FFMD Suggestions Thread

[bcb1213]

40 minutes ago, RpMc said:

And if you’ve been around for FFMD in the past you’d know that it’s never been about pick accuracy like the analysts/talking heads strive for. It’s fan groups coming together to make the moves for the franchises they root for, and make them better in their eyes. 
 

Mock means pretend or make believe or simulate as an adjective. You want to simulate the draft? The draft doesn’t have restrictions on player trades or pick trades - if a team wants to make the move, they should be able to make the move. 

And again I have no problem trading players for picks or picks for picks for this.  But players for players starts a slope of well why can't I just sign cam Newton or insert fa here 

[RpMc]

Just now, bcb1213 said:

And again I have no problem trading players for picks or picks for picks for this.  But players for players starts a slope of well why can't I just sign cam Newton or insert fa here 

Player for player deals are different than free agent for free agent deals to me. 

I’d be willing to listen to arguments for just removing players without contracts from the scenario, and should they sign with a team during our simulation, they just default to that team. 

[bcb1213]

34 minutes ago, RpMc said:

Player for player deals are different than free agent for free agent deals to me. 

I’d be willing to listen to arguments for just removing players without contracts from the scenario, and should they sign with a team during our simulation, they just default to that team. 

But you just don't see them Irl.  I think the only deal where players went both ways was David Johnson and DeAndre Hopkins and that's only because lol O'Brian    think we're gonna agree to disagree on this one just my opinion 

[RpMc]

12 minutes ago, bcb1213 said:

But you just don't see them Irl.  I think the only deal where players went both ways was David Johnson and DeAndre Hopkins and that's only because lol O'Brian    think we're gonna agree to disagree on this one just my opinion 

Bradford and Foles, Alonso and McCoy, Olivier Vernon and Kevin Zeitler, Demeco Ryans and Winston Justice, Darryl Tapp and Chris Clemons. 
 

those are just some of the ones involving bigger names. There are often smaller player for player deals around cut down time. 
 

the 2019 calendar year alone had eleven trades with players going both directions. 

Edited May 1, 2020 by RpMc

[TL-TwoWinsAway]

Why would we try and predict what might happen weeks later? Player for player trades don't happen... until they do. Prospects don't fall in the draft... until they do. Certain GMs don't [insert action]... until they do. Our goal in FFMD shouldn't be to try and predict the future, but to do what's best for your respective team. Limiting a forum in what they can do based on past trends goes against that, in my opinion.

[bcb1213]

31 minutes ago, RpMc said:

Bradford and Foles, Alonso and McCoy, Olivier Vernon and Kevin Zeitler, Demeco Ryans and Winston Justice, Darryl Tapp and Chris Clemons. 
 

those are just some of the ones involving bigger names. There are often smaller player for player deals around cut down time. 
 

the 2019 calendar year alone had eleven trades with players going both directions. 

So about one an offseason.  You can say 11 in 2019 but all but two happened in the actual offseason and not after training camp had started and draft was well over and the two that happened were Browns getting fleeced 

[RpMc]

1 minute ago, bcb1213 said:

So about one an offseason.  You can say 11 in 2019 but all but two happened in the actual offseason and not after training camp had started and draft was well over and the two that happened were Browns getting fleeced 

The point is, they happen, so there’s no point in saying that they can’t be done. What difference does it make if the Browns were fleeced or not? 

it’s a tool at the disposal of the teams that they can choose to use or not. If you don’t want to make player for player trades, don’t; there are GMs who operate that way. That doesn’t mean it should be taken off the table for those who’d like to go that route to try and improve their team.

 

[Scoundrel]

Suggestion? Cut the rams out of the NFL. Minus LBC and Jrry. 

[EaglesPeteC]

On 5/1/2020 at 2:20 PM, TL-TwoWinsAway said:

Why would we try and predict what might happen weeks later? Player for player trades don't happen... until they do. Prospects don't fall in the draft... until they do. Certain GMs don't [insert action]... until they do. Our goal in FFMD shouldn't be to try and predict the future, but to do what's best for your respective team. Limiting a forum in what they can do based on past trends goes against that, in my opinion.

This

[EaglesPeteC]

On 5/1/2020 at 1:27 AM, ny92mike said:

1) What worked well for you?

