The Boards WWE Draft spectacular!

Mr.Nice Guy

This is an idea shamelessly ripped off from the soccer board. I saw one of the posters there who was involved with a soccer draft on another forum. It basically involved twenty posters each selecting eleven players for a football team over eleven rounds. When each person makes their last selection, they then have to do one final post in which they summarize the draft, explain their thought process, why theirs is best etc. I think a poll determines the winner who picked the overall best team.

You can see it in action for yourself here:

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthread.php?t=202158

It seemed to me in light of the WWE's own draft, that this would be a cool idea to apply to the Pro Wrestling forum.

I was thinking along the lines of a WWE draft involving every wrestler who has ever wrestled for the promotion being up for selection. There would be twenty people from this forum involved and we'd each have to form our own roster. The challenge is to see who comes up with the best one.

Rules:

- You can include anyone that has wrestled for the WWE ever. This is not just for current wrestlers. It can be any superstar from their prime years. For example, Bret Hart, Hulk Hogan they are all available for you. It's not just current stars. You can include wrestlers who have worked dark matches and TV tapings if you wish.

- No wrestler can be chosen twice so it would get trickier as the rounds go by with the big names already being selected. For example, if someone selects Stone Cold then Stone Cold is no longer available for anybody else! Obviously by the final round, the picks will be harder (and more interesting).

- Each person makes ten picks over ten rounds. One choice per round. Everyone gets their turn.

- Tag teams come as a package so if you want the Dudleys then you don't have to pick Bubba one round and then D-Von the next. You get them as a package. It would be up to you to decide how many tag teams you want but you need at least one team. With regards to stables, they wouldn't come as a package because it would be pretty unfair if people were choosing D-X, Evolution etc.

- With regards to tag teams, to avoid people taking two main eventers via their tag team choice, a la The Rock and Sock connection, you cannot pick a tag team where at least one of the partners went on to become a world champion. Thus choosing 'The Rock and Sock connection' or 'Edge and Christian' for example is not allowed.

- You can't pick a tag team where both members worked for WWE but were only a team outside of WWE such as Lance Storm and Chris Jericho for example.

- You must select at least one female wrestler for your roster.

- Managers are eligible if people wish to pick them, but they are not required and are optional.

- I suggest leaving out commentators, at least for the time being, but if people think otherwise then we can discuss it.

- When it's your turn, you have 24 hours to make your pick. The picks will be made on the designated thread here. If you fail to pick anyone in the time limit then your turn is skipped and I will PM you as a reminder. If you fail to make your pick in time you go to the back of the queue. If it happens a second time during the game then you will face elimination as we need to keep it fair on regular followers. We want people involved who can keep the selection process flowing along.

The rules are pretty much still up for debate but if you think the above work fine enough then great.

