NFBC Online Championship Proposal

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Thu Jul 19, 2007 6:02 am

Okay, I've held off on announcing any plans for this because everything is still in the working stages. But I've always learned that getting feedback from our best participants eventually leads to a better plan than I could have devised on my own.

First of all, this is an idea I had last year and it was reinforced when I met with Eric Peden in Las Vegas last year. It was obvious last year that our online satellite leagues were a big hit and that providing NFBC high-stakes online leagues had great potential. So a national NFBC Online Championship seemed like the next step for us here. Providing a unique twist seemed to be all that was missing to reach the masses.

But with that in mind, I don't want to provide the same format we offer in our live drafts or even in our satellite leagues. I don't want 15-team leagues and 30-man rosters. I'd rather reach down to more traditional online leagues that people are familiar with and offer a 10 or 12 team format. I may not even have 23-man starting rosters; maybe 21 is a better number with 6-man reserves, not 7. A league that isn't so deep in starters will allow for more active pickups during the season.

Okay, so here's some thoughts for 2008 and provide some feedback if you think the idea has merit. I'm definitely committed to providing this second national championship format. Again, this wouldn't compete with our live drafts as not everyone can make the live events. But this would include league prizes and an overall prize pool, just like we do in the NFBC and all drafts would be online. All comments are appreciated.

NFBC Online Championship

When: Online drafts before Opening Day, March 26-29. Drafts would be held on multiple nights with different starting times to make this work.

Where: Online drafts on MDC.com or a special STATS site.

Who: 240-300 teams

Cost: $500-$600 per team. Grand prize of $25,000, league prizes of $4,000-$5,000, pay top 2 or 3 in each league. Payouts in the 75-80% range of total revenue with guaranteed overall prizes.

Rosters: 21-22 starters, 6-man reserves. C, 1B, 2B, SS, 3B, CI, MI, UT, 4-5 OFs, 8-9 Ps. 5x5 Rotisserie scoring format.

FAAB: Same $1,000 FAAB in-season budget, using blind bidding.

I could host online drafts over four nights with staggered starting times or do them all day on Friday-Saturday, March 28-29. That is still up in the air. If STATS hosted the drafts, all of the rosters would be easily loaded and ready for starting rosters before the Sunday, March 30th game. I'm looking into all of that now and will figure this out before October.

Okay, thoughts? Help me fine-tune this and we'll unveil all plans and begin taking signups on Monday, Oct. 1st. Thanks.

Plus, I need a catchy name for this. NFBC Light Championship?? Hmmmm, I need a beer sponsor!!

KJ Duke · Post by **KJ Duke** » Thu Jul 19, 2007 6:22 am

Good idea Greg! Also agree it needs a better name. Don't devalue your Mercedes brand by selling Chryslers under the same nameplate.

Other thoughts ...

- I'd go with an easy-to-remember, short url.

- NFBC lineups are fairly standard, wouldn't tinker with that, 14 and 9 is good.

- Smaller bench is ok.

- 12-team lges likely have broader appeal since less competitors increases perceived odds of winning for mainstream players. Wouldn't reduce lge size any smaller than that or you'll lose the serious player entirely, even sportsline has 12-team leagues.

[ July 19, 2007, 12:28 PM: Message edited by: KJ Duke ]

TRAIN · Post by **TRAIN** » Thu Jul 19, 2007 9:20 am

Since I cannot make it to the "live" NFBC events and will probably participate in the onlne "high stakes" competition, $25,000 does not seem like a big enough top prize. It should be at least $50,000 or more to draw more players and attention from the media.

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Thu Jul 19, 2007 9:25 am

Originally posted by unlucky:

Since I cannot make it to the "live" NFBC events and will probably participate in the onlne "high stakes" competition, $25,000 does not seem like a big enough top prize. It should be at least $50,000 or more to draw more players and attention from the media. Sure, we'd all love to have the grand prize as big as possible. But the number I choose is the number I have to guarantee and while I'd love to charge $1,300 per team for this, I think the right entry fee level is more like $500-$600. If we can fill 240-300 teams at $500 each and pay back 75-80%, then you need to find a way to pay back good league prizes and a nice grand prize. It's tough to do both and have a grand prize over $25,000.

Now if you think the entry fee should be higher and the market can support that, or if you think my estimation of 300 teams is way too low, then that's great feedback. But to get to a higher grand prize, something has to give.

