2016 WXV Awards and 2016 Rules Discussion

[Purple 77]

Hey everyone  :D

Similar to last year, this thread serves a few purposes:

a) Award nominations and fixture discussions

b) Rule suggestions - WHICH ANYONE CAN NOMINATE ANY RULE for discussion. I think all new rules need to be decided BEFORE trading begins, and that once they are decided, shouldn't be changed until this time next year (unless something drastic happens like a radical new AFL rule change or a tragedy of some sort)

c) Are you going to be around next year? Have you been posting less and less? Cos if you are thinking of retiring to the great fantasy land in the sky, now'd be the time to let people know :)

Award Nominations

1. Coach of the Year

Unlike last year, I'm definitely not in the running to be Coach of the Year :P so I reckon I'll nominate this years candidates, using last years criteria to help me out:

- If you've won more games during the regular season in 2016 than 2015, you get a nomination for coach of the year. If you had the same amount of wins, but scored more overall points you get a nomination
- A wild card nomination if I feel that a coach has had to overcome particular adversity or done something special to deserve it.

The nominations will be announced sometime this week!

2. Coaches award

Each team can nominate a player on there team they think deserves special mention. You can use any criteria you like, it doesn't have to be the best player. Previous winners are Mark Blicavs & Matt Jaensch for example.

Suggested Rules Discussion

ANYONE can nominate a rule change. And it will be voted on.

A few times throughout the year, someone has brought up something they'd like Worlds to do differently. Now is the time to bring that up, and it WILL be voted on.

As the thread progress, I'll be updating the OP with the suggestion so I can keep track of it.

Remember, once the rules have been voted on, THAT IS IT for the next 12 months! (except for the review on the trade voting process that is held after the trade period)

I REALLY want to introduce to 2017 the ability to affect the oppositions' score. That's my number one focus for this thread basically.

There are heaps of ideas that have come up, so I'll only put a few here now to get the ball rolling (most of which has been copied from last year's OP):

1. Points Cap Change

There WILL be a cap as long as I'm admin (either points or salary), so FFS, I better not hear any discussion about getting rid of it. I'll delete these posts. I don't care if you see merit behind it, you're wrong, and I'm right :P

Cap stays the same (30,000 max, 22,000 min - points scored over 17 rounds), or maybe slightly adjusted (TBC)

BUT, instead of taking just a players 2016 score, you take the highest score between 2016 and 90% of 2015? I.e. Nat Fyfe scored 527 this year, but 1872 last year (so his cap for the off-season would be 90% of 1872 = 1685. Doesn't have to be 90%... I urge meow to bring up what he suggested last year again.

2. Flood/Attack Changes

Each team can choose whether they play with 5 forwards and 3 defenders, 4 forwards and 4 defenders or 3 forwards and 5 defenders ANY week (except finals)

If you have 5 forwards against the opposition 4 defenders, each forward gets +10% and the opposition defender loses 15%
If you have 5 forwards against the opposition 3 defenders, each forward gets +15% and the opposition defender loses 20%
If you have 4 forwards against the opposition 3 defenders, each forward gets +5% and the opposition defender loses 10%
If you have the same amount of forwards/defenders, no penalty.

And vice versa if you have more defenders than forwards.

3. Tag

You nominated a midfielder in your team to tag a midfielder on the opposition (that midfielder has to be named on the midfield or interchange). The tagger loses 15% just for playing a tagging role. The player being tagged loses 5% for each TACKLE the tagger makes. BUT if the player being tagged has the same or more tackles than the tagger, he breaks the tag and receives no penalty, while the tagger still loses 15%.

I.e. Liam Shiels tags Jack Steven. Shiels loses 15% of his score for playing the tagging role, and has 7 tackles, so Steven loses 35% of his score. BUT if Steven also has 7 (or more tackles), the tag is broken, and he receives no penalty.

4. Ruck OOP

Often attracts discussion, and there have been MANY ideas posted, and I encourage the people who thought of them to bring them up again. But for OP sake, ossies' from last year was simple and made sense:

If you name a player OOP in the ruck you still lose 50% of the score (as has always been the case). BUT, if that player is less than 190cm, not only do you lose 50% of your score, the opposition ruck gains 25%.

5. Leadership Group

Keep? Expand? Restrict?

I personally want to have the same group for the entire year, and I only introduced flexibility with it last year as it was the trial year.

6. Form Confidence

Big fan of this one, and will again rob from last years' OP:

If you have a player that has increased his score for 3 weeks in a row, his next score gets a +10% confidence bonus (must have played all 4 matches consecutively, but not necessarily in the WXV seniors).

AND

If you have a player that has decreased his score for 4 weeks in a row, his next score gets a -10% confidence penalty (must have played all 4 matches consecutively, but not necessarily in the WXV seniors).

So in Round 1 Travis Boak scores 85, then 90, then 92, the 96 - his next score in round 5 will get a +10% confidence bonus.

While if David Armitage scores 120, 115, 104, 96, his next score in round 5 will get a -10% confidence penalty.

[meow meow]

Compo

[RaisyDaisy]

There's a lot of percentage increases and decreases there.  Not being resistant to change, but feel like a lot of games will be decided by bonus and lost percentage bonuses as opposed to just straight up beating the opposition like it currently is

[RaisyDaisy]

Here's a rule suggestion

Get rid of flood and attack all together

We have 40 senior players on our list. If you can't find 4 starters a week then perhaps trading in more depth is something you should look at, and on the flip side teams who have done well to ensure they have got solid depth aren't punished by letting the shallow teams get away with flooding or attacking to cover a weakness :P

[Levi434]

First Suggestion:

For every 3 years a player is on your roster they get a discount towards the salary/points cap.

