Priemiership draft

[Doink]

ok so how about we americanise the priemiership and do a draft every season where the F.A take all the registered players names, put them in a bowl and pick out 3 players from each team.

the people picked then go into a different bowl and each team manager gets to pick 3 at random.

so for example you could get terry henry playing for palace etc

is this a bad idea or a really bad idea?

[Rob]

beyond really really bad idea

[Doink]

i hate myself for thinking it up!

[The Mask]

terrible idea. We could lose like Rio Ferdinand, Ronaldo, and Ruud and get 3 absolute no-names.

[Ferocious]

Just think Middlesbrough could lose Michael Ricketts, Joseph Job and That Parnaby retard and end up with, Ronaldo, Owen, and Ashley Cole. IMO That would rule.

[Doink]

no no no no & no



sorry i misread it i though you said gain mickeal ricketts, there aint no way that guys coming back.

i heard they flew him over to portugal to flatten that penalty spot!

[Oxstar]

Doink try not to think in future:D

[91]

Terrible idea.

We could lose like Rio Ferdinand, Ronaldo, and Ruud and get 3 absolute no-names.

Oh OK, you've convinced me with that arguement, it's a brilliant idea.

[diothoir]

I'm pretty sure Leeds just signed Michael Ricketts. :'(

It MIGHT be a good idea for the youth leagues or something to even out the talent flow, but not in the full thing. There'd be no point paying out and signing people to contracts otherwise.

[Jesus Shuttlesworth]

Are you trying to make fun of "Americanized" way of picking up players? OUR BAD FOR COMPETIVE BALANCE

[diothoir]

This "competitive balance" sounds like communism to me, stima.

KILL THE REDS

[Jesus Shuttlesworth]

Soccer must be a lot like baseball. The same few teams almost always winning, or atleast always being very good.

[Rob Ban Fan]

<font face=verdana size=3 color="#ff6600">yeah, that idea sucks :$

Not just for the big teams like Arsenal and United that could end up losing the likes of Henry and van Nistelrooy but the smaller teams that could end up losing their highly rated young players.

True, a team could end up with Henry playing for them. But they could also end up losing their best young player and getting someone shite instead. I wouldn't be too pleased if we ended up losing Yakubu, Matt Taylor and Amdy Faye, only to end up with Thomas Repka, Michael Ricketts and David Batty or something :$</font>

[The Mask]

Soccer must be a lot like baseball. The same few teams almost always winning, or atleast always being very good.

the thing is, at the highest level, some teams can afford to pay players £120k a week, whereas they could lose a young player on £1200 a week, and that'd fuck that teams shit up completely. Generally the teams with the most support do best, and are richest, thus get better players.

Then you have Liverpool.

[Rob Ban Fan]

<font face=verdana size=3 color="#ff6600">and sometimes it goes tits up like with Leeds :'(

The richer clubs like Man U and Chelsea can afford to pay £15,000,000 for the smaller club's good young players which improves the big club's squad and also gives the smaller club a load of money they can use to improve the whole team.

Thats teh way it works</font>

[toxic rooster]

A salary cap would be better.

[The Mask]

Not really, unless it was applied to the whole of football.

[Goldbird]

I mean in that way... nah it sounds crap.

[toxic rooster]

Yes, but that's a problem that the whole of football faces. Any changes have to be pretty much universal.

In Aussie football, we really don't have that problem as there's only one country in the world which plays the sport. They can chop and change the rules as they please (not that they ever really do though). But they have a salary cap system in place and it is designed so that no team can ever dominate over several years in the way that ManYoo, Arsenal etc. do in England.

Example being my team, the Brisbane Lions. 6 years ago, they got the wooden spoon (ie came dead last). In the space of 3 years since then, they've turned themselves into a premiership side and won the last 3 (No team had won 3 in a row for roughly 40 or 50 years). That's due to all the systems that they have in place so that no teams can dominate (salary cap, rookie draft etc).

[91]

Are you trying to make fun of "Americanized" way of picking up players? OUR BAD FOR COMPETIVE BALANCE

What works for your football wouldn't work for our football and vice versa. Asides from Masks point about wages, it just wouldn't be accepted by the average football fan in this country and it almost punishes clubs for doing well (granted teams like United and Arsenal deserve punishing, but that's besides the point).

