Okay, so this will never ****ing happen, unless Clark Hunt or some big time dickswinger reads Chiefs Planet. I acknowledge that. But just as a thought exercise, I was trying to figure out a way that the NFL might possibly fix its biggest problem-- the fact that Andrew Luck plays for the Indianapolis Colts and why it really is a problem not only for nearly all of the NFL's fans but also for the money-grubbing asshole executives who run the league.
To cut down on space for the TL;DR folks, I'm spoilering my reasoning for why the draft order determining method needs to be changed. I strongly encourage you to read it before ripping my idea to shreds. Otherwise I'll tell you to go fist your sister.
Spoiler!
Parity is great and a huge part of why the NFL has been so successful in the last 20 years. I think the league is at its best when surprise teams make resurgences. Sports fans are average people, and average people are morons, and morons thrive on human interest rags-to-riches-template feel good stories. People eat that shit up. When the Cleveland Browns finally rise out of the muck, they'll be one of the most beloved teams in the league of the average fan, similar to the Arizona Cardinals in 2009 or the 1999 Rams. Yet as it is now, the only way to give bad teams swift kicks in the asses in the right direction is in giving them a whopping TWO favorable games over their opponents (and in a constantly changing environment even THAT'S not guaranteed). The other is the NFL draft, which is hardly a unique phenomenon to sports at all. That's it. That's what the NFL does to help those teams help the NFL. It's missing out on some cash.
Well, here we have the Cleveland ****ing Browns. The Buffalo Bills. The Oakland Raiders. How the **** is it that these teams can suck so hard for so long, yet the team that gets Andrew Luck is the Indianapolis ****ing Colts?
"Just works out that way, I guess. Nothing you can do about it."
"Those teams are shitty because they're run by shitty people. That's why."
"Quit yer bitching, SNR."
Let me respond to #3 first: Go eat a flaming AIDS sandwich with antifreeze sauce.
On point #2: Yes, you're half right. The lack of a true star at ANY position on all those teams (with the exception of Josh Gordon for the Browns in the past season) lends itself to those teams not having a ****ing clue at all how to evaluate talent in the draft. So what? The NFL STILL has to deal with these sad sack franchises sucking dick each and every year with no end in sight. And really, until the Chiefs prove they can win a playoff game or make the playoffs two years in a row or more, they're in the exact same ****ing boat. And this is a problem. It's one thing if a team with a huge fanbase makes this shit happen. It's another if it's the Indianapolis ****ing Colts that do this shit. And from the fan's perspective, who wants to watch the same team in the playoffs year after year when they did absolutely NOTHING to extend that tenure of playoff success for another decade or more?
"It just works out that way, I guess. Nothing you can do about it."
Wrong. Dead ****ing wrong. It doesn't have to work out that way. The NBA is currently going through a problem known as Shitty League Syndrome when a near guaranteed big-time draft class comes up. Teams tank it. It only makes sense for them to tank given that the sport as it is has a small amount of players per team with positional importance spread out somewhat evenly (i.e. who cares if they're a C or PG? A star is a star-- get more stars, get more wins). The NFL, with a whopping 22 starting players compared to the NBA's 5 has an advantage to prevent teams from tanking. There are just too many positions to go around to worry about tanking it for this or that player. The positions are also widely dispersed in terms of value to the team, with each position having its own pros and cons in the nuances of how to go about investing in talent. It's so complicated, and that's why the NFL draft has become the monster success that it is.
But when you bend the rules as the NFL has done to favor offenses, scoring, and AHEM COUGH COUGH HACCCCK CCKHHHAUGUUUGHH COUGH COUGHUHCH TEAMS WITH QBS WHO RAPE FACES....... *cough*... you're taking away from that nuance. It becomes all about the quarterback. And these rules aren't going to get better. They're going to get worse. That means already brilliant QBs like Andrew Luck are going to have their team value inflated even MORE than it is now.
It's becoming the case that the NFL has to start regulating the flow of these players. Not by hand-picking the teams, but just by setting out to really accomplish the mission of the NFL draft order system, where the worst teams receive the higher picks.
The problem that the NFL has on its hands in the past few years is that it's becoming the case that the REAL worst teams in the league aren't receiving those top picks. A team like the 2011 Colts was bad for one season out of a zillion years of good seasons. They didn't slowly decline. They weren't inconsistent and up-and-down from year to year. They were brilliant under a franchise QB and then they sucked when he got injured. And then they were proclaimed to be the worst team in the league.
And that's not true. Nor is it right. The Cleveland Browns and the St. Louis Rams have been struggling teams for years. It's not right that their marginal improvements (4-12 instead of 2-14) mean they were less deserving of that top pick. It means they are bad because they don't know how to stop losing. That's a worse kind of bad, and a team problem that needs more assistance through player development and the draft.
How the new draft order will work:
1. All tiebreakers from strength of schedule to the coin flip will stay they same. The tiebreakers aren't the issue here, but if you have a more elegant solution, I'd love to hear about it.
2. Seeding for playoff teams (21-32) will stay the same.
3. Seeding for slots 1-20 will be based on the COMBINED W/L record of the past THREE seasons.
4. That's it. The rest stays the same. Rookie contract slotting, trading, everything.
By ranking non-playoff teams in order of combined record over many seasons, you improve the league in so many ways. Here are just a few:
1. You eliminate the possibility of a team that just conveniently got bad in a good draft year for a top QB (or other player, I guess). In this scenario, the Colts would have been still at home ****ing themselves with dildos because they suck. That's the most important reason to do this.
2. There will be fewer exceptionally shitty divisions. And while this problem usually gets solved within a few seasons (See NFC West before 2012, AFC West before 2013), there is still always a lemon division out there that can mess with determining who the real best teams are for the playoffs and who just got a good schedule. Fixing that so shitty teams have a better chance to raise the basement level of the division would go a long way. It would further confirm the Parcells mantra: "You are what your record says you are." And that's what we want, right?
3. Good teams that just get bit in the ass one year (2013 Houston Texans) have no incentive to lose hope and say "**** it." In other words, in this system now teams actually DO play to win the game. Your season might be over, but you're still not gonna get a grand prize for losing, other than the chance to fire your shithead Patriot Way general manager and all his pussydick cronies and henchmen. You gotta be REALLY terrible in order to get that treasure, which isn't worth it to any team. The competition bar would be raised, and even late-season games with terrible teams would have some better entertainment value.
Thus, the TRULY terrible teams are guaranteed the top spots. And I think that's what the draft should be all about-- giving the worst teams the best chance to get out of that losing pit.
01-06-2014, 03:01 PM
My cunning plan to fix the NFL draft order and why it's a problem
Threaded Mode