Options for 2014

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: Options for 2014

Post  arfer on Sun May 26, 2013 11:08 am

i think there are certainly some good points to this suggestion, but also some problems

good points
* it does mimic the gc bidding process which as steve says is one of the funnest aspects of the comp
* it would mean less administration
* less potential fire-fights that threaten the comp's friendliness

Bad points:
* i don't think it will lead to a great deal more team trading (not when we have 30-35 players each), but will lead to less interaction which is a bad thing. I know the idea suggests that more trading will occur, maybe it will, but not by much and certainly not more than the current trading. why trade when you have one or two reserves in your back pocket - unless we really need holes filling.

* i think the biggest problem is that it will reward those that research (problem you say?!) - well I mean that the team managers that research the up and comers can really trawl the ocean clean so when mid season arrives those with cash but towards the bottom of the table cannot increase their opportunities meaning the comp may be less 'fun'.

Think about the players that have been recruited mid-year this year:
FB: Matt Moylan
W: Travis Robinson
C: Mahe Fonua
C: Chase Stanley
W: Vai Toutai
FE: Dylan Walker
HB: Trent Hodkinson
FR: Brett White
HK: John Morris
FR: Jack Buchanan
BR: Suaso Sue
BR: Brenton Lawrence
BR: Robert Rochow
Res: Sosaia Feki
Res: Matthew Ryan
Res: Rory Kostjasyn
Res: Anthony Tupou
+ Nathan Stapleton, Anthony Don, Joel Reithmueller, Peta Hiku, Scott Bolton, BJ Leilua, Adam Docker, Blake Ayshford, Kelipi Tanginoa, Matt Robinson, Sam McKendry, Jack Stockwell, Sosaia Feki
Beau Falloon.

....not a bad side which would likely win more than it would lose and i doubt many of those would be available under this method

I think the idea is ok, but i think our current way (with a few tweaks) is better
avatar
arfer

Posts : 495
Join date : 2010-03-18
Location : in the shadows of the Brindabella Mountains

View user profile

Back to top Go down

I LOVE IT!

Post  Stumpy on Sat May 25, 2013 5:27 pm

Great concept!
I'd even be inclined to push the number a little higher (32 or even 35)
Re number of trades in each period, at first I thought unlimited sounded better, but when you think about it 5 is already more than the current possible maximum so that's probably the right number. It could also be pretty full on for the COmmittee, so maybe some limit is necessary.
Allow trading between clubs each week. Maybe restrict it to a 24 hour period to aid the COmmittee - say midday Wednesday to midday Thursday (after the teams are named and prior to any Thursday night games) I'd also push for only one trade between clubs in any trading period, but with no limit on the number of players to be traded - you can swap 8 players if you wish. Something tells me if you can only go to the open market every 4 weeks we'll see a lot more inter-club trading (which would be a great thing), but currently the biggest hindrance is finding at trade that meets both the salary cap and 'one player per NRL club' restrictions.
I don't endorse keeping squads year to year for two reasons. With larger squads, and therefore potentially less players on the open market, it might become really difficult for a struggling team to work their way back to being competitive; but mostly because I don't think we want to lose the GC recruitment process which I reckon is one of the highlights of the season.

I'd also like to address the one dissenting voice to date. My comments are in red:

aardvark wrote:As is it now, with 12 teams and 25 players per squad, there arn't that many "Free" players available to fill 12 squads of 30 each. You still only pick 17 to play each week - it means we'd all have more depth to cover those injured or suspended players you don't want to cut

Another negative here would be that if we were to have trading only once each 4 weeks, if you happen to be away that week (Holidays, work etc) - it would then be 8 weeks between trades. Hands up who this season will spend an entire week where they're not able to jump on and make a trade. If you're that much of a jetsetter, I don't want you playing with us lol!

Leaving it 4 weeks between trades would also negate the 'investigative' aspect where a team manager could be following a youngster and as it is now, could bid on him before he makes it in 1st grade... If he were to wait a few weeks - the surprise factor is gone and everyone else then knows about him.... As well, if we were to have to wait for 4 weeks - we'd have these unsigned players scoring points for a few weeks before they could be selected. Those opportunities will still be there in every trade period, and with a larger squad you can take a chance at those risky rookies a week or two earlier than you might under the current system. Certainly not a deal breaker for mine.