* FINAL ROUND DRAFT ORDER *

1. Spongey1975...Shawn Michaels, Kevin Nash, New Age Outlaws, Lex Luger, Pedro Morales, Rikishi & Scotty 2 Hotty, John Morrison, King Kong Bundy, The Godfather, Debra
2. Jayhaitch2...Kurt Angle, Owen Hart & Jeff Jarrett, JBL, Scott Hall, Ken Shamrock, Mickie James, Hurricane & Rosey, Freddie Blassie, Jerry Crusher Blackwell, Flash Funk (2 Cold Scorpio)
3. RebelRockChick...Ric Flair, The Fabulous Freebirds, Dusty Rhodes, Demolition, Superstar Billy Graham, Jesse Ventura, Jerry Lynn, Juventud Guerrera, Christy Hemme, Joey Mercury
4. gimmick...Ted Dibiase, Ricky Steamboat, Matt Hardy & MVP, Harley Race, Bam Bam Bigelow, Jamie Noble & Kid Kash, Shane Douglas, Goldust, Colt Cabana, Torrie Wilson
5. b.ie curious...Jake Roberts, Ultimate Warrior, Big Show, Bob Backlund, DDP, Al Snow & Steve Blackman, Greg Valentine & Brutus Beefcake, Val Venis, Stevie Richards, Ivory
6. Fozzy...Kerry Von Erich, Terry Funk, Arn Anderson & Tully Blanchard, Barry Windham & Mike Rotunda (IRS), Jushin Liger, Bryan Danielson, Junkyard Dog, Sable, Stan Hansen, Dick Murdoch
7. callaway92...The Road Warriors, Rey Mysterio, Booker T, William Regal, Fabulous Moolah, Marty Jannetty, Chavo Guerrero Jr, Mark Henry, Chris Masters, Renee Dupree & Kenzo Suzuki
8. orestes...Mick Foley, Lance Storm, Vince McMahon, Brian Pillman, Dean Malenko & Perry Saturn, Bob Holly & X-Pac, Sherri, D-Lo Brown, Eugene, Brooklyn Brawler
9. Furious-Red...Chris Benoit, Jeff Hardy, Paul London & Brian Kendrick, Bobby Lashley, Finlay, Frankie Kazarian, Kofi Kingston, Stacy Keibler, Lance Cade & Trevor Murdoch, Chris Harris
10. Bounty Hunter...Hulk Hogan, John Cena, Yokozuna, Jimmy Snuka, Tazz & Raven, Don Muraco & Bob Orton, Mr Fuji, Ron Simmons, Alundra Blayze, Aja Kong
11. Mr.Nice Guy...Bret Hart, Roddy Piper, Kane, CM Punk, Rock 'n' Roll Express, The Rougeau Brothers, Maria, Bad News Brown, Steve Williams, Paul Bearer
12. michael.etc...Andre the Giant, Goldberg, Rick Rude, Rick Martel & Tito Santana, Paul Orndorff, The Wild Samoans, Mil Mascaras, Miss Elizabeth, Low Ki, Essa Rios
13. KKV...The Undertaker, Curt Hennig, Big Boss Man and Bull Buchanan, Honky Tonk Man, Earthquake & Typhoon, Melina, Eric Bischoff, Muhammed Hassan, Ariel, Daivari
14. Vince135792003...The British Bulldogs, Vader, Jerry Lawler, Tiger Mask, Jim Cornette, Bruiser Brody, Ultimo Dragon & Billy Kidman, Buddy Rogers, Nigel McGuinness, Terri Runnels
15. Danger Dave...Chris Jericho, Batista, Dudley Boyz, Trish Stratus, Sergeant Slaughter, Molly Holly, Iron Sheik, Nikolai Volkoff, The Nasty Boys, The Miz
16. ec18...The Rock, Edge, Christian, AJ Styles, Sunny, Samoa Joe, TAKA Michinoku & Funaki, Tyson Tomko, Rocky Johnson & Tony Atlas, Paul Heyman
17. Bubs101...Randy Savage, Bruno Sammartino, Steiner Brothers, Sycho Sid, Pat Patterson, Chyna, Gail Kim, Christopher Daniels, Elijah Burke & Marcus Cor Von, Dan Severn
18. Minto...Triple H, Randy Orton, Bobby Heenan, Shane McMahon, Cody Rhodes & Ted DiBiase Jr, Stephanie McMahon, Umaga, Killer Kowalski, The Great Khali, Paul & Katie Lea Burchill
19. Justbringit89...Brock Lesnar, Eddie Guerrero, Sabu, Shelton Benjamin & Charlie Haas, Mr Kennedy, Carlito & Santino, Victoria, Tommy Dreamer, Kelly Kelly, Sandman
20. dez_warlock...Stone Cold Steve Austin, Rob Van Dam, Rhino & Tajiri, Lita, Mike Awesome, Test & Albert, Super Crazy, Evan Bourne, Psicosis, Steve Corino



(*Note - to reiterate, your selections are posted on the Draft picks thread here)*

Minto

I'm in!

gimmick

Not sure I understand entirely, but Ill have a go.

Are the picks only from WWE, or can TNA, ROH etc be included?

Mr.Nice Guy

gimmick wrote: »

Not sure I understand entirely, but Ill have a go.

Are the picks only from WWE, or can TNA, ROH etc be included?

