I'll in for option 1

CURRENT OWNER LIST

Nath
Jmurder
diskoteque
BillNye
kowabunghole
wesrwood
BiiiiigChips
NLSoldier
LuckyLloyd
TJ Eckleburg12

We got 10 people in as of right now, and option 1 seems to be vastly favored.

How many franchises do we want in total? I'll leave signups open just in case, but we'll probably have to have two teams each to make this worthwhile. 24-28 is probably an optimal number, but if we don't get any more signups we'd have to choose 20 or 30.

Current salary cap is $155m for the top 51. I dunno how big we want our rosters to be, but I think for realism's sake the cap should be $3m per roster spot. (So, $60m/20 rounds, $75m/25 rounds, etc.) Any thoughts/preferences?

75m is tiny for 25 players. I'd go like 110m

What site or data source do we use to determine a player's cap number?

Spotrac is my usual go-to for contracts and cap numbers. I would propose using the 2016 cap numbers for each player from there.

With the cap limiting the desirable player pool considerably I don't think you need more than 1 team per owner for 10 teams. Think you have a way better chance at finishing at that point. Also just look at the QBs for example, 10 is kind of a good # assuming we go with a somewhat restrictive cap total.

Im more interested in the order and discussion of the elite young talent then getting 12 rounds in and auto drafting a significant amount of random rookies for multiple teams.

My recommendation 10 teams, 20 rounds, 70mm (or slightly less).

I'd do it. I lurk everyday from my office. Should have plenty of time.

I vote for option 1.

Nath I agree we should shoot for 20+ teams even if it means owners taking on two. I would prefer just waiting it out for more people to join but will defer to everyone else on that. I bet once the NBA auction ends more ppl will trickle in too

There are ~10 starting qbs that are both well over 30 yrs and are paid market value.

So if we're not gonna be building this around Tony Romo types you are down to a max of like 24 teams and that is assuming you use a cap that won't restrict people from drafting the Newton, rustle, luck, stafford, Rodgers types that are all making like 18m+. (not to mention scrub qbs that are also paid the same)

The restrictive cap part of the exercise works hand in hand with only having 10-14 owners or whatever we end up with. I think this draft would work very well with a 10-14 owners or become very stale after ~10 rounds if we double up on teams.

I'm inclined to agree with disko on this-- more teams means something closer to the original purpose of this exercise.

We could do a small number of franchises, but I feel like the choices will be less difficult. For example, 23 QBs in the league right now have a cap hit in the 8 figures. Of the ones who don't, if you were really optimistic, I count ten that are worth building around. (That includes this year's first-round picks as well as "Blaine Gabbert if he wins the job in SF.") If 10/12 teams can get a cheap franchise QB, that kind of skews the results. Even 6/12 is very different than 6/24.

The cap does make a difference regardless of roster size, but it's just so much easier to find bargain contracts in a smaller league. That removes some of the challenge, if cap space is the only scarcity but assets are not scarce.

I actually think we could do more than 24 teams since not every team has to have a lock franchise guy: Some of them could pair an older player with a young guy in waiting, for example. But of course, we'll worry about that when we find out if we can actually get to 24 or not in the first place.

If you go 2 teams deep a large portion of the draft will be taking players that you've basically never heard of but they're a rookie getting paid 1m and you're simply sorting by highest drafted player for your last 12 roster holes

The vast majority of the entertainment at least for me will be the top ~150 young, undervalued players. I'd rather those players make up 50% or more of the draft rather then being the first 6 rounds. The Adam Gotsis of the world are not gonna move anybodies opinion of a team. Let's not make him a guy that is taken in the first half of the draft.

Also QBs are always the big problem in these drafts, if you go 24 teams deep how are you gonna balance the draft snake wise? Also I think it makes determining a good cap amount more difficult.

24 teams x 10 rounds is 240 players. The last 10+ rounds would be very stale, I doubt it would finish. 12 teams x 20 rounds I think could by entertaining from start to end. Your team isn't gonna resemble a standard nfl team but I think you'll have a semi good ranking of the relevant young, undervalued talent in the league. And comparing teams will be more doable then rosters half full of dudes you have no opinion of.

I agree with nye. Nath you'll have opinions of a lot deeper pool of players but most other owners won't.

I think Naths main concern is avoiding every team looking like it belongs in the pro bowl. I'm not sure if the 12x20 suggestion avoids that

No one plays in the pro bowl, so the skill level may be comparable.

Not sure how possible it is to assemble an amazing roster when each player averages $3m & you're vying against 11 other people for the best bargains.

People are going to have to scrimp somewhere, & the different strategies & the different ways people value players should lead to interesting discussion.

I don't think we'd be creating all-star teams, but even if we did, there should be a pretty big variation between the best all-star team & the worst all-star team.

Still trying to gauge if we'll get any more owners.

Disko is basically right as far as what I'm thinking regarding rosters. But the argument for the cap creating its own restrictions is pretty solid, and I get it. Just as a flyer, if we go with only 12 teams or whatever, what kind of rosters and cap limit would y'all want to see?

ok I'll in--I only want one team since I'm just gonna pick people I remember off the top of my head.

CURRENT OWNER LIST

Nath
Jmurder
diskoteque
BillNye
kowabunghole
wesrwood
BiiiiigChips
NLSoldier
LuckyLloyd
TJ Eckleburg12
c0deman11
wheatrich

So we have 12 owners. We can go 12 or 24 teams, although it seems that more people want to only own one team each. So the question in my last post still applies.

I'd think 22 rounds ~70 million. I think you could go as low as 60 million or as high as 80(?) million, depending on how scarce you want the high salary studs to be.

I'd also consider a rule where you can't draft a player that would make your available cap less than $1 million per round remaining. Not completely necessary but would simplify some of the salary calculations / "can he afford that selection?" type of questions down the stretch.

Id be interested in joining

I don't think I've changed my mind regarding what I think would be cool since the 2nd post ITT, so I would propose that again.

I think if people make bad picks & can't afford their team they should be forced to drop people & make up the extra players at the end.

Sure. Any thoughts on preferred format?

My first thought for roster format is

5 OL
1 QB
2 WR
1 RB
1 TE
2 wild card, skill positions only

6 front 7 (any combo as long as you can justify playing them together)
4 secondary
2 wild card

Could even expand to 3 wild cards on each side.

I chose 10 and 10 as the default so that people could use the 11th player on each unit to decide their base package (2WR / 2RB / 1TE, 3WR / 1RB / 1TE, 2 WR / 1 RB / 2 TE), and the 12th (and 13th if applicable) to customize their team to look more like they want it to look.

Same for defense. This way your base can be a standard defense or a nickel, plus you can add a couple of specialists if you want to go dime, add extra pass-rush, add extra run-stuffing, whatever.

Any opinions on this?

Looks good (20 rounds) although my minor nickpick would be that I don't see the need to require a TE at the expense of preventing people from completing a 5 man OL. Maybe something like 3 (WR/TE) + 2 WC instead?

Looks good (24-26 rounds), are you ruling out backup, younger QBs with the skill position WC qualifier? I really don't have a preference just think you'd want that cleared up.

You can definitely have a 2nd QB as one of your wild cards. Probably would make sense to go 26 if people are interested in considering that.

I assumed this was just a 1 year draft & not a Dynasty type thing, so no real need for back-up anything. A lot of these "good values" won't be good values next year for a variety of reasons.

I'm fine with nath's format if people want to draft that many rounds. I just figured replacement level minimum players to fill in the gaps if 20 rounds & people have to worry less about linemen, who most people aren't that into.