Orclahoma Results and Changes in Tournaments Reports?

[Kilowog2814]

Hey everyone...

I posted a new blog over on our Both Down site talking about the results of the Orclahoma Bowl and my thoughts on ideas for future tournaments. Hopefully you can take a look and let us know what you think. Check it out here http://bothdown.com/the-orclahoma-bowl-results/
I'll probably talk about it on the next podcast some, but we have lots to talk about, so not sure...

Thanks,
Steve

[ZootSuitJeff]

I think this is pretty interesting good job! However I think unless you create a system to allow coaches to enter there own rosters, you will be increasing the amount of data entry needed to run a tournament by quite a bit, so I wouldn't expect it to become widespread.

Also I think the argument you have that posting these rosters is just about "fluff" is quite a stretch. On the one hand it can be fun and interesting, but on the other it could be highly tactical. Nothing wrong with it, but its not just fluff.

[Kilowog2814]

I think this is pretty interesting good job! However I think unless you create a system to allow coaches to enter there own rosters, you will be increasing the amount of data entry needed to run a tournament by quite a bit, so I wouldn't expect it to become widespread.

Well yes... You're very right about that. It did take some extra time, but I think it's worth it.

Also I think the argument you have that posting these rosters is just about "fluff" is quite a stretch. On the one hand it can be fun and interesting, but on the other it could be highly tactical. Nothing wrong with it, but its not just fluff.

It's certainly not all about fluff, but I see what you mean. It is sort of giving up some tactical information. However, I think you could give each coach the same team set up and each would play it differently. Success with any team is mostly coaching and dice.

Ultimately I think the more info the better, but I can see why it doesn't get out there too much.

Steve