Nat Fyfe has been on Berlin's roster for 3 years and currently has a points allocation of 1600. Next year he only counts say 75%, meaning only 1200 towards the cap.

[Torpedo10]

Purps, what happens if the player you chose to tag is Captained by the opposition?

[RaisyDaisy]

Ruck OOP suggestion

Having to lose 50%, and then potentially another 25% with the op ruck getting a bonus due to height is just too much

See, my outlook is that when I view rules for this I'm all for a team losing points, percentage of etc for not being able to fulfil one of the requirements, but I'm not a fan of the opposition then getting an added bonus on top too.

The team getting penalised is enough.

OOP ruck lose 50% as is, but if replacement is 190cm or better yet a player who actually pinch hits ruck for their real team than you only lose 25% and get 75% of their score

[RaisyDaisy]

And with the tag, I don't think tackles should be the decider. A lot of gun mids who will be the main targets of a tag don't tackle a lot

Should just be points scored. If the player you're tagging scores below their average then the tag has won, and if they go above their average the tagger loses, then do your penalties and bonuses off that

[Holz]

not sure on the tagging thing. Not sure tackles should be a way of breaking a tag. plus 5% per tackles seems huge.

Example. Liam Shiels averages almost 9 tackles a game. Nobody will beat him in tackles so he losses 15% a game but drops opponents scores by 45%.

He comes a gun.

also it kinda means players who lose dpp get double hit. eg.g Dmart doesnt tackle so he will get tagged every week as a fwd you cant tag him but if he becomes a mid you can.

What i think is a tagger can tag a guy and lose 20% of their scoring. to drop the taggers score by 10%. This rises by 1.5% per tackle. So liam shiels if he puts up 10 tackles breaks even with his player.

in terms of breaking a tag it should be how good a game the player has and that should be taken on how big they score in Sc as some times a player is just on fire and untagable. Eg. 110+ points the tag is halfed. 135+ points the tag is broken. This means it may not be the best to tag the best player on the team.

these are still sizable amounts and i will give a example from the weekend.

ok so Rupert Wills plays for cairo and they are playing dublin. Now he was tackle heavy in his first game but not a superstar so they use him as a tagger.

they avoid Rory Sloane because he was predicted to go big. Good call as the tag would have been broken.

They instead targer Treloar. Wills has 108 (which is bigger then they expected and he really shouldnt have been a tagger)

so Wills goes from 108 to 86.

Treloar goes under 110 so gets tagged 10% + 12% (from tackles) thats a drop to 76 points.

so the tag failed a little because Wills was wasted abit as a tagger given he would of had a good game and lost 22 points. He got a decent amount of tackles and Treloar had a decent but not great game so dropped 22 also.

If Wills had of had a more typical 70 point game, he would have dropped  only 14 points and the tag would have been a success. If Treloar went beserk and went 140 then the tag would have been avoided.

happy to hear thoughts on that.

I also think defenders should be able to hard tag fwds and vice versa. Rucks im not sure if they should be able to tag, i think rucks kinda should be avoided as they have rules about not stopping rucks 

[Purple 77]

Purps, what happens if the player you chose to tag is Captained by the opposition?

So if the Captain scores 120, his normal 120 will be reduced, but he captain bonus would be unchanged at 120.

[Nige]

All of this sounds terrible and I'm normally not one to resist change.

#kiss

[Holz]

Ruck OOP suggestion

Having to lose 50%, and then potentially another 25% with the op ruck getting a bonus due to height is just too much

See, my outlook is that when I view rules for this I'm all for a team losing points, percentage of etc for not being able to fulfil one of the requirements, but I'm not a fan of the opposition then getting an added bonus on top too.

The team getting penalised is enough.

OOP ruck lose 50% as is, but if replacement is 190cm or better yet a player who actually pinch hits ruck for their real team than you only lose 25% and get 75% of their score

really though a 190cm player isnt hard to find.

I think what purp is trying to fix is this.

Ok so i have no ruck, well my 16th best player is this 175cm defender lets stick him in the ruck.

What you do in the AFL and you should do in the game is hey I have a 195cm defender who averages 80 ill stick him in the ruck, instead of the 70 averaging defender who is short.

I really like this rule and i have just solved the way of fixing it. I also think on the flip side if the player is of a certain height then it should reduce the OOP.

So for Dublin, ohh Goldy is down. Lets not put in Neville Jetta into the ruck (my 16th best fwd) ill lose 50% and the other ruck gets a bonus.

Lets stick Buddy franklin into the ruck. I get say 80% of his score and the oppostion ruck doesnt get the 25% bonus.

that would add strategy to the game and make it more realisitc.

[Purple 77]

Those suggestions in the OP isn't necessarily what I want, more so just to get the ball rolling with discussion so to fine tune those ideas  ;)

Like what Holz has said about Tagging, I could get behind that.

[Purple 77]

BTW, there is no competition at Berlin, my Coaches Award goes to Daniel Talia.

Second round rookie draft pick and serial fantasy spud, has turned into being one of the best defenders in the second half of the year particularly :D

[Holz]

There is no standout for me in the coaches award. Sam Collins Heath Grundy, Jacob Weitering and Neville jetta have been handy in defence.

but im going to give it to one of my fwds. with roughy out I was in trouble up front and the amazing stat of the year is that Jroo Buddy Gunston Dmart have not missed a game all year. this has saved me.

So in that im going to give the award to Dustin Martin

Since round 6 he has averaged 118 and been a captain option as well as my clear F1 and actually the clear F1 of the comp.

this is from a guy who was apparently going to get suspended for the year