Another thing with the 4 weeks - if a player leaves a club whether sacked or traded - it could then be 4 weeks where you arn't represented by a particular club.. As it is now - you have 1 week to remedy the situation. So we amend the rules to allow that team to count that player as still with their previous team until the round after the next trading period - easy.

Loyalty Players - The 2 players as we have it now makes it a difficult choice at the beginning of the season - but that is good and adds to the strategy plays - as we need to sign them back up on exactly what we had paid for them the year before. See above

Personally - I would hate to see the GC have such a dramatic change - as it works well as it is now and has done for a number of years.... The last couple of years the Trading aspect has even been great, (That sounds pretty contradictory to your post re Matt Ryan less than 48 hours ago. Don't forget, part of the motivation for these changes is to minimise the impact of pricks like Stumpy and his despised trading practices) but I think it took a backward step this year - although, in saying that - the rule change when fined tuned will be even better than previously ... as the saying goes - "one step back - two steps forward" .... Is always worth a bit of pain to get a much better answer. The 30 minute extension would have to remain. I'm not sure if we'll ever find a perfect solution to this short of Gutsy not playing and just acting as an administrator so we could then have silent bidding - like I said, probably no perfect solution. confused




avatar
Stumpy

Posts : 488
Join date : 2011-03-24

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Not enough players available

Post  aardvark on Fri May 24, 2013 4:57 pm

As is it now, with 12 teams and 25 players per squad, there arn't that many "Free" players available to fill 12 squads of 30 each.

Another negative here would be that if we were to have trading only once each 4 weeks, if you happen to be away that week (Holidays, work etc) - it would then be 8 weeks between trades.

Leaving it 4 weeks between trades would also negate the 'investigative' aspect where a team manager could be following a youngster and as it is now, could bid on him before he makes it in 1st grade... If he were to wait a few weeks - the surprise factor is gone and everyone else then knows about him.... As well, if we were to have to wait for 4 weeks - we'd have these unsigned players scoring points for a few weeks before they could be selected.

Another thing with the 4 weeks - if a player leaves a club whether sacked or traded - it could then be 4 weeks where you arn't represented by a particular club.. As it is now - you have 1 week to remedy the situation.

Loyalty Players - The 2 players as we have it now makes it a difficult choice at the beginning of the season - but that is good and adds to the strategy plays - as we need to sign them back up on exactly what we had paid for them the year before.

Personally - I would hate to see the GC have such a dramatic change - as it works well as it is now and has done for a number of years.... The last couple of years the Trading aspect has even been great, but I think it took a backward step this year - although, in saying that - the rule change when fined tuned will be even better than previously ... as the saying goes - "one step back - two steps forward" .... Is always worth a bit of pain to get a much better answer.




avatar
aardvark

Posts : 416
Join date : 2010-03-12

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Options for 2014

Post  Admin on Fri May 24, 2013 3:23 pm

** One of our coaches came up with a great idea, with squad size goes up to 30 players (perhaps more), and no trading. That's it - you get injured, bad luck.

I reckon having a larger squad is great idea, but allow trading ONLY every 4 weeks. It would have to be maximum 5 players each team each period, and would be a smaller time period and highest offer gets the player. Could be unlimted I guess, either way the coaches have to manage it and ensure they still have all NRL teams and positions covered.

Bit more ironing out of the rules would be required to ensure it works smooth, but I love it.

** I would also allow between team trading once a week, as that would make it super interesting and heaps of fun and more social.

** We could also talk about keeping your squad year to year (like we do in another comp we play), however that would not start for 2 years as next year we would all have to start on an even clean slate, as player value would also carry over year to year. Don't want to take the shine off that other comp though, as I really do enjoy managing that one.

avatar
Admin
Admin

Posts : 700
Join date : 2010-03-08

View user profile http://gutsycup.forum-motion.net

Back to top Go down

Re: Options for 2014

Post  Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum