2016 WXV Awards and 2016 Rules Discussion

[Ricochet]

Yeh i reckon keep Leadership Group the same

Also really liked the votes being processed so quickly Purps. I'd imagine the period would have been a lot quieter otherwise

[RaisyDaisy]

Agree, the trade period was great I felt. Turnaround was quick, vote numbers (0-3 etc) are spot on and Purps was solid

Wouldn't change a thing tbh

Leadership group whatever - keep it the same or scrap it all together, I don't mind either way

[Holz]

Everything was fine but the cap.

The bias against established players needs to stop.

Jack who averaged 90 and is almost 5 should not be cheaper then bont.

[Ringo]

Hate to be the one to stir but why not.

Just working on averages think the following tweaking is required:
0 - 4 votes against autopass (Only 22%) coaches voting against so fair.
5 - 6 votes against passes the trade with the admin having the power to reject it (33% or Less coaches against)
7 - 8 votes against fails a trade with the admin having the power to pass it (45% of coaches rejecting)
Both of these options falls back to Admin to assess and Purple has been doing a great job with the trades
9+ votes auto fail as 50%+ of coaches reject trade.
Think this slight tweaking should further increase approvals of trades.

Regarding Cap it needs to be a little more lenient for trading especially with going below.  You have the option of going above but not below,  A change to rule to allow this would be appreciated. Something like if going below minimum  cap then trade details to include how you will get above cap. Eg a team may have 5 vacancies on roster which will be filled and add $500k to cap and take above minimum cap. You should also be allowed to value traded picks in as $100k for cap calculations.

[Adamant]

I thought the decision numbers for voting were fine and the speed in processing trades was great.

I'd prefer not to have a leadership group, but don't really mind if we do.

[GoLions]

Regarding Cap it needs to be a little more lenient for trading especially with going below.  You have the option of going above but not below,  A change to rule to allow this would be appreciated. Something like if going below minimum  cap then trade details to include how you will get above cap. Eg a team may have 5 vacancies on roster which will be filled and add $500k to cap and take above minimum cap. You should also be allowed to value traded picks in as $100k for cap calculations.

Was gonna suggest exactly this.

Other than that, think everything else was pretty good!

Oh but also, #scrapthecap

[Purple 77]

I've been thinking about allowing Beijing & Tokyo to pick one of the undrafted players to replace Lumumba and Shane Yarran.

Or give them the choice to carry them as an LTI.

Thoughts?

[Holz]

I've been thinking about allowing Beijing & Tokyo to pick one of the undrafted players to replace Lumumba and Shane Yarran.

Or give them the choice to carry them as an LTI.

Thoughts?

should be a no to both in my view. No different to a player getting injured round 1 then retiring.

[RaisyDaisy]

Either way, it's not going to have any impact

Trade them out for an absolute nodoby who didn't get drafted, or keep them to use as an LTI to upgrade an absolute nobody off the rookie list

Don't mean to sound negative, but it's not going to mean anything  :-X

[GoLions]

I've been thinking about allowing Beijing & Tokyo to pick one of the undrafted players to replace Lumumba and Shane Yarran.

Or give them the choice to carry them as an LTI.

Thoughts?

Happy for them to draft someone else, however I don't know if a precedent has been set previously.

[Purple 77]

I've been thinking about allowing Beijing & Tokyo to pick one of the undrafted players to replace Lumumba and Shane Yarran.

Or give them the choice to carry them as an LTI.

Thoughts?

Happy for them to draft someone else, however I don't know if a precedent has been set previously.

I don't think it has, hence why I'm asking because this probs will be the precedent for the future.

I was more leaning towards the way of having them able to promote a rookie in place for them, like I do with mid-season retirements. But if the consensus felt the other way, I'd oblige.

[GoLions]

I've been thinking about allowing Beijing & Tokyo to pick one of the undrafted players to replace Lumumba and Shane Yarran.

Or give them the choice to carry them as an LTI.

Thoughts?

Happy for them to draft someone else, however I don't know if a precedent has been set previously.

I don't think it has, hence why I'm asking because this probs will be the precedent for the future.

I was more leaning towards the way of having them able to promote a rookie in place for them, like I do with mid-season retirements. But if the consensus felt the other way, I'd oblige.

What happened to whoever had Beau Waters ~2 years ago?

[Levi434]

I've been thinking about allowing Beijing & Tokyo to pick one of the undrafted players to replace Lumumba and Shane Yarran.

Or give them the choice to carry them as an LTI.

Thoughts?

Happy for them to draft someone else, however I don't know if a precedent has been set previously.

I don't think it has, hence why I'm asking because this probs will be the precedent for the future.

I was more leaning towards the way of having them able to promote a rookie in place for them, like I do with mid-season retirements. But if the consensus felt the other way, I'd oblige.

What happened to whoever had Beau Waters ~2 years ago?

Had to keep him there for the year.

[GoLions]

I've been thinking about allowing Beijing & Tokyo to pick one of the undrafted players to replace Lumumba and Shane Yarran.

Or give them the choice to carry them as an LTI.

Thoughts?

Happy for them to draft someone else, however I don't know if a precedent has been set previously.

I don't think it has, hence why I'm asking because this probs will be the precedent for the future.

I was more leaning towards the way of having them able to promote a rookie in place for them, like I do with mid-season retirements. But if the consensus felt the other way, I'd oblige.

What happened to whoever had Beau Waters ~2 years ago?

Had to keep him there for the year.

I guess maybe we should stick with that approach then?

[Levi434]

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2015-02-19/waters-to-call-it-quits

Unfortunate  :(

But feel I should mention Levi, this gives you a free spot on the senior list, should you decide to promote a rookie.

Any rookie you choose will be on the senior list for the rest of the year, but you still have to go through the draft to promote them permanently at the end of the season, if you choose to.

You can promote a rookie now or up to the Grand final, or not at all, so up to you  :)

Purps posted this when Waters retired on Feb 19th which is still before the season. But then again I believe every player was on a list at that stage.

Currently there are left over players which I don't think has ever happened before?