Mr Dalrae · Post by **Mr Dalrae** » Thu Jul 19, 2007 9:34 am

Dear Greg,I really like this idea.I would vote for a 12 team league,14 and 9 with only a 3 or 4 man bench,or 14 and 7 with once again a 3 or 4 man bench.The name for your new game could be something easy like the National Computer Baseball Championship.

Spyhunter · Post by **Spyhunter** » Thu Jul 19, 2007 9:57 am

Interesting idea. A couple of thoughts:

1. Don't go less than 12 teams, 23 starters, 3 bench. You don't want this to become the ESPN of high stakes leagues I don't think.

2. I would think long and hard about this idea. Why? Because there is going to be some cross-attrition to the live drafts. There will also be more effort etc... to manage more leagues etc.. and to watch drops etc..

Overall I think that this is a great idea, but not one without risks...

Spy

CC's Desperados · Post by **CC's Desperados** » Thu Jul 19, 2007 10:24 am

The NFBC is the major leagues of fantasy baseball. The is no reason to make the format any different. If you want to attract from the smaller leagues, I think it will be about the money not the league size. The online championship should be a breeding ground for the main event. If the league size is 10-12 teams, I can just imagine the circus with players getting dropped. You would lose control of the manipulation.

I would like to see it 15 teams with bi-weekly transaction. You would have to set your line-up before Mondays and Fridays first game. You would run the free agent period the same as the main event.

I would like you to add two DL spots per team. The biggest reason is teams with injuries get hit twice. If a team gets a few injuries, the owner must decide who to cut. When a hurt player get cut, most of the time it is an opportunity for a healthy team. By doing this, you would control the free agent pool better.

As for the DL spots, they are only used for players going on the DL after say April 15. If you draft a hurt player, you know what you are getting. You want to eliminate owners drafting players for DL spots. During spring training there will players who are hurt and you know they are going on the DL. That is why you push back the date. You want the DL spots for players getting hurt while playing on your team. If an owner picks up a DL'd player, he has to use a roster spot.

I also think 800 innings minimum is required.

[ July 19, 2007, 04:42 PM: Message edited by: CC's Desperados ]

Quahogs · Post by **Quahogs** » Thu Jul 19, 2007 10:53 am

Interesting...

Greg,

- multiple draft nights = multiple team entries. Very hard to do in the 4 city main event

- it seems like you want to set this apart from the traditionally run NFBC main and sats. I also agree with Dukes setup but how about marking your territory with a different category ? Maybe OBP instead of batting avg ?

- with a smaller reserve list lets open up the in season free agent list to include ALL minor leaguers, not just the draft day ones.

- want to keep most of the contestants active througout the season ? how about rewarding all 12 contestants in the league that has the most cumulative points a free entry to next seasons contest ? That would generate some league camaraderie and league pressure to keep team's lineups fully functional.

Just some thoughts. Unique yet simple would work great here. Great idea overall.

Q

Gordon Gekko · Post by **Gordon Gekko** » Thu Jul 19, 2007 11:02 am

Originally posted by CC's Desperados:

The NFBC is the major leagues of fantasy baseball. The is no reason to make the format any different. If you want to attract from the smaller leagues, I think it will be about the money not the league size. The online championship should be a breeding ground for the main event. If the league size is 10-12 teams, I can just imagine the circus with players getting dropped. You would lose control of the manipulation.

I would like to see it 15 teams with bi-weekly transaction. You would have to set your line-up before Mondays and Fridays first game. You would run the free agent period the same as the main event.

I would like you to add two DL spots per team. The biggest reason is teams with injuries get hit twice. If a team gets a few injuries, the owner must decide who to cut. When a hurt player get cut, most of the time it is an opportunity for a healthy team. By doing this, you would control the free agent pool better.

As for the DL spots, they are only used for players going on the DL after say April 15. If you draft a hurt player, you know what you are getting. You want to eliminate owners drafting players for DL spots. During spring training there will players who are hurt and you know they are going on the DL. That is why you push back the date. You want the DL spots for players getting hurt while playing on your team. If an owner picks up a DL'd player, he has to use a roster spot.

I also think 800 innings minimum is required. greg - i agree with shawn's points.

in addition, i'd only payback 2 spots per league, or if you have to payback three, have the 3rd place guy only get his money back. that way, you can trump up the grand prize more. plus, nobody would be paying travel expenses or taking time off of work to do this.

good idea greg!

