Future card additions

I would like to see more focus on "filling out" some of the franchises. Could we spend the next few card addition polls to do that? Rockies, Marlins, D'Backs have all been in existence for more than 25 years, and have combined for multiple WS appearances and wins. The Rockies especially, have had a lot of notable offensive performances thanks to the ballpark. It would surely be nice to be able to include these franchises in franchise leagues, and there would be a much better spectrum of cards added.

I concur wholeheartedly with Rburgh's thoughts here. Franchise leagues are quite popular and an infusion of talent to these post-war/expansion franchises would expand the option of truly usable franchises.

Also, as someone mentioned on this topic recently (I believe it was Petro/Last Druid), it would also be nice to bring in some complete teams from various years just like it was done originally. This would provide some needed talent at lower salary levels and also include some interesting players who would otherwise be ignored in the votes for new additions. I think each influx of new players should include at least one team along with individual players; it would seem easy to do.

Thanks rburgh.

Been saying this for a long time.

I too would like to see whole teams added as well.

I still don't understand why ALL 40 selected cards could not be added to the player pool. It was voted on and these were the first 40 players. Just add them already. Why vote again? They aren't doing us any favors by voting again for the top 6-7 players from the 40.

While on the subject of adding players, why the F does it take so long to add the players once selected?
After all, it's not 40 cards being added.

I want as many cards added as possible, just like everyone else. The voting is not going away though, because it stirs interest, and that's just good business.

Id like to suggest next time we vote on team additions-
lets say 20 nominations- 5-10 teams added;

See the thing is that we want to cover people who play all cap and types- this way we can at least vote for a team that has 1 or 2 useable high cap players per team as well as getting the rest of the team.

Please feel free to poke holes in what I just said, since I havent completely worked out weather it makes sense.

Id like to suggest next time we vote on team additions-
lets say 20 nominations- 5-10 teams added;

See the thing is that we want to cover people who play all cap and types- this way we can at least vote for a team that has 1 or 2 useable high cap players per team as well as getting the rest of the team.

Please feel free to poke holes in what I just said, since I havent completely worked out weather it makes sense.

I would be in favor of this.

"I want as many cards added as possible, just like everyone else. The voting is not going away though, because it stirs interest, and that's just good business."

When you have a certain player in mind and it will help out a franchise, you would like to see him being entered.

When Strat asks for 40 players, 40 players should be entered. Not 7. Make everyone who chipped in happy. After all, they are only your customers...

Agree on adding to the Rockies, Marlins, D-Backs and even the Rays. So I will start. Please feel free to add.

Colorado
2008 Chris Iannetta
1996 Eric Young - 2B
1998 Vinny Castilla - 3B
1995 Dante Bichette - LF
2007 Matt Holliday - LF
2010 Carlos Gonzalez - LF/CF/RF
1996 Ellis Burks - CF
2010 Ubaldo Jimenez - SP

Tampa
2007 Carlos Pena - 1B
2009 Ben Zobrist - 2B
2009 Jason Bartlettt - SS
2010 Evan Longoria - 3B
2010 Carl Crawford - LF

In the case of Iannetta we get an INFERIOR 2009 card. I wish people would do some homework when voting or nominating.

Nobody nominated him. Strat chose to add that card. I do agree that those cards should be added.

Well then I stand corrected. SOM sure knows how to pick them then.