That was the old regime and the new one is desperate to be competitive. They need a QB in the worst way.
I did mine a month ago. I'll update it as it gets closer and I don't want to give away my thoughts on specific players before the mock draft.
I blame Parcells. We never had a TE fetish until that man arrived in town.
Not sure if we are going to have one. Would like to, but I know I am not in the mood to do it unless we can get more participants and people who will actually commit to doing it right.
I'm down with doing it, but like you and a couple others, it gets really fucking frustrating when some of us commit a lot of time to it, and people can't even show up for their own pick or send in a list.
Or we are having to "recruit" just to get all the teams filled. Funny thing is, those guys we have had in the past sometimes did a better job fulfilling their obligation than our regulars who signed up.
If we did do it, I'd propose changing the format for no shows. No more votes on picks. That tends to drag it in too. I'd say just pick one source that shows team needs and a best available list and match teams up.
I don't think they should even get that. I know people always say that they will be voted poorly for not showing but I don't their team should get the benefit of BPA. I don't know what the answer is outside of people just showing the hell up.
BPA is best because it keeps the integrity of the mock.
Just doesn't seem right to me that someone who doesn't show up gets a good pick, and the person behind them is sitting their waiting and gets their choice taken from them because someone doesn't show up.
That's better than the person behind him voting for a player they don't want hoping theirs falls.
I would agree with that.
That site has a lot of players misranked and really does not take into account how the stock changes from week to week.
Crichton over Murphy, come on, easy call.