[ July 19, 2007, 05:03 PM: Message edited by: Gordon Gekko ]

Quahogs · Post by **Quahogs** » Thu Jul 19, 2007 11:17 am

Originally posted by CC's Desperados:

The NFBC is the major leagues of fantasy baseball. The is no reason to make the format any different. If you want to attract from the smaller leagues, I think it will be about the money not the league size. The online championship should be a breeding ground for the main event. If the league size is 10-12 teams, I can just imagine the circus with players getting dropped. You would lose control of the manipulation.

Shawn, I think if this new contest became a 15 teamer it would cannibalize the existing satellites. These contests have become great introductions to the main event and work as nice ramp-ups . The new online contest if made into a 12 team event could attract a whole new crowd not interested in the 15 team events.

Q

[ July 19, 2007, 05:18 PM: Message edited by: Quahogs ]

CC's Desperados · Post by **CC's Desperados** » Thu Jul 19, 2007 11:28 am

Originally posted by Quahogs:

quote:Originally posted by CC's Desperados:

The NFBC is the major leagues of fantasy baseball. The is no reason to make the format any different. If you want to attract from the smaller leagues, I think it will be about the money not the league size. The online championship should be a breeding ground for the main event. If the league size is 10-12 teams, I can just imagine the circus with players getting dropped. You would lose control of the manipulation.

Shawn, I think if this new contest became a 15 teamer it would cannibalize the existing satellites. These contests have become great introductions to the main event and work as nice ramp-ups . The new online contest if made into a 12 team event could attract a whole new crowd not interested in the 15 team events.

Q [/QUOTE]Greg would certainly trade his existing satelite leagues for a 500 team event. As I said before, I don't think it will be league size, but the amount of the entry fee. He could easily run a $500 300 team event along with a $200 600 team event. The $500 event could start with $25,000 overall prize with a goal of 300 teams. The $200 event could start with $10,000 overall prize with a goal of 300 teams.

Many more people will be interested in the smaller entry fee. For us Diehard NFBC guys, we would shoot for $500 or maybe we really want three teams at $200.....I could see the Scallop and Clam teams!!

[ July 19, 2007, 05:29 PM: Message edited by: CC's Desperados ]

sportsbettingman · Post by **sportsbettingman** » Thu Jul 19, 2007 11:32 am

I liked CC's post.

What do you see more of in fantasy baseball magazines and websites re: league size (15, 12, 10)...go with that number.

I like the return on winning your league. I think I'm not alone. The draw of the grand prize may have proven very important for drawing power...but a fantasy player likes to be rewarded for the things he has control over as well...and that's his individual league. (draft, free agency)

~Lance

Quahogs · Post by **Quahogs** » Thu Jul 19, 2007 11:43 am

Originally posted by CC's Desperados:

quote:Originally posted by Quahogs:

quote:Originally posted by CC's Desperados:

The NFBC is the major leagues of fantasy baseball. The is no reason to make the format any different. If you want to attract from the smaller leagues, I think it will be about the money not the league size. The online championship should be a breeding ground for the main event. If the league size is 10-12 teams, I can just imagine the circus with players getting dropped. You would lose control of the manipulation.

Shawn, I think if this new contest became a 15 teamer it would cannibalize the existing satellites. These contests have become great introductions to the main event and work as nice ramp-ups . The new online contest if made into a 12 team event could attract a whole new crowd not interested in the 15 team events.

Q [/QUOTE]Greg would certainly trade his existing satelite leagues for a 500 team event. As I said before, I don't think it will be league size, but the amount of the entry fee. He could easily run a $500 300 team event along with a $200 600 team event. The $500 event could start with $25,000 overall prize with a goal of 300 teams. The $200 event could start with $10,000 overall prize with a goal of 300 teams.

Many more people will be interested in the smaller entry fee. For us Diehard NFBC guys, we would shoot for $500 or maybe we really want three teams at $200.....I could see the Scallop and Clam teams!! [/QUOTE]hmm, why have 20 separate 15 team $200 sats when you can have 1 contest with 300 teams with the lure of a big prize right ? $200 separate sats that would otherwise be ignored by some nfbc diehards might now be entered 2 or 3 times. Good point.

Q

Vander · Post by **Vander** » Thu Jul 19, 2007 11:56 am

I like CC's idea of dl spots also. I wouldn't go less than 12 teams. You must keep the overall prize much less than the main event to keep from canabolizing the big show. If done right this could be a feeder league for the main. You may lose some main entries the first year as some may try this instead of the main just like what happens with the sats. Other than that I like it and would enter. Don't dump the regular sats though. I've come to like them very much also. I'd also stick to traditional rot. 23 man roster that most are familiar with.

