PW Draft 2014 - Discussion Thread

Lord TSC

ShagNastii wrote: »

Are all the stipulations decided or could we PM a suggestion? I was swotting in the WWE encyclopedia earlier and thought of a doozy.

Please do. While I've a few ideas, none are set in stone yet. Nody suggested one earlier that I'm mulling over, and I've got a few classics lined up too.

One thing I'd say is as a personal philosophy, I prefer stips which open up the game rather than restrict it. The exception is the first round where I like to make sure big names are spread out over numerous rounds. After that though, it's about relaxing rules (pre-70s, non-National companies, etc).

But yeah, if you've got an idea, fire it my way

DM_7

JP Liz V1 wrote: »

Maybe the max number of participants can be increased to 22 or 25 this year so more can compete if there is no objections, though obviously means less pick options as rounds progress but what do TPTB think?

Thanks Liz

I am happy enough to be a reserve, I was undecided if I would be able to make time this year so figured I would let the draft decide for me if there was a drop out.

I am not sure it would be fair to increase numbers now that its underway as it would impact on people who were able to say yes from before (reduce options etc)

campo

DM-ICE wrote: »

Thanks Liz

I am happy enough to be a reserve, I was undecided if I would be able to make time this year so figured I would let the draft decide for me if there was a drop out.

I am not sure it would be fair to increase numbers now that its underway as it would impact on people who were able to say yes from before (reduce options etc)

It is also rare that the full 20 who started the draft finish the draft

beakerjoe

Just pmed teamshadowclan about a potential tag team entry, waiting on his reply

Lord TSC

Guys and gals, a quick question.

In previous years, how stringent have the tag team rules been when it comes to Indy titles being used to define a "team"?

If I'm reading right, beakerjoe's picks have had a title reign in a small enough Indy fed (a German one at that), but the reign seemed to last a year. According to the site, "Because after a year of successful title defenses, no other title fight in Europe was set with the switch blades, the belts were vakantiert" (German google translation). That would imply the timeframe aspect of being together 3 months suits.

Online World of Wrestling have the duo wrestling in a few places together for matches here and there, though don't have the above company results listed.

My initial inclination is to give it the go ahead, but was wondering (since my memory is useless) if the rules in the past had specified it had to be a bigger tag title run?

campo

Teamshadowclan wrote: »

Guys and gals, a quick question.

In previous years, how stringent have the tag team rules been when it comes to Indy titles being used to define a "team"?

If I'm reading right, beakerjoe's picks have had a title reign in a small enough Indy fed (a German one at that), but the reign seemed to last a year. According to the site, "Because after a year of successful title defenses, no other title fight in Europe was set with the switch blades, the belts were vakantiert" (German google translation). That would imply the timeframe aspect of being together 3 months suits.

Online World of Wrestling have the duo wrestling in a few places together for matches here and there, though don't have the above company results listed.

My initial inclination is to give it the go ahead, but was wondering (since my memory is useless) if the rules in the past had specified it had to be a bigger tag title run?

It never mattered in the past where they had the run ( for example a lot were going for guys ho tagged at FCW ) Just as long as they tagged together for 3months.

The fact that they were tag champs in a Indy fed in Germany for a year would not mean a whole lot without knowing how often they tagged there
( was it once and show folded only to be revived 12 months later )

If you want to PM there names I be happy to trawl through the net for em

campo

Great team beaker joe if you get them in that is , there YouTube promos look class

Lord TSC

We're running it by D2D as well and we'll give you an official response asap.

One problem I do have is it means there's two guys I want for my pick; a guy I'm very familiar with and a guy I've not had before but I could have a tonne of fun with.

Choices choices

waltersobchak

Teamshadowclan wrote: »

Guys and gals, a quick question.

In previous years, how stringent have the tag team rules been when it comes to Indy titles being used to define a "team"?

