CB NFL Draft Interest Thread

[Donoghus]

This thread is to gauge interest for an NFL draft along the lines of the CB Draft, Pick Two, and other various drafts we have on these boards throughout the year.

Since we're in the midst of a lockout and there seems to be some interest to "mix it up" from a draft standpoint, why don't we try an NFL draft?

So the thought is this and its certainly up for discussion:

11 offensive players: QB, RB, WR, WR, RB/WR, TE, OL, OL, OL, OL, OL

11 defensive players: DL, DL, DL, DL/LB, LB, LB, LB, CB, CB, S, S

4 special teamers:  K, P, KR, PR

1 coach

Also, I was thinking of doing this as a historical draft.  From either a 1960- present day time frame (incorporation of the AFL) or just the Super Bowl era (1966-present day).  1990- present day.

If the player played in any portion of that era, they are eligible.  They didn't necessarily have to start their career in that era so a guy like Gifford or Unitas who started in the 50s but wrapped up in the 60s and 70s would be eligible.

Thoughts?  Ideas?

[indeedproceed]

I'll do a present-day incarnation, no historical pour moi though.

[Rondo2287]

Im in for the draft, would prefer present day

[Roy H.]

I'm in, although I'll miss quite a few picks, I think.

Initial thought:  since a lot of teams will use the same guy as KR and PR, how about adding "wild card" slots?  Like wdleehi mentioned in the other thread, this could be used for defensive specialists like nickle situations, a 3rd down pass rusher, etc. 

What I suggested was 4 "wild cards", with a minimum of 1 each on offense and defense.  Combine KR and PR into "returner", and that leaves you with 30 slots.

I'm cool with either a present-day or historic draft.  Historic definitely opens up a lot more possibilities and leads to some interesting debate, and is less limiting.  At the same time, everybody is more familiar with modern players.  Maybe compromise and do a 1980 to present draft?  Whatever you decide, I'm fine with.

[Donoghus]

I'm in, although I'll miss quite a few picks, I think.

Initial thought:  since a lot of teams will use the same guy as KR and PR, how about adding "wild card" slots?  Like wdleehi mentioned in the other thread, this could be used for defensive specialists like nickle situations, a 3rd down pass rusher, etc. 

What I suggested was 4 "wild cards", with a minimum of 1 each on offense and defense.  Combine KR and PR into "returner", and that leaves you with 30 slots.

I'm cool with either a present-day or historic draft.  Historic definitely opens up a lot more possibilities and leads to some interesting debate, and is less limiting.  At the same time, everybody is more familiar with modern players.  Maybe compromise and do a 1980 to present draft?  Whatever you decide, I'm fine with.

I like the wild card idea and would be open to a compromise regarding time frame.

[Kwhit10]

As much as I love draft threads, I don't think I'm going to have the time for this one.   

Seems like it would be a lot of fun though.

[Rondo2287]

My only thing is, I would assume we might get 15 participants for this on the high end.  Would the present nfl talent pool be that limiting with only 15 teams?

[indeedproceed]

My thing with present day vs historic is that there isn't a level playing field, and the whole thing ends up feeling a bit contrived and just..soft.

Present day takes some of the mystery out of it, while still maintaining the feel of a draft. Historic draft means that I'll be arguing why Nate Newton makes Art Donovan look silly every single play, and why Mean Joe Greene just ain't getting past Orlando Pace, no matter how good you think he is. Its just apples and oranges, so you wind up more debating the 'legend' than you do the actual tangible facts.

[Donoghus]

My thing with present day vs historic is that there isn't a level playing field, and the whole thing ends up feeling a bit contrived and just..soft.

Present day takes some of the mystery out of it, while still maintaining the feel of a draft. Historic draft means that I'll be arguing why Nate Newton makes Art Donovan look silly every single play, and why Mean Joe Greene just ain't getting past Orlando Pace, no matter how good you think he is. Its just apples and oranges, so you wind up more debating the 'legend' than you do the actual tangible facts.