They have to be guys (or gals) who have been in WWE at some point so Cage, Rhyno, Albright etc. can be included.

Bubs101

I'm in, but 20 is far too much for the wrestling forum TBH, I'd recommend about 10 with 13 or 15 per roster. We could be waiting a week for 20 people to sign up

Edit: Just 1 question. When you said we could pick tag teams as one pick and then said we couldn't do the same for stables you mentioned D-X, an old stable. You also mentioned Stone Cold, a retired superstar. With tag teams, where do the likes of Edge and Christian stand. Can you pick an old tag team that has two current established Main eventers.

gimmick

gimmick wrote: »

Not sure I understand entirely, but Ill have a go.

Not quite sure i get it either, but i've nothing better to do in my time, so I'm also up for it.


I took a look at the football one and i can kinda see how it works.


One thing I'd like to ask though:


Are we independently giving our opinions and ideas on the roster we make, or are we challenging each other to dispute who has the better roster?

Cos the whole "around the horn" thing kinda went to crap when i was playing, because people kept on coming up with the most unreasonable attacks for me to battle against. I'll give this a shot and hopefully it works out.

Also, is this a survivor series match? as we go on, do we 'eliminate' two people per round so its a 1-on-1 match in the end?

john concannon

Put my name in for it MNG.

john concannon

Bubs101 wrote: »

I'm in, but 20 is far too much for the wrestling forum TBH, I'd recommend about 10 with 13 or 15 per roster. We could be waiting a week for 20 people to sign up

I agree.We barely have 20 people read the forum in a day including lurkers so we should have 10 or 12.

Mr.Nice Guy

Bubs101 wrote: »

I'm in, but 20 is far too much for the wrestling forum TBH, I'd recommend about 10 with 13 or 15 per roster. We could be waiting a week for 20 people to sign up

Well the Rumble thing that Vince was involved with got names pretty fast so it shouldn't take too long.

Deleted User wrote:

One thing I'd like to ask though:

Are we independently giving our opinions and ideas on the roster we make, or are we challenging each other to dispute who has the better roster?

Cos the whole "around the horn" thing kinda went to crap when i was playing, because people kept on coming up with the most unreasonable attacks for me to battle against. I'll give this a shot and hopefully it works out.

Also, is this a survivor series match? as we go on, do we 'eliminate' two people per round so its a 1-on-1 match in the end?

We wouldn't dispute who has the better roster until the end when the rsoters are finalised so the idea would be that you make a pick and present your reasons for it. Ideally it would go the way the soccer one works and not feature people being criticised for their picks (save that for the end )

If anyone is unsure about anything feel free to make your point because I know it seems a bit puzzling initially but it's not all that bad once you wrap your head around it.

michael.etc...

sure why not... I'll have a go

Bubs101

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

Well the Rumble thing that Vince was involved with got names pretty fast so it shouldn't take too long.

Yeah but all you had to do there was put your name down and watch it. Here you have to moniter the forum to see when it's your go, engage in the discussion thread and keep interest in it for a while.

Any chance you could clarify the dead tag team situation as well

Mr.Nice Guy

Bubs101 wrote: »

Edit: Just 1 question. When you said we could pick tag teams as one pick and then said we couldn't do the same for stables you mentioned D-X, an old stable. You also mentioned Stone Cold, a retired superstar.

You can include anyone that has wrestled for the WWE ever. This is not just for current wrestlers. It can be any superstar from their prime years. For example, Bret Hart, Hulk Hogan they are all available for you. It's not just current stars.

Edit: I didn't really clarify that all too well. I added it to the rules just now.

Bubs101 wrote:

With tag teams, where do the likes of Edge and Christian stand. Can you pick an old tag team that has two current established Main eventers.

If you pick Edge and Christian for example then you'd be getting them prior to their main event status. It would be an interesting pick though because it would foil someone's plan who wanted to have Edge. :pac:

Mr.Nice Guy

Bubs101 wrote: »

Yeah but all you had to do there was put your name down and watch it. Here you have to moniter the forum to see when it's your go, engage in the discussion thread and keep interest in it for a while.

