2014 RealGM Soccer Forum Draft Discussion Thread

[Andi Obst]

Groups are looking pretty weird. Had more people voted they would have made more sense imo

Yeah, I really hoped to see more people voting here. It looks like most of you guys put much time and thought into this, would be nice to see more people voting to kinda acknowledge this. I think we'll see more votes in the later rounds but that'll be too late for some of you.

[Ted Lasso]

Don't mean to be salty (I will be anyways) but my team had no business going 0-0-3.

I think you lost the first one directly because of Ramsey's position. If you had simply switched him with Thiago, my vote alone would've won it for you.

Next two were always going to be tough.

[Ted Lasso]

Groups are looking pretty weird. Had more people voted they would have made more sense imo

Makes me wonder where Baphomet, and1GS, IronChef, Maex and other regulars are when we need them.

[Matty]

Don't mean to be salty (I will be anyways) but my team had no business going 0-0-3.

I think you lost the first one directly because of Ramsey's position. If you had simply switched him with Thiago, my vote alone would've won it for you.

Next two were always going to be tough.

It's funny, that was a game I believe deserved an L. I didn't put enough firepower up front against my opponent. The game afterwards made no sense to me though. How was a midfield of Besic, Medel and Kuba (barely even played last season) suppose to dominant Thiago and Ramsey? and how was a Lukalu-Benteke duo better than Tevez & Adebayor up front based on last season's performances? Iniesta is great but he can only do so much with the players that surrounded him. In real life that game wouldn't have even been close.

It just boggles my mind that I lost that game by a landslide. I must be missing something.

[Ted Lasso]

It's funny, that was a game I believe deserved an L. I didn't put enough firepower up front against my opponent. The game afterwards made no sense to me though. How was a midfield of Besic, Medel and Kuba (barely even played last season) suppose to dominant Thiago and Ramsey? and how was a Lukalu-Benteke duo better than Tevez & Adebayor up front based on last season's performances? Iniesta is great but he can only do so much with the players that surrounded him. In real life that game wouldn't have even been close.

It just boggles my mind that I lost that game by a landslide. I must be missing something.

I voted for ATL in that match-up, and i can explain my thinking to you if you like, but i dunno if it'll do any good.

[Matty]

It's funny, that was a game I believe deserved an L. I didn't put enough firepower up front against my opponent. The game afterwards made no sense to me though. How was a midfield of Besic, Medel and Kuba (barely even played last season) suppose to dominant Thiago and Ramsey? and how was a Lukalu-Benteke duo better than Tevez & Adebayor up front based on last season's performances? Iniesta is great but he can only do so much with the players that surrounded him. In real life that game wouldn't have even been close.

It just boggles my mind that I lost that game by a landslide. I must be missing something.

I voted for ATL in that match-up, and i can explain my thinking to you if you like, but i dunno if it'll do any good.

Give me an explanation for your choice and I promise I won't scold you but it better be a good one

[Ted Lasso]

Give me an explanation for your choice and I promise I won't scold you but it better be a good one

Two 4-4-2s squaring off was surely going to be an open game. The centre mid battle was physicality vs skill, but ATL had an elite player who would drift in to both make up numbers and provide a much needed possession player. (Really liked the idea of Marcelo going into the space Iniesta would vacate.) I didn't know where your third guy was going to come from. Tevez is past that sort of contribution and i think very little of Valbuena. Whether Thiago is prepared to cover for an uber-roaming player like Ramsey is questionable too.

I also believe his defence was a better unit. Ultimately, i thought he would find it easier to create and take adv of chances.

[Matty]

Give me an explanation for your choice and I promise I won't scold you but it better be a good one

Two 4-4-2s squaring off was surely going to be an open game. The centre mid battle was physicality vs skill, but ATL had an elite player who would drift in to both make up numbers and provide a much needed possession player. (Really liked the idea of Marcelo going into the space Iniesta would vacate.) I didn't know where your third guy was going to come from. Tevez is past that sort of contribution and i think very little of Valbuena. Whether Thiago is prepared to cover for an uber-roaming player like Ramsey is questionable too.

I also believe his defence was a better unit. Ultimately, i thought he would find it easier to create and take adv of chances.