We've had historical drafts on here before that seemed to go well.  I don't see why this would be any different.  This makes it a little simpler for the casual football fan and I think would generate some pretty solid discussion. 

I really would rather not limit it to present day.  I'm down for closing the window to '80 to present or something along those lines. 

[Roy H.]

My thing with present day vs historic is that there isn't a level playing field, and the whole thing ends up feeling a bit contrived and just..soft.

Present day takes some of the mystery out of it, while still maintaining the feel of a draft. Historic draft means that I'll be arguing why Nate Newton makes Art Donovan look silly every single play, and why Mean Joe Greene just ain't getting past Orlando Pace, no matter how good you think he is. Its just apples and oranges, so you wind up more debating the 'legend' than you do the actual tangible facts.

I think you're right on this.  My response, though, is:

1) Debating the nuances is part of the fun; and

2) Who cares about level playing fields?  Since this isn't a huge competition, beauty is completely in the eye of the beholder.

[Donoghus]

My thing with present day vs historic is that there isn't a level playing field, and the whole thing ends up feeling a bit contrived and just..soft.

Present day takes some of the mystery out of it, while still maintaining the feel of a draft. Historic draft means that I'll be arguing why Nate Newton makes Art Donovan look silly every single play, and why Mean Joe Greene just ain't getting past Orlando Pace, no matter how good you think he is. Its just apples and oranges, so you wind up more debating the 'legend' than you do the actual tangible facts.

I think you're right on this.  My response, though, is:

1) Debating the nuances is part of the fun; and

2) Who cares about level playing fields?  Since this isn't a huge competition, beauty is completely in the eye of the beholder.

Boom.  Nailed it.

[indeedproceed]

My thing with present day vs historic is that there isn't a level playing field, and the whole thing ends up feeling a bit contrived and just..soft.

Present day takes some of the mystery out of it, while still maintaining the feel of a draft. Historic draft means that I'll be arguing why Nate Newton makes Art Donovan look silly every single play, and why Mean Joe Greene just ain't getting past Orlando Pace, no matter how good you think he is. Its just apples and oranges, so you wind up more debating the 'legend' than you do the actual tangible facts.

We've had historical drafts on here before that seemed to go well.  I don't see why this would be any different.  This makes it a little simpler for the casual football fan and I think would generate some pretty solid discussion.  

I really would rather not limit it to present day.  I'm down for closing the window to '80 to present or something along those lines.  

Oh, I'm not saying historical drafts can't go well, I'm saying I personally find them frustrating. If that's the consensus I think it'll go fine, just not my bag is all.

[StartOrien]

From an outsider's stand point:

Football's history is a lot less storied, which could make it that much more difficult to compare.

[Rondo2287]

My thing with present day vs historic is that there isn't a level playing field, and the whole thing ends up feeling a bit contrived and just..soft.

Present day takes some of the mystery out of it, while still maintaining the feel of a draft. Historic draft means that I'll be arguing why Nate Newton makes Art Donovan look silly every single play, and why Mean Joe Greene just ain't getting past Orlando Pace, no matter how good you think he is. Its just apples and oranges, so you wind up more debating the 'legend' than you do the actual tangible facts.

We've had historical drafts on here before that seemed to go well.  I don't see why this would be any different.  This makes it a little simpler for the casual football fan and I think would generate some pretty solid discussion.  

I really would rather not limit it to present day.  I'm down for closing the window to '80 to present or something along those lines.  

Oh, I'm not saying historical drafts can't go well, I'm saying I personally find them frustrating. If that's the consensus I think it'll go fine, just not my bag is all.

I also don't like them as much, Im 24, i tried defending some 70's and 80's basketball players but couldnt really do it in the last historical draft, i never saw them play and defnding based on writeups was tough

[Donoghus]

From an outsider's stand point:

Football's history is a lot less storied, which could make it that much more difficult to compare.

Less storied?  The NFL has been around longer than the NBA.