[toxic rooster]

Are you trying to make fun of "Americanized" way of picking up players? OUR BAD FOR COMPETIVE BALANCE
How does the American draft work? I take it what Doink means is that every season, each team is picked completely at random or something (is that what you meant? :$).

The draft for the NFL is for what, rookies and off-contract players, right?

[Rob]

Doesn't the NFL, NBA, etc own all the contracts at the start and basically lease them to teams?

In Football, there is no college system so it's near impossible to use drafts. Plus there are over 100 professional football teams in Britain alone.

[Rob]

Forgot to mention all the American teams are franchises from their respective leagues/associations. No football teams are franchises.

[Rob Ban Fan]

<font face=verdana size=3 color="#ff6600">Milton Keynes Dons FC ;)</font>

[El Capitano Gatisto]

Doesn't the NFL, NBA, etc own all the contracts at the start and basically lease them to teams?

In Football, there is no college system so it's near impossible to use drafts. Plus there are over 100 professional football teams in Britain alone.

Yeah, football teams scout their own youth players and invest into developing them from their youth sides. A draft couldn't possibly work in that situation.

[Doink]

How does the American draft work? I take it what Doink means is that every season, each team is picked completely at random or something (is that what you meant? :$).

The draft for the NFL is for what, rookies and off-contract players, right?

yeh this is kinda what i mean, i dont really know the full in's & outs of the drafts i just know that players are basically picked from a hat and allocated to a random team.

i know this wouldnt work right now but i was thinking along the lines of trying to stop the leeds situation from happening in future i.e spending millions of pounds on players, securing bank loans based on championship football ( sorry didnt the plan work then? oopps my bad it was champions league football wasnt it!)

anyway my point is trying to think of a plan to illiminate clubs going into administration and was think maybe by scapping transfers and doing a draft (sometime in the future) it would give clubs a better chance of coming somewhere (obviously it would take a lot of thinking and organising before anything would/ could happen)

[toxic rooster]

OK, well in Australia (not sure about Aussie rules, maybe Y2C or something can back me up on this, but the other year when Canterbury were getting in shit in the rugby league, my dad explained the rugby league salary cap to me), we have a salary cap system. Basically, the total sum of all player payments must be at or below a set figure (It's only about 4 million Aussie Dollars per team per year. Some players in Europe would break that by themselves). When a club is struggling financially, the amount reverts to a percentage of their assets or something, so that they don't overspend on players.

Also, they have a rookie and free agent draft at the start of each season, with lower placed clubs from the previous season being given earlier picks in the draft, and thus a better chance of acquiring a highly rated player or prospect.

Anyway, the basic goal of it is so that no team can dominate for a sustained period of time, a la Manchester United and Arsenal. For the best part of the last 10 years, these two teams (especially ManYoo) have been in either the top two or three clubs in England, and by a long way too.

This system Australian football has works pretty well, too. Last year, the Brisbane Lions (my team :cool::D) won their third consecutive premiership (which hadn't been done for about 50 years beforehand). So you can get an idea of how hard it is to dominate for a long period of years.

Also, it allows for struggling teams to strengthen themselves over a pretty short time. Only 6 years ago (1998), the Lions got the wooden spoon (ie finished last). 3 years later (2001), they won their first of three straight premierships. Which would be the equivalent of Wolves winning the Premier League in 2006/2007.

On the flipside, it doesn't allow teams to be strong for long. As a team wins premierships etc, players are entitled to be paid more from their clubs, they get later draft picks and it becomes very difficult to keep a winning group of players together (the Lions only managed what they did because most of the squad agreed to take a pay cut to stay together, and could probably earn double what they are somewhere else). Example being Carlton AFC. In the year the Lions finished last (1999), they got to the Grand Final (ie Final) and lost. Last year, they were second last.

Under this system, a team's position fluctuates quite a lot. I think this may cause a problem in football leagues, especially as they are multi-divisional. The AFL has only one division, there is no promotion or relegation. Finishing last only qualifies other clubs to have bragging rights - no team is ever relegated.

