2015 RULE DISCUSSION THREAD

[Jroo]

Yeah I'd be happy for the teams that need it, to get priority picks.

[Ricochet]

Fairly certain Worlds is
<4 wins for 1 year is priority pick at start of 2nd Round
<4 wins for 2 years in a row is priority pick at start of 1st Round

[JBs-Hawks]

Think we need to do something about the unevenness of the comp.

I know this probably won't be popular but what about some kind of point cap?

That would probably have to lead to unlimited list movements, which I'm sure will be more popular  :P

They traded there old guns away its their own faults

[nrich102]

Think we need to do something about the unevenness of the comp.

I know this probably won't be popular but what about some kind of point cap?

That would probably have to lead to unlimited list movements, which I'm sure will be more popular  :P

They traded there old guns away its their own faults

Thats just stupid. Is it wrong to trade out 30 year old players who only have 1-2 years left so we get something for them. Would you rather the team just gets worse over time before eventually hitting rock bottom when heaps of players retire in the same year and have no picks to replace them with?

I like the worlds system.

[PowerBug]

Thats just stupid. Is it wrong to trade out 30 year old players who only have 1-2 years left so we get something for them. Would you rather the team just gets worse over time before eventually hitting rock bottom when heaps of players retire in the same year and have no picks to replace them with?

I like the worlds system.

I think there has to be some kind of balance. Trading because you want to get value is not always the best option. Enright, Kelly (to an extent), NRoo are a few guys that will retire this year maybe next, and all have been more than serviceable to their AXV teams.

The teams with the old guys win the premierships, the teams with the young guys will not necessarily get better in the near future.

Avoiding a time where everyone retires is good/bad management, but players will retire, and constantly having an average age of 25 and selling everyone once they hit 28 is not going to win you anything, ever.

[nrich102]

Thats just stupid. Is it wrong to trade out 30 year old players who only have 1-2 years left so we get something for them. Would you rather the team just gets worse over time before eventually hitting rock bottom when heaps of players retire in the same year and have no picks to replace them with?

I like the worlds system.

I think there has to be some kind of balance. Trading because you want to get value is not always the best option. Enright, Kelly (to an extent), NRoo are a few guys that will retire this year maybe next, and all have been more than serviceable to their AXV teams.

The teams with the old guys win the premierships, the teams with the young guys will not necessarily get better in the near future.

Avoiding a time where everyone retires is good/bad management, but players will retire, and constantly having an average age of 25 and selling everyone once they hit 28 is not going to win you anything, ever.

Very good point. But for example, what I got at the dongs I had no choice but to sell everyone 30+ because they were all going to retire within 2 years, so it was either mid table team for 2 years before hitting rock bottom with everyone retiring and then have no picks to get back up with. Of course the Dongs are an extreme example, and yes I have regretted a couple of trades that I've made, but really I did what had to be done.

[Memphistopheles]

I'd like to propose that we finish our season in Round 22 instead of ROund 23 so mass AFL restings don't affect us.

[Nige]

I'd like to propose that we finish our season in Round 22 instead of ROund 23 so mass AFL restings don't affect us.

I'm going to miss Barlow and possibly Goldy this week, so I'm definitely in favour of this.

[Ricochet]

Fairly certain Worlds is
<4 wins for 1 year is priority pick at start of 2nd Round
<4 wins for 2 years in a row is priority pick at start of 1st Round

Looking at this again.

Would people be against being even more lenient than worlds with priority picks?

Like <4 wins for the year and teams get one at the start of the first round AND one at the start of the second?

[PowerBug]

Personally I don't think giving lower teams (which are young), the ability to draft extra youth, it won't change anything. How many draft picks are going to become guns straight away in terms of fantasy scoring?

Player Poaching is this answer. Why do players leave AFL teams? One reason is they aren't getting enough games.

I'll expand more another time, within the next week. Bit busy atm

[Ricochet]

Personally I don't think giving lower teams (which are young), the ability to draft extra youth, it won't change anything. How many draft picks are going to become guns straight away in terms of fantasy scoring?

Player Poaching is this answer. Why do players leave AFL teams? One reason is they aren't getting enough games.