Fair enough. My 2 cents on this though; Iniesta is not really your prototypical possession player. He needs to be around solid IQ players that play quick passes repeatedly and can play off the ball with quick movements. He's more of an elite play-maker and an above average dribbler. Messi is a an elite dribbler. Neymar is an elite dribbler. Iniesta is not like them. When you have players like that on your team its easy to follow suit knowing the defense has to pick its poison. But when Besic and Medel are on the field, knowing they are a liability on offense, Iniesta instantly becomes the prime target of the defense. So its not just Thiago covering him but Carvajal and Valbuena as well, thus forcing the other midfielders to make something happen.

Iniesta strives with like-minded play-makers and possession players. But when all that's surrounding him is hold up midfielders and classic stay in the box strikers, your asking for too much out of him.

No proof of this though of course, just a theory. All we've ever seen Iniesta play with is Barcelona and Spain.

[blkout]

Groups are looking pretty weird. Had more people voted they would have made more sense imo

Yeah, I really hoped to see more people voting here. It looks like most of you guys put much time and thought into this, would be nice to see more people voting to kinda acknowledge this. I think we'll see more votes in the later rounds but that'll be too late for some of you.

I just got beaten by a team with no line-up, we already had 4 votes before I'd even posted my line-up it's a shame it's kinda falling apart because it has been really fun, I think timing is the problem because all the group threads are getting buried by the football threads.

[Ted Lasso]

I just got beaten by a team with no line-up, we already had 4 votes before I'd even posted my line-up it's a shame it's kinda falling apart because it has been really fun, I think timing is the problem because all the group threads are getting buried by the football threads.

Which one of your lineups are you using against Boognish and 5DOM?

[blkout]

I just got beaten by a team with no line-up, we already had 4 votes before I'd even posted my line-up it's a shame it's kinda falling apart because it has been really fun, I think timing is the problem because all the group threads are getting buried by the football threads.

Which one of your lineups are you using against Boognish and 5DOM?

Just posted it, the one I beat brit with.

[Ted Lasso]

Give me an explanation for your choice and I promise I won't scold you but it better be a good one

Two 4-4-2s squaring off was surely going to be an open game. The centre mid battle was physicality vs skill, but ATL had an elite player who would drift in to both make up numbers and provide a much needed possession player. (Really liked the idea of Marcelo going into the space Iniesta would vacate.) I didn't know where your third guy was going to come from. Tevez is past that sort of contribution and i think very little of Valbuena. Whether Thiago is prepared to cover for an uber-roaming player like Ramsey is questionable too.

I also believe his defence was a better unit. Ultimately, i thought he would find it easier to create and take adv of chances.

Fair enough. My 2 cents on this though; Iniesta is not really your prototypical possession player. He needs to be around solid IQ players that play quick passes repeatedly and can play off the ball with quick movements. He's more of an elite play-maker and an above average dribbler. Messi is a an elite dribbler. Neymar is an elite dribbler. Iniesta is not like them. When you have players like that on your team its easy to follow suit knowing the defense has to pick its poison. But when Besic and Medel are on the field, knowing they are a liability on offense, Iniesta instantly becomes the prime target of the defense. So its not just Thiago covering him but Carvajal and Valbuena as well, thus forcing the other midfielders to make something happen.

Iniesta strives with like-minded play-makers and possession players. But when all that's surrounding him is hold up midfielders and classic stay in the box strikers, your asking for too much out of him.

No proof of this though of course, just a theory. All we've ever seen Iniesta play with is Barcelona and Spain.

I think i need to clarify my point. Theoretically, when you play with two pure forwards against modern set-ups, you gain an offensive advantage in that chances are easier to create, but you have to make up for the missing man in midfield, and there are a variety of ways of doing that. If both teams play 4-4-2, then the game usually becomes open bordering on the uncontrollable, and whichever team is adapt at utilising such a make-up technique starts to gain some level of control.

As such, it's not that i expect Iniesta to dribble, or serve as a game-winning creative force, it's that he would drift in without the ball to provide ball circulation relief to two very physical & mobile players and become a third midfielder against a side which is lacking such a player. As i mentioned earlier, Tevez doesn't fulfill that function any longer, i don't trust Valbuena to do it, and Lucas is a very direct player.