Any chance you could clarify the dead tag team situation as well

I see your point Bubs and hopefully we'll get those who can devote their time. Perhaps it would be worthwhile to make a rule that anyone who doesn't make their mind up withina set time is disqualified and loses their place?

Or we could just restrict the numbers. We'll see how it goes. I hope I cleared up the tag team matter there.

michael.etc wrote:

sure why not... I'll have a go

Are you going to be able to commit to it? I'll whack your name down but we need people who can keep up with it.

michael.etc...

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

Are you going to be able to commit to it? I'll whack your name down but we need people who can keep up with it.

I don't see why not, i'm usually not away for more than a couple days at a time. If you get too many folk wanting to be involved sure, take me out.

Mr.Nice Guy

michael.etc... wrote: »

I don't see why not, i'm usually not away for more than a couple days at a time. If you get too many folk wanting to be involved sure, take me out.

It's just that being away for a few days might hold up proceedings for those who want to make their picks. We mainly need people who tend to stop by every day you know?

callaway92

Include me too lads

Vince135792003

I'd love to join in but I take it this will be going on longer than Friday? If so I can't. Cool idea though.

justbringit89

Im In:D

dez_warlock

Put me in too.

Mr.Nice Guy

Vince135792003 wrote: »

I'd love to join in but I take it this will be going on longer than Friday? If so I can't. Cool idea though.

Yeah it will probably take a few weeks I suspect. But if you have to go away for a while then you could still participate as long as you PM me what your picks are.

Bubs101

Vince135792003 wrote: »

I'd love to join in but I take it this will be going on longer than Friday? If so I can't. Cool idea though.

Shame, would have loved to see you lock horns with VR via your rosters.

BTW, the comment about F4W listeners wasn't about you in the other thread (think it's locked now), I was more pre-empting what VR was going to say. Rovert on the other hand :rolleyes:...

Mr.Nice Guy

dez_warlock wrote: »

Put me in too.

We need people who can contribute on a regular basis now. Are you going to have the time to do that?

Vince135792003

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

But if you have to go away for a while then you could still participate as long as you PM me what your picks are.

Ok I will try then. If it turns, I go quiet for a couple of days when it's my turn, feel free to kick me out because I won't have too much time on the net over the next few weeks.

Fozzy

I think that maybe a rule like "only tag teams where one or both members didn't have any big singles success can be picked" might be an idea. Just because you could get Steve Austin and Brian Pillman in one pick, or The Rock and Mick Foley

Could a tag team be picked where both members worked for WWE but they were only a team outside of WWE? Like Lance Storm and Chris Jericho for example

And the rule at the moment says that they have to have wrestled for WWE. Would that include someone like Bryan Danielson or Samoa Joe, who have worked dark matches and tv matches for WWE?

Best to get all these gray areas worked out now!

Mr.Nice Guy

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

You can include anyone that has wrestled for the WWE ever. This is not just for current wrestlers. It can be any superstar from their prime years. For example, Bret Hart, Hulk Hogan they are all available for you. It's not just current stars.

Edit: I didn't really clarify that all too well. I added it to the rules just now.



If you pick Edge and Christian for example then you'd be getting them prior to their main event status. It would be an interesting pick though because it would foil someone's plan who wanted to have Edge. :pac:

I think the tag team thing shouldn't work like that.


I mean, if thats the case, EVERYONE'S first pick is the two man powertrip. And the minute someone chooses them, That means two mega huge superstars are after being removed. Which means that the other x amount
of people will either 1) lose interest or 2) look deep into wrestlings past to try and screw everyone else over. I mean, why not choose the brothers of destruction? you know?


I think it should be a case of, a team is a team, but its only a team if the two superstars never went on to become huge singles stars.

Besides, why would you pick Shawn Michaels, when you could have the rockers?

I understand the whole time frame thing, but it still makes that person unavailable for other people to use.