It would mean that a club could get relegated a few years after winning the Premiership (like if Arsenal were relegated at the end of the coming season, shut up The Mask :mad: ). With the TV rights issues and such which cause a massive loss of revenue for relegated clubs, this could cause a few issues.

I think issues which need to be considered if they were looking to use this system to make leagues more equal would include:

1. You'd get flak from the bigger clubs who want to stay big (ie they don't want to be brought back into the pack)
2. To get a suitable salary cap level, either players from bigger clubs would have to take a pay cut, or smaller clubs would have to overspend in order to reach it.
3. Football (soccer) is more global than Australian Football, any changes would have to happen simultaneously
4. The promotion/relegation financial issue

I had a few more, but I forgot them.

Thoughts?

[Doink]

my thoughts are as you just said the bigger clubs wouldnt agree to it, the only way it would work is to try it in a league where you have a lot of teams in financial difficulties to see if it works.

the option i see is scotland, as they have the two big teams that apparently want to join the english league, make them play for the right to be in it, the more games they win the higher the league they play in

ie play conference side & win they get to play for right to play in league 2, if they win that they play to get into league 1 etc, if they lose to league 1 then they have to start in league 2 and go for promotion (this is only fair way i see of getting them into english leagues)

then with the remaining scotland teams, form 2 league rather than 4 teams of 10 (whatever they have) introduce the wage cap and draft and see how it works.

no offence to scottish league just an option of how to get it started.

any thoughts on this?

[Dazz]

Imagine Chelsea got Tarrico and Keller, they are both shit spurs players and the chelsea fans would boo them everytime they got the ball. Not to mention the fact that saying Chelsea got David James and Paul Robinson in the draft, we would still play Cudicini or Cech in goal, so it would be a bad thing for the national side.

[Doink]

i see what your saying thats another reason to try it in some leagues that wont be affected that much on a trial basis.

the idea of the draft is either a manager of a chairman makes the picks or even the F.A themselves and it is pot luck as to who you get.

take the situation you just said and put it another way, chelsea now have 4 keepers, cech, Cudicini, robinson and calamity james. so 4 people fighting for 1 spot, all internationals which are now going to have to work harder and play better than before to get into the team and once in there pull off outstanding displays to stay in the team.

surly this would help the nationals side rather than hinder it as 1. james wont get near a first team at all and 2. robinson will be on form of his life once/if gets in the team. if they dont get in the team then they are not international class!

[Dazz]

No, firstly Cudicini is not in the Italian National squad, and secondly three keepers are not going to want to fight it out for one spot regardless of playing for their national side or not. So basically, theres four keepers who all want to play, one will play, one will be a sub, and the other two will be wated.

Whatever way you look at it, the idea of a draft sucks.

[Doink]

sorry thought cudicini had been capped.

cudicini was first choice last season, with a new manager coming in this doesnt mean he is now. so if draft took place and these players did go to you its upto them to impress that manager and show they should be in the team.

if not the draft i think something needs to be done to help clubs out from going into debt and administration.

[Dazz]

your missing the point, if we got two more keepers then it would ruin the careers for at least two of the keepers. And it would also be hard for England to choose James or Robinson if Cech and Cudicini always played.

[Doink]

not beind pesimistic or trying to cause a fight with you as this is only a sudgestion about the draft but the point you just made about having 4 keepers and ruining the careers of 2 of them

erm

most clubs have 3-4 keepers on there books and how many do chelsea have out of interest?

and out of the others that are on the books after the draft they could be released or something, like i said im not sure how the drafts work in full but im sure this situation has possibly arrised in america and life seems to go on there!

[Dazz]

Your still wrong, no club has three international keepers and another keeper worth being in his national squad. Chelsea have four keepers at present, but Macho doesn't really expect to play, and Sullivan and Ambrosio know that they will never be good enough to replace Cudicini, as Cudicini was there before the other three keepers, they knew the deal when they signed. However, three international keepers and Cudicini would fuck things up, nothing good would come of it.