KJ Duke · Post by **KJ Duke** » Thu Jul 19, 2007 4:17 pm

Originally posted by Gordon Gekko:

... i'd only payback 2 spots per league, or if you have to payback three, have the 3rd place guy only get his money back. that way, you can trump up the grand prize more. plus, nobody would be paying travel expenses or taking time off of work to do this. Paying top two in a 12-tm lge is plenty. Sportsline has 8 billion players and only pays 1st place out of 12 team lges. Pay 1st place, or 1st and 2nd place, definitely not 3rd. Jack-up the main prize.

Also agree with CC, if the bench is only 3-4, have 2 DL spots as well.

[ July 19, 2007, 10:18 PM: Message edited by: KJ Duke ]

Edwards Kings · Post by **Edwards Kings** » Fri Jul 20, 2007 12:06 am

Great idea but I believe it will have reprecussions.

I have no way to prove this, but I think this "Online" championship would at the very least arrest the growth (cause a decline?) in the live event. I think you will always be able to get 14 to 17 live drafting leagues (some of us in the hard-core camp simply prefer the live events) spread among a max of three cities, but very soon the online will become your marquee (as far as particpants) high stakes event for the same reason Yahoo/ESPN/CBSSportsline has been so successful...ease of initial partcipation.

In the long run, an "Online" high stakes championship will grow the overall NFBC family of participants in events faster and to a larger degree, but I think the growth in this area (high stakes events as defined as $25k plus in prize money) will cap and possible cost some of the participation in the live main event leagues.

Joe Sambito · Post by **Joe Sambito** » Fri Jul 20, 2007 3:41 am

Greg,

Have you considered an 11 x 11 league?

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Fri Jul 20, 2007 10:40 am

Originally posted by Edwards Kings:

Great idea but I believe it will have reprecussions.

I have no way to prove this, but I think this "Online" championship would at the very least arrest the growth (cause a decline?) in the live event. I think you will always be able to get 14 to 17 live drafting leagues (some of us in the hard-core camp simply prefer the live events) spread among a max of three cities, but very soon the online will become your marquee (as far as particpants) high stakes event for the same reason Yahoo/ESPN/CBSSportsline has been so successful...ease of initial partcipation.

In the long run, an "Online" high stakes championship will grow the overall NFBC family of participants in events faster and to a larger degree, but I think the growth in this area (high stakes events as defined as $25k plus in prize money) will cap and possible cost some of the participation in the live main event leagues. Wayne, I suppose anything is possible and it's quite possible that our NFBC Satellite Leagues prevent our live drafts from growing. But anyone who has participated in the live draft knows the difference between doing it in person and doing it on a computer alone at home. It's not the same. Nor is the $500 entry fee vs. the $1300 entry fee. Nor is the $25,000 grand prize vs. the $100,000 grand prize.

That's why I do disagree with Shawn's assessment to make the online championship the same format as the NFBC. I don't want similar events online and live. I think a 12-team format at $500 per team with a fair overall grand prize is completely different from our NFBC Championship and caters to our current owners and to new players. Plus, a few contests didn't perform well at that level last year and I think there is an opening for a well run contest with guaranteed prize pools.

We'll see if the Online Championship hurts the live events, but I obviously hope they don't and right now I feel strongly that they will just add to what we're doing. We'll see.

JerseyPaul · Post by **JerseyPaul** » Fri Jul 20, 2007 7:45 pm

I think this is a great idea.

The smaller buy-in is very appealing as I'm not competitive (yet) in fantasy baseball. I was going to give up but this would allow me to continue to compete. It's such a long time between the Super Bowl and serious football draft preparation, we need something to fill that. The good news for you is that many of your customers will play both live and online. I would prefer to play with newbies, but that won't happen.

For me, smaller starting lineups and rosters would be a plus. I think you should look at Yahoo lineups. You might be able to create a migration from the free, simple Yahoo to the paid simple NOBC to the big event. Cap the NOBC entries so that there is always a big incentive to go to the NFBC. If the NOBC entries balloon, you can create NOBC-1 and NOBC-2, each with a $25,000 prize. The smaller event cap will also be less intimidating for new players. Compete against no more than "x" players to win the $25,000 prize. Perhaps in the longer term NOBC-1 and NOBC-2 will have different entry cap numbers so you can compete against 1/2 "x" and win say $10,000.

Since you won't have the overhead of a live draft, I'd like to think the payout would be closer to 80% than 75%. As a feeder league, I think you should pay deeper with league prizes (3 places) but I'm not sure how important that is.

