There isn't any film on YT of him beyond this one clip. He's started every game but 1 in 4 years at Georgetown. He was team Captain last year.
Not afraid of a big moment...
Not afraid of a big moment...
franchise646
Registered
If he signs a GA deal, it means that he can get drafted by anyone. This probably means that MLS rejected NYCFC's homegrown claim.
The advantage of signing Harrison to a homegrown deal is that we would have received two top 4 picks for the price of one -- Harrison on the homegrown, and the separate draft pick (#4). If he's signed a GA deal, NYCFC would have to draft him.
Harrison's a really talented guy, but I doubt he makes it to us at 4, and we have greater needs than a midfielder.
Okay, assume we need to trade up to get Yaro or Harrison. What are you willing to give up to move from #4 to #1 or #2?
franchise646
Registered
Tommy Mac, this years 4 and next years pick for Yaro
He's the sexy pic this year. Everyone is talking about him. Hope I am wrong, but we ain't getting him.
I see what you are saying...but he is a midfielder now, maybe he could be a winger. He's a good attacker and has talent. Wouldn't pass him up, whatever the need is. Yaro will be gone, so that leaves us with maybe Vincent, which is a need. Then a crap shoot on CBs...which we will wind up doing...rolling the dice on a CB hoping for the best.
Similar threads
