Why not have Big Spenders a live draft as opposed to $80 mil

[JAMESSCHUBERT]

It isn't a big deal to me, but I think it makes more sense to have the league where cap is not an option to have a draft. You would be selecting the best player and not necesarily the best bargain. Just my 2 cents, curious to see what others think

[teepack]

Exactly the reasons you state is why I think it is important to have the $80 million leagues be the live drafts. It puts an emphasis on finding bargains as well as the biggest salaries.

[durantjerry]

I agree with the $100mm live draft. As someone who got first waiver pick, I can assure you it's much easier to bounce back from a bad autodraft in $80mm than in a $100mm. Too many players gone so that first waiver almost means nothing.

[Coffeeholic]

A pretty decent idea James... at least worth some consideration Todd!

The 2007 card set doesn't seem to support a $100 mil league very well, and you can't help but notice that the teams who do poorly in the autodraft struggle to spend all their salary. A live draft would probably help alleviate this disparity.

Trouble is, I'd hate to see the $80 mil live draft go by the boards, as this is a nice test of our basic game skills.

Maybe 2 live drafts? :roll:

[JAMESSCHUBERT]

I'm a fan for as many live drafts as possible. I feel often times the autodraft is a big guessing game. I'd be very curious to see data to support top managers and their records in live draft vs. autodraft forums