Jump to content

FFMD


EaglesPeteC

Recommended Posts

If part of the problem with ffmd was lack of participation, then at some point you need to increase participation. Allowing teams to have outside chat rooms to discuss aspects of the Mock would be pertinent to increasing participation. 

It seems silly to want to increase participation then at the same time restrict the access and ways that teams can discuss things outside of this site

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

No, I asked you what exactly about TCMD was the solution to FFMD's issues, and you put out a general statement.  Nothing there that says what the problems were and how they were fixed by your mock.  That's what I'm asking you to expand on.

Alright, I'll work on it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

No, I asked you what exactly about TCMD was the solution to FFMD's issues, and you put out a general statement.  Nothing there that says what the problems were and how they were fixed by your mock.  That's what I'm asking you to expand on.

His mock significantly improves and streamlines the free agent experience.  The actual mock draft part of it really doesn't differ from FFMD.  So if you want to do FFMD with no free agency (which I would recommend) it should remain its own thing.  If you want to continue incorporating free agency you should probably consider using the TCMD approach to free agency.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, squire12 said:

If part of the problem with ffmd was lack of participation, then at some point you need to increase participation. Allowing teams to have outside chat rooms to discuss aspects of the Mock would be pertinent to increasing participation. 

It seems silly to want to increase participation then at the same time restrict the access and ways that teams can discuss things outside of this site

Having people talk offsite takes them off...the....site though.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

Unfortunately, people took what was supposed to be a fun, interactive mock and made it a game.  There were a LOT of posters who literally tried to find loopholes and how to exploit them.

So what's the harm in allowing an outside discussion platform away from this site. If it increases people's participation, then at some point they may increase their participation on the site.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ny92jefferis said:

No I'm not.

Just agreeing with @squire12that housing a war room without the use of codes to keep it private would be cool, not saying to remove any war rooms.  In fact I'm a huge advocate of using the war rooms and that it would be cool if those war rooms were private so the use of codes could be removed, which is something I don't even see as being possible in this format.

In your TCMD improvement thread you were recommending it so I was just referencing that.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, MKnight82 said:

His mock significantly improves and streamlines the free agent experience.  The actual mock draft part of it really doesn't differ from FFMD.  So if you want to do FFMD with no free agency (which I would recommend) it should remain its own thing.  If you want to continue incorporating free agency you should probably consider using the TCMD approach to free agency.  

And correct me if I'm wrong, but that requires the use of the google doc?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

Unfortunately, people took what was supposed to be a fun, interactive mock and made it a game.  There were a LOT of posters who literally tried to find loopholes and how to exploit them.

Which is why you need to just make it a forum-wide mock draft.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, squire12 said:

So what's the harm in allowing an outside discussion platform away from this site. If it increases people's participation, then at some point they may increase their participation on the site.  

Because it takes away from forum discussion.  If 90% of the discussion is going on outside of FF, that's less discussion going on.  If the casual poster goes wandering into the war room thread and sees little discussion, they're not going to be active in there.  That's the issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, MKnight82 said:

Having people talk offsite takes them off...the....site though.  

Yes that is true. But I look at this as a multi-step process. Step 1. Increase participation in the mock itself. Step 2 get them discussing things more here at some point in time.

It seems like wanting both increased participation with members and increasing participation with more posting and discussion can't happen at the same time. As open discussions allow other teams to look at the discussion itself and gain insight into targets and draft prospects. Teams have to be able to conduct some level of business and discussions in private. Doing so exclusively through PM's is too much of a tax on the GM and thus teams and individuals want to just run it themselves

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

Because it takes away from forum discussion.  If 90% of the discussion is going on outside of FF, that's less discussion going on.  If the casual poster goes wandering into the war room thread and sees little discussion, they're not going to be active in there.  That's the issue.

So ffmd not running versus ffmd running with adoption for off-site discussion at least increases 10% discussion.

You at least generate the start of discussion ....Snowball Effect process

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, MKnight82 said:

In your TCMD improvement thread you were recommending it so I was just referencing that.  

That I recommended removing the war rooms?  If so, it was likely due to the majority of the tcmd members wanted to keep it individual and that they didn't want to be forced to create a war rooms.  I made it mandatory a few mocks back, I got a ton of heat for it so I then made it a request to create a war room and this year I'm debating on having it at all but this has nothing to do with ffmd.  What I'm doing with TCMD is for the members of tcmd.

While there is discussion of combining the two I understand that not all of its elements would carry over to ffmd.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, CWood21 said:

And correct me if I'm wrong, but that requires the use of the google doc?

That is correct.  When we ran the TCMD last year @ny92jefferis handed out a private link to each team's GM.  I was the Redskins GM, so I then distributed the link to my AGM, and any other member that wanted to participate.  So only the Redskins war room had access to our google docs.  

We then had a war room in the Redskins forum where we discussed practically everything.  What ended up happening is that we had mostly guys contributing casually and myself and the AGM were really the only ones manipulating the google docs.  

Upsides include: Very quick awarding of free agents, a lack of human error in determining who the free agents are awarded to, and not having to pour through threads and threads of a free agency post looking to see if someone had been bid on.

Downsides include: You're going to need at least need one member per team forum that can work the google docs (they really aren't that bad but some people are really bad with spreadsheets), and the whole thing is very dependent on @ny92jefferis being able to manage the whole thing (which isn't really a problem, but things do happen and heaven forbid he ended up in the hospital or something the whole thing would have to be scrapped).

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...