I wouldn't use "computer" in the title. "Online" is a better term. National Online Baseball Championship. The "online" makes the term "fantasy" unnecessary. NFBC and NOBC become the brands. I wouldn't use indicators of level like Diamond, Platinum since other fantasy vendors do that already and it's kind of cheesy.

I would not use DL slots. What happens in real life is that DL players are added to rosters then moved to the DL. It becomes a minor league system and essential increases roster sizes as all the teams will fill those DL slots with creative waiver moves.

Those are my initial thoughts as I saw this for the first time just now. I'll post again if something else occurs to me.

sportsbettingman · Post by **sportsbettingman** » Fri Jul 20, 2007 8:30 pm

Originally posted by JerseyPaul:

I think this is a great idea.

The smaller buy-in is very appealing as I'm not competitive (yet) in fantasy baseball. I was going to give up but this would allow me to continue to compete. It's such a long time between the Super Bowl and serious football draft preparation, we need something to fill that. The good news for you is that many of your customers will play both live and online. I would prefer to play with newbies, but that won't happen.

For me, smaller starting lineups and rosters would be a plus. I think you should look at Yahoo lineups. You might be able to create a migration from the free, simple Yahoo to the paid simple NOBC to the big event. Cap the NOBC entries so that there is always a big incentive to go to the NFBC. If the NOBC entries balloon, you can create NOBC-1 and NOBC-2, each with a $25,000 prize. The smaller event cap will also be less intimidating for new players. Compete against no more than "x" players to win the $25,000 prize. Perhaps in the longer term NOBC-1 and NOBC-2 will have different entry cap numbers so you can compete against 1/2 "x" and win say $10,000.

Since you won't have the overhead of a live draft, I'd like to think the payout would be closer to 80% than 75%. As a feeder league, I think you should pay deeper with league prizes (3 places) but I'm not sure how important that is.

I wouldn't use "computer" in the title. "Online" is a better term. National Online Baseball Championship. The "online" makes the term "fantasy" unnecessary. NFBC and NOBC become the brands. I wouldn't use indicators of level like Diamond, Platinum since other fantasy vendors do that already and it's kind of cheesy.

I would not use DL slots. What happens in real life is that DL players are added to rosters then moved to the DL. It becomes a minor league system and essential increases roster sizes as all the teams will fill those DL slots with creative waiver moves.

Those are my initial thoughts as I saw this for the first time just now. I'll post again if something else occurs to me. Very great post (if that's correct), JerseyPaul.

It's better than very good!

(Total tangent...with the headphones connected to the computer on full...even toggling down creates a sound...weird.)

I do like the full starting lineup and the bigger bench...small benches are bogus! They allow the bottom feeders to reap the rewards of injuries.

~Lance

Edwards Kings · Post by **Edwards Kings** » Sat Jul 21, 2007 1:29 am

Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

quote:Originally posted by Edwards Kings:

Great idea but I believe it will have reprecussions.

I have no way to prove this, but I think this "Online" championship would at the very least arrest the growth (cause a decline?) in the live event. I think you will always be able to get 14 to 17 live drafting leagues (some of us in the hard-core camp simply prefer the live events) spread among a max of three cities, but very soon the online will become your marquee (as far as particpants) high stakes event for the same reason Yahoo/ESPN/CBSSportsline has been so successful...ease of initial partcipation.

In the long run, an "Online" high stakes championship will grow the overall NFBC family of participants in events faster and to a larger degree, but I think the growth in this area (high stakes events as defined as $25k plus in prize money) will cap and possible cost some of the participation in the live main event leagues. Wayne, I suppose anything is possible and it's quite possible that our NFBC Satellite Leagues prevent our live drafts from growing. But anyone who has participated in the live draft knows the difference between doing it in person and doing it on a computer alone at home. It's not the same. Nor is the $500 entry fee vs. the $1300 entry fee. Nor is the $25,000 grand prize vs. the $100,000 grand prize.

That's why I do disagree with Shawn's assessment to make the online championship the same format as the NFBC. I don't want similar events online and live. I think a 12-team format at $500 per team with a fair overall grand prize is completely different from our NFBC Championship and caters to our current owners and to new players. Plus, a few contests didn't perform well at that level last year and I think there is an opening for a well run contest with guaranteed prize pools.

We'll see if the Online Championship hurts the live events, but I obviously hope they don't and right now I feel strongly that they will just add to what we're doing. We'll see. [/QUOTE]You make great points Greg. Given your years of experience and the fact you and your team have been the most successful in high stakes fantasy events, I am confident that you are right and the online not only expands the "family" (que up the "Godfather" soundtrack

), but create a feeder network for the live events.

