Posted by dacj501 on 8/13/2010 2:56:00 AM (view original):
I'd like to state a preference for the recruiting SGs one...

Genius idea: Let's get 10 people that want to do this (10 because there's no way we'll be able to clear out an entire conference, so I figure we start with 10 and then people can just get in the conference as soon as it opens it). We'll get the first 10 people that can truly commit to this and we'll do a draft. I'll use random.org and we'll get a draft and people can choose which they want to do.

edit: in Phelan this upcoming year, we'll all have to do 1 year of D3 but I think D2 is preferable for everyone involved, so we'll rush the most empty conference in season 2. It'll be a 4-5 season commitment from everyone to get all your players in and have them fit all the criteria.

We can also randomize what team everyone gets, and cut all Seniors ASAP so that we can get to the players that meet the criteria 1 season sooner.

in phelan, right?

If we do it in phelan, we are able to reserve right now. I already have a team in Phelan and can look for a conference.

How about a list at the top of this thread of the coaches who are going to participate in this.  Just how many people do we have as firm commitments?

What about getting coaches that want each restriction.  For example, dac wants to recruit all SGs and I want to do internationals.  I wouldn't want to do it if I had to recruit guys with less than 15 durability.  Also, instead of the +2 we could do a low work ethic team.

Posted by tkimble on 8/13/2010 12:26:00 PM (view original):
What about getting coaches that want each restriction.  For example, dac wants to recruit all SGs and I want to do internationals.  I wouldn't want to do it if I had to recruit guys with less than 15 durability.  Also, instead of the +2 we could do a low work ethic team.

I like this idea - I understand the fairness of some sort of draft, but I'm going to be honest and just say that there are a few of the options that just don't sound like fun to me, and I'd not really be interested in joining if I got stuck with one of them over my first choice...no hard feelings in that case, but it just wouldn't be any fun for me...sorry to be a diva...

WHy can't more than one person have the same theme?  Just make it so if they have the same theme it has to be in opposite divisions.

Posted by arssanguinus on 8/13/2010 2:45:00 PM (view original):
WHy can't more than one person have the same theme?  Just make it so if they have the same theme it has to be in opposite divisions.

I guess this is not impossible to do. So, we can use the first 10 people that can give a firm commitment and then we need a list of people who want one of those 10 things, and then we can give each one of them to up to 2 people.

I will go on record saying that I will have any one of these.

For another twist, I remember a coach who insisted that his non-conf schedule be played in alphabetical order.  Easy to do if you play Sims, but he didn't.

I'm in with SGs...

i will take all PF's

Posted by arssanguinus on 8/13/2010 2:45:00 PM (view original):
WHy can't more than one person have the same theme?  Just make it so if they have the same theme it has to be in opposite divisions.

possibly all pg, sg, sf, pf, c and a mixed team in both divisions then we can talk about team and individual core talent preferences.

I would think the hardest one to make work woudl be all centers.

Posted by 4green2 on 8/13/2010 6:41:00 PM (view original):
I would think the hardest one to make work woudl be all centers.

I think doing an all PG or all C team would simply be too hard.

I dunno.  An all PG team you could pick fast athletes and run a fastbreak/press and hope that the turnover margin compensates for the lack of rebounding.  But a center at PG is going to get demolished.