[Doink]

except you would have 4 good keepers instead of 1 good one, 1 ok keeper, 1 who's shit and 1 whos 30 and upto this season had only played about 20 league and cup games in his career.

so for example if the draft i dunno came up with chelsea getting ruud van donky face from man u, henry from arsenal and then shearer from newcastle would you still complain then?

see thats the idea of the draft you dont know what ull get so it gives lower teams the chance of having better players while also letting the big teams try and show that its not just one player who makes there team!

fair enough it might weaken some teams but again it could also improve them!

[Dazz]

The point I am making is that the negatives outweigh the positives. And for the record, the last player I would like to see wearing a Chelsea shirt is Taricco, closely followed by Ruud Van Nistelrooy and Gary Neville, so yes, you bet your ass I'd complain.

[Doink]

like i said i'm not arguing, i dont know if it would work it prob wouldnt as the fans would complain, i know i would if we lost southgate for example as you would if you lost lampard

i just think it could be something that may help the financial situation within football but there are other things that could be done instead.

[Dazz]

Well, I still disagree, but I suppose its worth suggesting.

[Rob Ban Fan]

<font face=verdana size=3 color="#ff6600">I dont get how it helps the financial problems in football. If anything, the new plans to dock points from teams that go into administration will act as a better deterant to overspending.

Surely if someone like Norwich ended up with Crepso, Hasselbaink and van Nistelrooy, their obsene £100,000 a week wages would cripple them financially anyway.</font>

[toxic rooster]

Precisely.

That's where a salary cap (like in Aussie football) becomes useful, because it limits the amount that a team can spend on their players, and ensures that they don't spend beyond their means and face administration etc.

If you wanted to even out the competitions, use a salary cap and ROOKIE AND FREE AGENT draft. Not something like Doink is suggesting, where teams are in a lottery as to the players that they get.

[Jesus Shuttlesworth]

There seems to be too many teams and leagues to run a draft

[Doink]

Precisely.

That's where a salary cap (like in Aussie football) becomes useful, because it limits the amount that a team can spend on their players, and ensures that they don't spend beyond their means and face administration etc.

If you wanted to even out the competitions, use a salary cap and ROOKIE AND FREE AGENT draft. Not something like Doink is suggesting, where teams are in a lottery as to the players that they get.

like i said i dont know the full in's & outs of how the drafts work but it may give teams a better chance of gaining more money by finishing higher in league because they have been drafted better players. a wage cap would be needed for it to work.

also Dazz mentioned it would hinder the national side, i thought about this last night and i have to disagree.

if we draft players rather from within the leagues rather than sign forigners all the time then teams will have to look to their academys and youth teams for future players, this will only help the national side

[toxic rooster]

But having 4 international keepers at one club, however, will not.

[The Mackem]

It wouldn't work because football is more "worldly" than any of the American sports. Different countries with different economies. It would take someone with the intelligence of 91 91's to get a system that worked and was fair. Plus the big teams would piss and moan about it.

[toxic rooster]

Precisely.

The system I explained works for us in Australia because:

a) We're the only country in the world that plays the game
b) There's only one division IE no promotion/relegation etc.

[The Mask]

It's a terrible idea though, just all round.

Let's say the wage cap was 50k a week. That'd still be far too high for most clubs in the premiership, especially if they brought in 3 players on that.

Following that, Man Utd can easily play to 75k or more people per week if they wanted, on top of their worldwide fanbase, so they're always going to have money rolling in. You can't really say the same for say... Norwich. Delia Smith only goes so far. She'll have to have bake sales at match day to keep a 50k per week player happy :rant:

[Doink]

But having 4 international keepers at one club, however, will not.

to help the national side i.e england for myself, the situation of 4 keepers was at chelsea, its easily solved they had 2 english keepers & 2 forginers, solution dump the forigners!

seriously though it prob wouldnt work anyway as the players could probably sue the F.A for not being given the chance to further their careers (i.e move to a big club should an offer come in).

it would take a hell of a lot of thinking, organising and co-operation for anything like this to happen.

[Doink]

. Delia Smith only goes so far. She'll have to have bake sales at match day to keep a 50k per week player happy :rant:

she wouldnt make much money anyway, ive seen her programme and her cakes always look dry & horrid to me!