I'll expand more another time, within the next week. Bit busy atm

If a bottom team was looking to improve quickly they wouldn't be taking those extra picks to the draft though. It gives them someone else that's valubale to trade for proven players

[nostradamus]

Personally I don't think giving lower teams (which are young), the ability to draft extra youth, it won't change anything. How many draft picks are going to become guns straight away in terms of fantasy scoring?

Player Poaching is this answer. Why do players leave AFL teams? One reason is they aren't getting enough games.

I'll expand more another time, within the next week. Bit busy atm

If a bottom team was looking to improve quickly they wouldn't be taking those extra picks to the draft though. It gives them someone else that's valubale to trade for proven players

I think it leaves scope for either approach........

1. To trades those picks for established players for more immediate improvement

2. To utilize those picks to draft the best available youth for longer term improvement and possible 10 year players who will be the core of future success

Both are valid tactics, dependant very much on the coaches strategy, drafting skill and trading nous.

That is very much why this is such a great comp, there is no exact formulae for success.

[Memphistopheles]

Fairly certain Worlds is
<4 wins for 1 year is priority pick at start of 2nd Round
<4 wins for 2 years in a row is priority pick at start of 1st Round

Looking at this again.

Would people be against being even more lenient than worlds with priority picks?

Like <4 wins for the year and teams get one at the start of the first round AND one at the start of the second?

No. Only one priority pick should be handed out to teams. Either at the start of the first round (after any other clubs who've also scored less than 4 wins have picked) or at the end of the first round.

Giving out two makes in harder for middle-tier teams to rebuild through the draft and encourages people to god for a complete rebuild if they're not challenging rather than try improve their fortunes from mid-table.

Those top picks (1-10) can be the super guns, especially the key forwards, and while they might not impact straight away long term they will guns and the best fantasy scorers.

[Ricochet]

Fairly certain Worlds is
<4 wins for 1 year is priority pick at start of 2nd Round
<4 wins for 2 years in a row is priority pick at start of 1st Round

Looking at this again.

Would people be against being even more lenient than worlds with priority picks?

Like <4 wins for the year and teams get one at the start of the first round AND one at the start of the second?

No. Only one priority pick should be handed out to teams. Either at the start of the first round (after any other clubs who've also scored less than 4 wins have picked) or at the end of the first round.

Giving out two makes in harder for middle-tier teams to rebuild through the draft and encourages people to god for a complete rebuild if they're not challenging rather than try improve their fortunes from mid-table.

Those top picks (1-10) can be the super guns, especially the key forwards, and while they might not impact straight away long term they will guns and the best fantasy scorers.

How much harder does it make it for middle teams though? You'd only move down 1 or 2 spots in the 2nd round. Does that really affect the middle teams that much?

I think the first part of my suggestion is... To change the minimum games from 2 to 4. Which i think is more than fair.

The second part is adding a second priority pick at the start of the second round.

So it'd look like this

Priority Pick
1.   Manila Folders
2.   Vietnam Vipers

Round 1
3.   Manila Folders
4.   Vietnam Vipers
5.   Taiwan Dolphins
6.   Honk Kong Dongs
7.   PNG Head Hunters
8.   Turkish Gazelles
9.   Tibetan Llamas
10.   Bangkok Crabs
11.   KL Crocodiles
12.   Bangladesh Bears
13.   Kathmandu Eskimos
14.   Australian Ales
15.   Sri Lanka Strikers
16.   UAE Tigers
17.   Mongolian Lambs/Laos Elephants
18.   Mongolian Lambs/Laos Elephants

Priority Pick
19.   Manila Folders
20.   Vietnam Vipers

Round 2
21.   Manila Folders
22.   Vietnam Vipers
23.   Taiwan Dolphins
24.   Honk Kong Dongs
25.   PNG Head Hunters
26.   Turkish Gazelles
27.   Tibetan Llamas
28.   Bangkok Crabs
29.   KL Crocodiles
30.   Bangladesh Bears
etc


So the middle teams only really move down two spots at pick 25ish. Will that make such a big difference??

[JBs-Hawks]

Not a fan of rewarding tanking at all!