*EDIT*


And in relations to Fozzy's post above (which wasnt there when i posted) i think it should only be people who have actually appeared on WWE tv a few times. A lot of people dont know much outside of WWE, and its hard to find the flaw in Tagimaji Yoka (Made up name) if you never even heard of him before, if you understand what i mean?

Mr.Nice Guy

Vince135792003 wrote: »

Ok I will try then. If it turns, I go quiet for a couple of days when it's my turn, feel free to kick me out because I won't have too much time on the net over the next few weeks.

Cool I'll stick your name down. Hopefully no one will have to be kicked out.

Fozzy wrote:

I think that maybe a rule like "only tag teams where one or both members didn't have any big singles success can be picked" might be an idea. Just because you could get Steve Austin and Brian Pillman in one pick, or The Rock and Mick Foley

Good idea. I hadn't thought of that. Maybe something like 'no tag teams where one of the partners went on to become a world champion?'

Fozzy wrote:

Could a tag team be picked where both members worked for WWE but they were only a team outside of WWE? Like Lance Storm and Chris Jericho for example

Hmm I don't think that would be fair personally.

Fozzy wrote:

And the rule at the moment says that they have to have wrestled for WWE. Would that include someone like Bryan Danielson or Samoa Joe, who have worked dark matches and tv matches for WWE?

Best to get all these gray areas worked out now!

Good points all round! I think it would be fine to allow anyone that has worked a WWE match at some point.

Vince135792003

Deleted User wrote: »

look deep into wrestlings past to try and screw everyone else over. I mean, why not choose the brothers of destruction? you know?

So in your opinion I'd be screwing people over if I picked someone pre 1990 or whatever?

The fun of it is that it gives everyone a big range to choose from.

Bubs101

Fozzy wrote: »

I think that maybe a rule like "only tag teams where one or both members didn't have any big singles success can be picked" might be an idea. Just because you could get Steve Austin and Brian Pillman in one pick, or The Rock and Mick Foley

I think the way it was mentioned in the soccer forum originally was that you couldn't pick a footballer like Djorkaeff (they had to play in the premiership) from Bolton, and start reffering to the player who played for Inter. The same would go with Veron and Lazio, or Hierro and Real so I'd assume the same would go with Pillman and Austin. You couldn't pick those two and then say, not only were they a great tag team, but Austin went on to be one of the best ever and Pillman could have if he had more luck. If you pick the tag team your pick ends with their run (or so I understood but I read the whole of the post that was linked by Lloyd in the soccer forum so I'm well versed in the rules).

As for tag teams like the Rock'n'soc, the Power Trip, The Brothers of Destruction and Vitamin C an exception has to be made I think

Mr.Nice Guy

Deleted User wrote: »

I think the tag team thing shouldn't work like that.

I mean, if thats the case, EVERYONE'S first pick is the two man powertrip. And the minute someone chooses them, That means two mega huge superstars are after being removed. Which means that the other x amount
of people will either 1) lose interest or 2) look deep into wrestlings past to try and screw everyone else over. I mean, why not choose the brothers of destruction? you know?

I think it should be a case of, a team is a team, but its only a team if the two superstars never went on to become huge singles stars.

Yes it's a good point alright. Would you be fine with a rule which states no tag team where at least one member went on to become a world champion?

Deleted User wrote:

And in relations to Fozzy's post above (which wasnt there when i posted) i think it should only be people who have actually appeared on WWE tv a few times. A lot of people dont know much outside of WWE, and its hard to find the flaw in Tagimaji Yoka (Made up name) if you never even heard of him before, if you understand what i mean?

Well people will have to explain their choices at the end. If people want to go for names that aren't very well known it shouldn't be a big deal to those who want only well known names.

Edit: To dez warlock, I haven't put your name down yet as I'm not sure if you can commit to it but if you tell me can I will put you down.

Edit 2: I've just updated the rules to try and clear up some of the points raised. Regarding the tag team issue raised by Fozzy and KKV, I just added this. Give me your thoughts:

With regards to tag teams, to avoid people taking two main eventers via their tag team choice, a la The Rock and Sock connection, you cannot pick a tag team where at least one of the partners went on to become a world champion. Thus choosing 'The Rock and Sock connection' or 'Edge and Christian' for example is not allowed.

