(S28) Ultimus Week

[37thchamber]

20. If your player had a show starring them, what would the plot be? Graphic Option: Create the cover art for your player’s show

Okay so, many of you will be unaware but there *is* actually a TV show starring Raphael Delacour. More than one, technically. See, doing his internship at a media production company -- Flying Thunder Studios; a joint venture between his father and acclaimed director Tobias Akinbobo -- meant all kinds of connections were forged. Tobias Akinbobo, much like he did with Babatunde Warrington before, has chosen Raphael to be the mainstream draw for his latest project: The Abominables.

The name is a bit of a giveaway but the treatment says the show will be set in "the mountains", following a professional football team... gee, that sounds familiar. The twist is that the players have the power to control the elements, though. It's exactly the kind of wacky, semi-realistic fantasy concept that Akinbobo is known for, and his experience on Medieval Kingdom of Kingdoms will probably help a lot in shaping the world of The Abominables, should the pilot be green-lit.

As for the overarching plot, it's not really clear, but Akinbobo is on-record stating that the main thrust of the show is to "show sport as a force for unity and goodness in the world". He was not clear on what they would be combating, however. Some rumblings have suggested that the show will tackle some of the darker aspects of professional sport, with drug abuse, political corruption, and financial pressures playing a part. The rumoured casting of Willem Dafoe as the show's primary antagonist has also raised eyebrows, but the studio is keeping additional detail under wraps for now.

-----------------------------------

26. Imagine your current position was not available to be picked when you created your player. What other position would you have picked, and why?

I actually considered creating a linebacker at first, but I wanted to play offense, since both my previous guys were defensive backs. I think if wide receiver wasn't an option, I may have looked more seriously at linebacker. Main reason being that I still wanted to play an impact position, so I'd have a chance at making the Hall of Fame. Problem with linebacker is that it's trickier to be an immediate call-up, even though if you max-earn or close, you've got a pretty good shot at the Hall. The more I thought about it though, I decided I really wanted to play offense, because it just works better with the backstory I had in mind for this player (son of my first player, etc etc)

So, considering that, I guess if wide receiver was no longer a choice, I probably would have gone with running back. Tight end would be weird, given that the father is short, so having a massive son just would have sort of broken my immersion I guess? Offensive line doesn't interest me at all (also, size issues) and quarterback is too much of a crapshoot in terms of making the Hall. There's also a weird pressure associated with being a quarterback that I really didn't want, because I can't guarantee I'll be active through my player's entire career.

Obviously some of this still applies to running backs -- hard to be an impact player in year one; need to max earn or near to really be effective, stats are often situational depending on the team etc -- but it's probably the closest I can get to my chosen role. In the end wide receiver works because it's *directly* opposite the elder Delacour's position, it doesn't take much TPE to max out, and will be relatively easy to maintain near elite attributes in regression if I can get to around 1100 TPE before it hits. There's also the fun challenge of building specifically for the slot, and not maxing speed, and seeing if I can still make a player with a HOF level career.

-----------------------------------

27. Football is a game that has been going on for a while, loved by fans all over. But what if you were able to make some rule changes? Talk us through your new version of football, and what would be different and why?

The main thing that gets me about football is the injury rate, so I'd look at making changes to reduce that first and foremost. So the first thing I would change is I'd scrap kickoffs. I'd also amend tackling rules to encourage wrap-up tackling like in rugby as opposed to the impact tackles we currently see. This isn't to say I'd outlaw impact tackles, I'd just encourage other approaches, and remove the incentive for them somewhat. Probably by changing how yards gained are determined, I'd have to consult with people more in the know to get clarification on how to do that, to be honest. On a similar note, punts would be abolished too. Or at least sort of. On the one hand I feel like punts are useful for getting the ball away from your end zone and getting rid of that option would make teams play differently in fear of being pinned inside their own half, so maybe only allow punts when within 30 yards of your own end zone on fourth down or something.

Another thing that bothers me is how long a game takes, compared to how little the game is actually being played. This might be the ex-footballer in me talking, but I'd alter the play clock to be shorter, and probably change the rules on when it stops so that happens way less frequently. Maybe make no-huddle drives mandatory after the two-minute warning or something like that. Speed things up.

I'd also get rid of the point after touchdown attempt. Instead, make it so everyone has to "go for two", but it wouldn't always be worth two points. Maybe you can opt to start further back, but it's worth three or four points instead.

Field goals would also change. Closer range field goals would be worth fewer points, with really long range ones worth more. I think this would enourage a more varied approach on offense, while making sure that defensive units were still versatile and had to play aggressively to prevent the accumulation of territory.

Honestly, I don't know that any of this would actually improve the game, but I'd like to see it out of curiosity. I should contact The Rock and see about getting some of this included in XFL if/when it ever gets revived (again).

-----------------------------------

28. What team do you think has the best branding in the league? What team do you think could use a refresh? Why?

My favourite league branding is the sabercats. Has been for ages. I don't know if it's because I grew up watching Thundercats, or because I just really like cats... or the green/gold combination (which is actually the decor in the front room of my house; big up Jam Down!) but I just really like it. It even *sounds* cool, you know?

I feel like sports mascots should always be predatory animals if you're going for a nature vibe, or something stereotypically linked to power, or aggression. Alliteration isn't always good but it really works here, and the name flows nicely, one, two, then three syllables. San Jo-Se Sa-Ber-Cats. The 1-2/3 split is great for chants too. If I have a complaint about the branding, it's that it's not original. But I suppose that's why it works so fuckin well innit?

Silverbacks probably have the coolest branding after Sabercats for me. The 1920s New York vibe, plus King Kong allusions, the flow (1-1-3 is a common crowd chant rhythm), the colours... it's all great. Again, if I'm nitpicking, I don't really like that it's in New York. I sort of prefer the less obvious locations for teams in sim leagues to be honest. It's a fantasy world, let's have teams that straight up couldn't exist in real-life, you know? But in this case, the branding just wouldn't work anywhere else so... I get it.

Some teams I would say have questionable branding for various reasons, but I don't know that I'd change them. Just like how I feel more off-the-beaten-path locations are cool, I kinda get why some teams have odd mascots. So for example, the Otters, you can't change it at this point because they're an institution right? I know otters are also vicious little bastards... but it just doesn't scream "american football team name" to me. Similarly, Fire Salamanders just doesn't sound "tough" (although it's a really cool animal). These aren't really criticisms, to be honest, it's just a personal preference. I mean, I didn't really like "Baltimore Hawks" originally either, because it seemed too close to the real-life Ravens, but it grew on me.