If I'm reading right, beakerjoe's picks have had a title reign in a small enough Indy fed (a German one at that), but the reign seemed to last a year. According to the site, "Because after a year of successful title defenses, no other title fight in Europe was set with the switch blades, the belts were vakantiert" (German google translation). That would imply the timeframe aspect of being together 3 months suits.

Online World of Wrestling have the duo wrestling in a few places together for matches here and there, though don't have the above company results listed.

My initial inclination is to give it the go ahead, but was wondering (since my memory is useless) if the rules in the past had specified it had to be a bigger tag title run?

The rule of thumb always seemed to be as long as they where a tag team for a solid 3 months they're good to go.. And pretty much any promotion counted.. Once Online World Of Wrestling proved it.. But sporadic team ups don't count.. Like say Punk and Daniel Bryan recently in WWE. As a "Tag Team" wouldn't count in the rules of the game..

DM_7

Are they on cagematch.net or the .de German version.

Since I am not in the game I would be happy to have a look if the names are sent to me.

Also you can't have world champs so the tag team won't be that huge in names. But if a draftee found something nobody else managed it would be great if it was allowed.

Lord TSC

I've sent a PM to D2D to get a third and final vote on the matter. If I've not got a reply by 1:00PM, I'll make the final decision and we'll progress on

beakerjoe

Ill await your repsonse kind sirs. Have a back up just in case. Sorry for delaying things

campo

beakerjoe wrote: »

Ill await your repsonse kind sirs. Have a back up just in case. Sorry for delaying things

Hope you get em , was a great pick

Lord TSC

Nah, it's me delaying things now.

Mainly so I can figure out which of my two choices to go with after you :pac:

Lord TSC

Beaker, go for it then.

beakerjoe

Sweet

waltersobchak

Lots of us are online at the mo, so hopefully we'll fly through the picks now:cool:

beakerjoe

Your up TSC.... I wanted Dean Ambrose from the start and Sami Callihan made getting him in the first round possible. Solomon Crowe/Sami Callihan is a great bonus for me.

Lord TSC

Sigh.

The star of my last two shows and probably one of the biggest names available in the draft. Or someone new who I'd be able to match up with anyone and have a tonne of fun with.

campo

beakerjoe wrote: »

Your up TSC.... I wanted Dean Ambrose from the start and Sami Callihan made getting him in the first round possible. Solomon Crowe/Sami Callihan is a great bonus for me.

Be interesting to see if you use them as a team or not

campo

Teamshadowclan wrote: »

Sigh.

The star of my last two shows and probably one of the biggest names available in the draft. Or someone new who I'd be able to match up with anyone and have a tonne of fun with.

New

waltersobchak

campo wrote: »

New

+1

And lovely left field pick breakerjoe

Lord TSC

Ok, passing up someone to both try someone new and give others a chance to use him.

But simply cannot pass up the chance to have fun writing for him.

Viva La Raza!

waltersobchak

Teamshadowclan wrote: »

Ok, passing up someone to both try someone new and give others a chance to use him.

But simply cannot pass up the chance to have fun writing for him.

Viva La Raza!

Great choice Eddie was definitely in my top 3..

thebostoncrab

waltersobchak wrote: »

Great choice Eddie was definitely in my top 3..

Thought Eddie would have been gone sooner!

campo

waltersobchak wrote: »

Great choice Eddie was definitely in my top 3..

My No.1 choice gone I have about 3 I would really like at this stage

waltersobchak

thebostoncrab wrote: »

Thought Eddie would have been gone sooner!

Same! After Punk and DB..

beakerjoe

campo wrote: »

Be interesting to see if you use them as a team or not

I was going with Moxley on his own but now im not so sure. Decisions ....decisions

Bounty Hunter

Punk, Bryan, Eddie, Bret & the guy TSC almost picked were my expected top 5 (in no particular order), that guy will be a steal for whoever gets him this late when you consider they will have a decent draw next round as he really is just as good/big a name as the others gone so far

beakerjoe

There was 2 teams I turned down for Ambrose and Callihan so im expecting them both to go soon.