Is that fair enough?

Vince135792003

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

Is that fair enough?

The tag team alteration rule works.

dez_warlock

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

We need people who can contribute on a regular basis now. Are you going to have the time to do that?

Trust me man, I'm on this site a lot so will definitely have the time for it.

Bubs101

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

]
I'm involved with it and I've spoken about the idea with Fozzy and he's up for it too. That means we need 18 more participants to make up the numbers. We'll then mix the names at random and whoever is first will have the first pick, whoever is second will make their second pick etc. and so on until we get to the twentieth person. Then we will commence round 2 and start the second picks.

The rules seem fine apart from this. Should it not go up to 20 and then back down from 20 to 1, otherwise the people at the second end of the spectrum are at a massive disadvantage

Fozzy

Bubs101 wrote: »

The rules seem fine apart from this. Should it not go up to 20 and then back down from 20 to 1, otherwise the people at the second end of the spectrum are at a massive disadvantage

They're not really at that much of a disadvantage after the first round of picks. By the time the first person makes their second pick there's 19 other wrestlers chosen that they can't pick. And those will probably be the very best picks, the next few rounds will be from guys around the same level. I don't see any problem

Minto

If it goes from 1 - 20 and then 20 - 1, then person number 1 will have to wait out 38 goes (I think) between picks. If we do it as
originally concieved, each person will only wait 20 picks! Seems fairer that way!

Mr.Nice Guy

dez_warlock wrote: »

Trust me man, I'm on this site a lot so will definitely have the time for it.

Ok mate. I added you.

On the issue of the choice selection, I don't think it's too bad really. There have been so many big names in WWE over the years that everyone will get a big star name. The real tough part will come when the big names are taken and that's when people will have to get a bit creative with their picks.

8 spots still to be filled. I would hope VR puts his name forward because he's pretty knowledgeable about WWE history and could come up with some interesting selections I reckon.

Bubs101

Fozzy wrote: »

They're not really at that much of a disadvantage after the first round of picks. By the time the first person makes their second pick there's 19 other wrestlers chosen that they can't pick. And those will probably be the very best picks, the next few rounds will be from guys around the same level. I don't see any problem

But realistically, there's around 10 people you could argue that could be picked at number 1. When you get to number 20 there'll be no Hogan, no Flair, no Bret, No HBK and no Rock. You'd be lucky to even get a HHH. There's a big gap between the top tier and the second in my view and a reverse order would address that

Fozzy

Bubs101 wrote: »

But realistically, there's around 10 people you could argue that could be picked at number 1. When you get to number 20 there'll be no Hogan, no Flair, no Bret, No HBK and no Rock. You'd be lucky to even get a HHH. There's a big gap between the top tier and the second in my view and a reverse order would address that

How? Number 20 still won't be able to pick those guys. It's the luck of the draw!

Bubs101

Fozzy wrote: »

How? Number 20 still won't be able to pick those guys. It's the luck of the draw!

But that's the point. Picks 1 and 40 are equal to 20 and 21, there's a big difference between 1 and 21 to 20 and 40. Sure it's not that big of a deal anyway. Only a 50% chance I'll be in the bottom half;)

orestes

Can I put my name down for this?

I think I get the general premise but will have a good read tonight and tomorrow through the rules in depth and go through the soccer thread to get a better understanding, it's just a bit late at night to try to understand it completely

Mr.Nice Guy

orestes wrote: »

Can I put my name down for this?

I think I get the general premise but will have a good read tonight and tomorrow through the rules in depth and go through the soccer thread to get a better understanding, it's just a bit late at night to try to understand it completely

Ok man I will add you.

Don't worry if it seems a bit hard to comprehend. I was the same when I first saw the soccer one. If you need to find about something, feel free to ask.

7 spots remaining everyone.

orestes

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

Ok man I will add you.

Don't worry if it seems a bit hard to comprehend. I was the same when I first saw the soccer one. If you need to find about something, feel free to ask.

7 spots remaining everyone.