Sounds great and good luck.

bucks66 · Post by **bucks66** » Sat Jul 21, 2007 5:26 am

My only take on this is that it's a good idea and one I would partake in. However, you would need to adhere to a stricter enforcement of the time allotted per player. In one of my midseason leagues, an owner was given Gil Meche because he failed to make a pick in time. The owner had no computer malfunctions but argued that all the players in his que had been taken and couldn't find anyone he wanted in the allotted time. Owner was allowed to go back after the fact and change his pick after a couple other players had been drafted and the next guy up was going to draft the player that was selected by the owner who couldn't make his mind up. If you're going to up the cost of the online, you're going to have to strictly enforce the time limit on drafting. For a $100 league, I guess that didn't matter much to the commish, but at $500 if the drafter is unprepared, that falls on him and I can see something like that becoming a huge problem. I'm pretty sure that wouldn't be tolerated at the main event so why allow it at a satellite? I understand that computers sometimes cause problems (I never had one in multiple satellites and I'm running on wireless) but at some point, when the same guy is holding up the draft, he needs to dump the Commodore 64 he's using and spend some of the money he's using on fantasy for an upgrade in computer. It also gives an unfair advantage to those following him with extra time to make a pick. Not sure how you're gonna do it, but I felt that mid-season league was extremely unfair in that regard. Just my 2 cents.

[ July 21, 2007, 11:28 AM: Message edited by: bucks66 ]

JerseyPaul · Post by **JerseyPaul** » Sat Jul 21, 2007 6:50 am

Bucks, I feel your pain but I have the opposite problem with online baseball drafts.

There are so many positions and so many players that after the first couple of rounds where things are pretty predictable, it takes me several seconds to find and scratch off players taken. With an online draft there isn't the "paste the name" time that you have in person. If 2 or 3 players take the top pick from their queue in a row (no delay time), it's easy to fall behind in bookkeeping. If that happens right before your pick and your queue is empty, it is a problem.

I'd like to see a minimum time between picks, if that was technically possible. I'd like no pick to be allowed to be posted before, say, 10 seconds from the last pick.

If that were done then there would be much less of an issue with the pick time clock.

In a live draft you have the allowed time beginning with the name being pasted to make your decision. Then you can just announce the name. In an online draft you have the same decision to make but must also find the person on the draft list through some scrolling, make sure it's the right guy, and click the right draft button. The technical requirement can easily take 30 seconds so marking off time plus thinking time is really short.

For those intimately familiar with the top 300 players, that's no problem. But if the appeal of the NOBC is to reach more casual fans, the pace of the draft must be tempered to be closer to that of a face-to-face draft.

sportsbettingman · Post by **sportsbettingman** » Sat Jul 21, 2007 7:35 am

Great suggestions.

Add a 10 second mandatory clock runoff per pick, and if the time runs out on you...you get NO PLAYER, and the next team is on the clock...just like the Main Event...after that player selects...you (the one who didn't select a player) get a 5 second window to select before going to the next drafter...repeat.

Programming upgrades!

~Lance

JerseyPaul · Post by **JerseyPaul** » Sat Jul 21, 2007 8:17 am

Originally posted by sportsbettingman:

Great suggestions.

Add a 10 second mandatory clock runoff per pick, and if the time runs out on you...you get NO PLAYER, and the next team is on the clock...just like the Main Event...after that player selects...you (the one who didn't select a player) get a 5 second window to select before going to the next drafter...repeat.

Programming upgrades!

~Lance The "no player" result of a missed time allocation is much better than the computer selected solution. 5 seconds to catch up will never work in an online environment, however. It will also be a big "human interface" issue to make the situation clear in the MDC draft room.

These are very real issues and one reason why "live" online high stakes drafts have not caught on. Draft issues have killed (or severely injured) some online money leagues.

The other solution is a "slow draft" with an 8 hour window. This would allow participants who can't (or won't) set aside 4 or 5 hours for a draft to be able to participate. One football site is well known for its drafts with a 12 hour window which takes about 7-10 days to complete 16 round drafts. Moving to an 8 hour draft should compensate for larger rosters but the drafts would need to start no later than 2 weeks before the season. The clock would have to be suspended for 2AM to 8AM ET I suspect although picks are allowed during the clock off periods.

Perhaps both types of drafts could be offered to give participants a choice. WCOFF is offering both for its satellites.