I appreciate the response, but please have the courtesy not to twist my words.


“The idea that we should somehow "reward" success in PB with better picks is a contrarian concept at best. We will continue to ask for input, but will take some suggestions with a grain of salt... “


I did not suggest that you reward winning teams with better picks. In fact I made absolutely no reference to winning with regard to rewards. My suggestion was that you find a way to reward good scouting and management. I think it’s reasonable to give losing teams a break. The problem is that winning teams don’t have room to keep prospects on their roster in the spring when they have to make cuts before the FA draft. If you can’t keep your prospects, and all of the rookies who are producing are gifted to the loosing teams, what is the incentive to scout?


It would have been nice if you addressed the real point of my post as well as the one that I responded to. I think that it’s a terrible circumstance when you have managers that don’t care if their team wins or looses. This is exactly what the manager in the post I read suggested and I echoed those sentiments in my reply. I am BORED. First of all because I don’t care if my non-playoff teams win and secondly because I don’t need to put any effort into scouting or managing in order to improve them. The whole system is designed to spoon-feed and improve teams regardless of the manager’s effort or skill.


I personally have two LAST PLACE rebuilding teams. I am not speaking “on high” from a winning manager’s perspective as you suggest. If I feel cheated it has nothing to do with giving high picks to loosing teams, it’s because my efforts to rebuild MY loosing teams are diminished by the welfare policies that have been adopted. Maybe I’m one of those incompetent managers, but I still don’t want the rules changed so that it will be easier for me to succeed. What satisfaction could I derive from that?


I can’t comment on any emails that you received personally but I will disagree with you on your assessment of the posts on this board. Few were in total agreement with this change. More were partially in agreement. Just as many were totally against it. Almost none were in favour of making the change in mid season. Those against the proposal were more vocal, but perhaps not because they were in the minority, rather because they actually understood the proposal and were able to make comments. I have observed from engaging in trade talks and reading posts on this board that there are many who don’t understand the basic differences between draft types.


I have no problem with tweaking the rules in the off season; however, I think it is incredibly short sighted and damages the game’s credibility to make a change that could radically alter the course of the season in mid stream. You say this had to be done because you were going to loose managers. Should we all start threatening to drop our teams if we don’t like the rules? By making this change, it seems that this is a precedent you are willing to set. Personally, I think the “I’m going to take my ball and go home if I loose” attitude is one that can be done without. I would rather see teams managed by the robot than a less challenging simulation.