Cool, thanks man. I'll have a better read of it tomorrow when the brain isn't as tired.

Actually, are managers eligible?

Mr.Nice Guy

orestes wrote: »

Actually, are managers eligible?

I hadn't thought about that but I don't see why not if people want to pick them. So yeah let's say they are but they're not a mimimum requirement like for example having at least one tag team or at least one female wrestler.

I might just add that to the rules actually. :cool:

orestes

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

I hadn't thought about that but I don't see why not if people want to pick them. So yeah let's say they are but they're not a mimimum requirement like for example having at least one tag team or at least one female wrestler.

I might just add that to the rules actually. :cool:

Cool.

What about factions? If you have every member of a faction on your list, can you form the faction?

I am aware that although I am trying to make things clearer I am probably just making them more complicated

Mr.Nice Guy

orestes wrote: »

What about factions? If you have every member of a faction on your list, can you form the faction?

Factions aren't allowed. For example you can't pick Evolution. If however you wanted to try and pick each individual member of that group and try to form it, you could do so but there's no guarantee the guy you plan on picking next won't be picked by someone else.

So if for example you picked HHH in the hope to form Evolution, someone else could end up picking Ric Flair as their choice and your plan would be scuppered.

orestes wrote:

I am aware that although I am trying to make things clearer I am probably just making them more complicated

No that's fine. Sure if you read the whole thread we're making it up as we go along.

It will work out fine though here's hoping...

orestes

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

Factions aren't allowed. For example you can't pick Evolution. If however you wanted to try and pick each individual member of that group and try to form it, you could do so but there's no guarantee the guy you plan on picking next won't be picked by someone else.

So if for example you picked HHH in the hope to form Evolution, someone else could end up picking Ric Flair as their choice and your plan would be scuppered.

Cool, that's what I was wondering, like if you happen to have every member of a faction can you form it. Being able to pick an entire faction as a single pick would just be ridiculous, but people trying to scupper each other forming factions could end up with some interesting results. Cheers

See, this confuses me. If, say, i have to defend my roster against Orestes, what format does it take?

make-your-own-storyline format? where i say "i could put edge with undertaker and create the canadian deadmen"

or is it just debating how good the wrestler would be to the overall brand?

"well yes, i can see what you mean when you say your Shawn Michaels can work a match with anyone, but my Hulk Hogan can draw a bigger crowd without wrestling at all, so i'd be more likely to sell more tickets based on that point alone".


Cos i think this may turn very confusing


Regardless, I dont mind making things up as we go along. Thats how i live my life

Mr.Nice Guy

Deleted User wrote: »

See, this confuses me. If, say, i have to defend my roster against Orestes, what format does it take?

make-your-own-storyline format? where i say "i could put edge with undertaker and create the canadian deadmen"

or is it just debating how good the wrestler would be to the overall brand?

"well yes, i can see what you mean when you say your Shawn Michaels can work a match with anyone, but my Hulk Hogan can draw a bigger crowd without wrestling at all, so i'd be more likely to sell more tickets based on that point alone".


Cos i think this may turn very confusing


Regardless, I dont mind making things up as we go along. Thats how i live my life

Storylines wouldn't come into it. The point of the challenge is to see who comes up with the most impressive roster overall. There are various strategies people could adopt to achieve this. It wouldn't be about comparing Michaels with Hogan but assessing ALL of the picks and seeing whose roster overall offers the most interesting package.

Some people might go down the road of trying to pick 'star value' names like Hogan, whereas others might try and go for those who offer the best from an in-ring perspective like Michaels.

Both are fine strategies but it will be up to everyone to make their case and determine who made the most impressive line-up.

I would guess that a roster which ultimately makes up both 'star value' names and offers impressive wrestling ability would be the best roster but that remains to be seen.

Well i guess thats all the nit-picking i can do.

Sounds good. So long as I win I'm happy

Tricity Bendix

I'm in. Now that I'm a working stiff I have all the free time in the world.

Vince135792003

Come on people, sign up. Let's get this going!~!

ec18

Yeah O'M IN