2) What didn't work?

3) What would you like to see added?

4) Is there anything you want changed or removed?

5) Any other suggestions?

@EaglesPeteC, 

For me, the Giants forum is what it is however it showed hope during the first 3 or 4 picks of the actual draft, so I think you'll have more Giants fans participating next season.  I think everything went well this year and expect a much greater level of participation, look how it's already exploded the GM mock draft forum....It's booming with traffic now well more so than normal.  Actually reminds me of when I joined, back then there were like 6 mocks going at once, I'd love to give credit to tcmd for that but I can't...lol...It's why I pushed so hard for ffmd, so I'm glad it's back.

The talk of salary cap is probably due to why there was a version 1 and 2 for ffmd.  ME....I'd stick with just the draft only, I think the minute you attempt to install a salary cap you're opening up the discussion for a free agency, because what else are you going to spend money on, "trades" not worth the headache, imo?  Trade volume really doesn't bother me, I wish I was better at it, there are some of you that could sell a boat to someone with aquaphobia so I imagine for some that this is just part of the draft strategy and you hate to take that away, but if you froze player trades until after the say 5th round, because that is about when most start to die off.  Even the irl draft, I started losing interest after the early 5th round was selected.  Just hadn't scouted deep enough..."what she said".  I just don't think you can keep the attention for 7 rounds, so I'd put all my focus on the first 3 rounds, toss in player trades on or after the 5th.

 

Personally, I'd love to keeping doing it like we have this year.  The big individual TCMD mock first with FA and everything and then to the forum-wide draft only with FFMD. I think with the increased traffic with FFMD back TCMD would only grow. Especially if someone (wink, wink) were still around to keep TCMD running as awesomely as he does.  

[Deadpulse]

2 hours ago, EaglesPeteC said:

Especially if someone (wink, wink) were still around to keep TCMD running as awesomely as he does. 

[ny92mike]

So we know that these mocks typically start to die off between the 5th and 7th rounds depending on the mock, we also know that most of us enjoy making a few trades when possible.  If we were to provide a smaller window for teams to make trades within the later rounds of the mock.  

A large number of these trades are worked out before the start of the mock, it happens every year with tcmd and I'm sure it is the same with other mocks.  I think by adjusting the trade start date to somewhere between the 4th and 5th round it could potentially resolve the "dead zone"  during the later rounds of the mock.  By giving us another level of entertainment when most mocks start to trail.  It would also provide additional time for the entire team staff to evaluate the trade.

Another option would be to limit the number of trades a team can make, giving the trade greater weight in the mock adding another level of game planning without over complicating it.

I know- I know- we are months away from really needing to discuss this.  Was just working on some things for tcmd that got me thinking about this.

 

 

  

[Deadpulse]

5 minutes ago, ny92mike said:

So we know that these mocks typically start to die off between the 5th and 7th rounds depending on the mock, we also know that most of us enjoy making a few trades when possible.  If we were to provide a smaller window for teams to make trades within the later rounds of the mock.  

A large number of these trades are worked out before the start of the mock, it happens every year with tcmd and I'm sure it is the same with other mocks.  I think by adjusting the trade start date to somewhere between the 4th and 5th round it could potentially resolve the "dead zone"  during the later rounds of the mock.  By giving us another level of entertainment when most mocks start to trail.  It would also provide additional time for the entire team staff to evaluate the trade.

Another option would be to limit the number of trades a team can make, giving the trade greater weight in the mock adding another level of game planning without over complicating it.

I know- I know- we are months away from really needing to discuss this.  Was just working on some things for tcmd that got me thinking about this.

 

 

  

I dont understand what you are suggesting. Like the NBA where you pick for another team because you have a trade in the works? Or just not trading 5th or lower round picks until after the 4th?

[ny92mike]

5 minutes ago, Deadpulse said:

I dont understand what you are suggesting. Like the NBA where you pick for another team because you have a trade in the works? Or just not trading 5th or lower round picks until after the 4th?

Sorry man...Reading some of the earlier post I was under the impression that there were a lot of player for player trades in the early rounds but looking at the trade thread that wasn't the case at all...lol.  Most of the early trades included some form of draft pick compensation.

So with that said...I should have done some homework before posting.