The rules would be

- You can only draft actors who have never received a nomination (something like 5 males and 5 females each)
- 5 points for any future nominations, 15 points for win

We update the standings yearly and possibly have a future supplemental draft for new actors at some point.

I can make a longlist of candidates ahead of time to help people's picks, but you wouldn't have to draft from it

I’d be down.

IN

From PM:



This isn't predicting next year, it runs indefinitely in the future. So if Zendaya gets a nomination in 2025 you get points.

I think doing a 1 round draft in a year to swap out one actor would be a good way to do it.

It's a no from me, at least to how it's currently suggested. It would need to be yearly (say, around September) for it to make sense and be exciting, and why only for actors that haven't been nominated before? Don't get that unnecessary clause.

I'm out, as they say.

My logic would be

- If it's too close to Oscar season it becomes too logical to just take the guaranteed 2023 nomination, instead of predicting the long term plays

- Previous nominees would make it too boring to just draft the veterans that are going to rack it up like Colman, Blanchett, Davis, etc., a young actor draft could work but some picks like Ronan and Chalamet would be pretty easy.

Whether it's too easy is disputable. But the way you're presenting it so far guarantees it being impossible. Nobody will know the new younger ones for 2025 let alone next year. There's talent coming through all the time that we would have absolutely no chance at predicting two, three, four, or five years in advance.

The game will not be exciting as a yearly draft should be. It will be more like stocks and shares. You attach yourself to a random star and watch the value of your pick drop year on year, apart from the one-in-a-million chance that gets it right and that player gets a measly 25 points or something.

Or maybe I just don't get it.

Maybe it would be better to just let people draft Blanchett and Davis then

How's that any different from picking the sure thing in the box office draft? The better thing for an Oscars draft would be to do it yearly, but early enough so that all the contenders are not obvious. So there's still a little bit of risk and/or all the contenders haven't even been released yet. You know how it is, in September every year most of the contenders are still not really known yet. All Quiet on the Western Front, for example, wasn't in anybody's mind until, like, January.

We could do a Best Picture draft, though it would be a different game than this type of long term thing

That's my issue with it. It's like a wine bottle full of seeds. If you look down at the seeds at the top it looks like you can see all of them, but for every new year you tilt the bottle 15 degrees to see a shitload of other nominees that you haven't chosen because you couldn't see them when everybody did their picks. Tilt it a few times and you end up with a few picks out of hundreds of potential winners. It feels pointless. I can't see the game generating excitement. As it is people only care about Oscar season for a few short months, so I say best create a game around those few short months.