Like us on Facebook
Follow us on Twitter
Members added, ballots ready to be received, and social club has been created in the interim
Ive created this forum for us while we wait for a response from all potential members, in the mean time you can submit your ballot there, or through PM.
2:1 members are saying positional ranks are the way to start, most also agree a simplified ballot would be best.
(POS) : Ballot
You can submit your Ballot at your leisure but it should be a complete ballot for the Top-15 Players you can think of at whichever position you wish to submit first.
If the task of properly ranking the Top-15 players at each position as a starting point seems steep, your thinking too much of it. This is just to establish a baseline pecking order so that the poll options can be narrowed down to the majority favored. The beautiful thing about this project is that if you happen to forget someone or under/over value an individual player, there are still 40ish other members who could find him worth mentioning.
When the votes are tallied, the results will not be limited to 15 Players but every player who received a vote.
Once again thanks for the help fellas, the credibility of this project gos to **** without the collective efforts of PSDs best. Have a good weekend, hopefully come Monday the voting can start.
----------------- New Post Alert ---------------------
For Positional: 5
(Raps08-09 Champ, Iggz53, ebbs, sixer04fan, sep11ie, kingbrentg)
For Overall: 4
(Corey, Swashcuff, JB, Denbutsu)
PS: In order to erase the complaints associated with MHC's method, when it comes time to vote for the best period, I will post the Top3 vote getters instead of just the 1, even tho I think it wont be necessary.
Once the voting system is settled on, we have to agree on a scoring system, electoral system or some sort of ballot.
Ebbs mentioned the idea of a PTS system similar to ESPN's where everyone has a Top(10-15)Ballot, they submit their Top players at that position. The votes are tallied and weighed according to their draft status (#1 gets the full 15PTS, #2 get 14, #3 gets 13 and so on...), the pros to this are that it will speed up the initial process considerably.
The arbitrary #'s could lead to some iffy results for the positions segment of the project, but since the initial stages are meant only to establish some sort of associative balance, this should not effect the process of selecting the best overall.
If we go with the Overall system we will copy JB's system to a near T. Hes laid down the foundation, the only change I would suggest is that we begin the voting process by submitting a Top5 Ballot and beginning the 1 by 1 process from that starting point. Most of us have an idea of the first 5 players we plan on voting for anyways.
Totally up to you guys tho
So which methodology would you guys rather utilize? Straightforward Player by player voting that works for either system or if we go by positions to start, a scoring ballot where everyone submits their Top-15 at each position?
Yea RapsChamp felt the same way, he shares your complaints but for a fair compromise, when we do the overall list I will include the Top3 available at their position so that people arent forced into voting someone they dont support.
Regarding the GOAT Project;
Corey is looking into finding the proper discussion location for this topic so in the mean time until he gets the go ahead Im coming to you individually to get your opinion on how the voting process should work.
First and foremost, the method:Positional Rankings vs Overall?
-----If we go by positions then it allows for a narrower/simpler starting point with more clearly defined expectations and analysis. The only con here is there may be difficult players to pigeonhole into a position, also the process drags on a little longer as it applies the logic Mile High Champ used in his Annual Rankings, which depending on the size of the committe could be a good/bad thing.
-----Going by overall is and to the point, sounds simpler and in many ways it is but the lack of complexity allows for a broader range of candidates along with the possibility of contradictory logic. For example, the group at large could agree that PlayerA and PlayerB are > PlayerC, but if that group of individuals were split on voting for Player A or B they could potentially lose out to Player C despite the group at large unwilling to back the notion.
Aside from that comes the eligibility of current superstars; we can either set up a strict cutoff in terms of years served or simply rank players by where they would fare had their careers ended today, which given the climate may not be much of a stretch.
2 issues, thoughts?
Hahaha what made you think of Switzerland in that last post of yours? I'm actually from there, which made me laugh and wonder why you had picked that for your joke lol