So you are left with giving up on matching him, becoming even more direct, and perhaps trying to take advantage of Iniesta and Marcelo's movement in return, but Carvajal and Valbuena aren't really cut out for that. It would have been better to flip Lucas and Valbuena in that sense.

Add to all of that my preference of his back four and what i said about Thiago behind Ramsey, and i think you can understand why i went in the other direction.

Of course, this could all be speculative horse manure. In reality, you could blast one in from 40 yards early on or score off a set piece, and the dynamics of the match would change completely.

[ATL Boy]

so is it the top 2 advance?

[Ted Lasso]

so is it the top 2 advance?

Yup

[El Turco]

what is the tiebreaker, h2h or goal differential? if it is head to head we locked up the first place and can come out with the reserve team last game

[Ted Lasso]

I generally think h2h makes more sense.

Having said that, if more people prefer goal (vote) difference, i need to explain how i determined scores in certain instances and see if everyone is on board because it wasn't exactly a scientific process.

[cgf]

It's the way every other voting draw has been handled. I lost a point through the run off to and am fine with it. Not sure I'd have proposed we do it this way, but I wasn't around when it was discussed so I can't really bitch about it now as long it's consistently implemented through the group stages.

If you or anybody else had simply suggested anything else when i proposed the run-offs, i would have happily gone along with it. I've made every change people have asked for.

Having said that, since we agreed to have draws on the ballot, is it actually more logical to do anything else? There have been instances where one team's victory and a tie received the same number of votes. What then? As for the type of run-off you were involved in, giving each of you a point (i assume that's what you meant by losing a point?) would have meant declaring the least popular option the winner. It's a misinterpretation. If people thought that match should have ended in a draw, they would have voted for a draw. It's more sensible to pursue the more supported outcomes.

I didn't mean that post to be critical at all, you've taken on a herculean effort and if anyone's moaning is critical of the way you've run this they should shut the **** up. In fact I tried to make that point by pointing out that it was my own fault for not paying attention and bringing it up when it was first done.

As for the logic of it, it's just the way we handled it in the last draft I did since we figured that if half the people think one team would win and half think the other would win then it would seem that the two teams were equally deserving of the spoils and so we did ties, but I don't think this way makes less sense, just not what I'm used to so I wouldn't have argued very strongly for it even had I brought it up...though maybe if I knew how it'd work it for me I should've

[ATL Boy]

I generally think h2h makes more sense.

Having said that, if more people prefer goal (vote) difference, i need to explain how i determined scores in certain instances and see if everyone is on board because it wasn't exactly a scientific process.

My vote is for goal difference, if it's used in the World Cup then I'd definitely use it here.

Having said that, I'd like to admit that I'm only lobbying for it because I'd pretty much be out if we did H2H.

[El Turco]

i think h2h is more logical since there are uneven number of votes per match up. three way ties obviously have to be goal difference.

[Ted Lasso]

It's the way every other voting draw has been handled. I lost a point through the run off to and am fine with it. Not sure I'd have proposed we do it this way, but I wasn't around when it was discussed so I can't really bitch about it now as long it's consistently implemented through the group stages.

If you or anybody else had simply suggested anything else when i proposed the run-offs, i would have happily gone along with it. I've made every change people have asked for.

Having said that, since we agreed to have draws on the ballot, is it actually more logical to do anything else? There have been instances where one team's victory and a tie received the same number of votes. What then? As for the type of run-off you were involved in, giving each of you a point (i assume that's what you meant by losing a point?) would have meant declaring the least popular option the winner. It's a misinterpretation. If people thought that match should have ended in a draw, they would have voted for a draw. It's more sensible to pursue the more supported outcomes.

I didn't mean that post to be critical at all, you've taken on a herculean effort and if anyone's moaning is critical of the way you've run this they should shut the **** up. In fact I tried to make that point by pointing out that it was my own fault for not paying attention and bringing it up when it was first done.

As for the logic of it, it's just the way we handled it in the last draft I did since we figured that if half the people think one team would win and half think the other would win then it would seem that the two teams were equally deserving of the spoils and so we did ties, but I don't think this way makes less sense, just not what I'm used to so I wouldn't have argued very strongly for it even had I brought it up...though maybe if I knew how it'd work it for me I should've

I didn't think you were being critical. Just wanted to explain my thinking.

We need more voices on the h2h or goal difference thing!