WXV Rules Discussion 2017

[Purple 77]

To clarify, IMO, salaries should be a reflection of scoring power and scoring relevancy, not trade value.

So you agree that 2 irrelevant 55 average players should cost a small fraction of a 110 average star. Good. In SC pricing they're worth the same so we cannot go off those raw prices.

Correct. I didn't say I wanted SC prices, just that I agreed with the view/attitude that the price of a player doesn't necessarily have to represent their actual value.

SC prices are garbo IMO.

[upthemaidens]

To clarify, IMO, salaries should be a reflection of scoring power and scoring relevancy, not trade value.

Could pretty much just base it off the players actual averages.
   The Cap could be something like 3000 and your squad needs to add up to less.  Rookies given a minimum starting average.

Do you really think 2 Nathan Browns should cost as much as Tom Mitchell in the salary cap? Really?

It doesn't matter, the price and value don't need to match up.

[Holz]

To clarify, IMO, salaries should be a reflection of scoring power and scoring relevancy, not trade value.

Thats fine if the case.

But thats why my rule changes need to go through.

Kelly should be 111and shaw 85 as that reflects their scoring power not 95 for kelly and 97 for shaw.

I dont think anyone in this comp would bet that shaw averages more then kelly next year.

And if we are talking this year then the cheaper guy averages 26 more points

[JBs-Hawks]

To clarify, IMO, salaries should be a reflection of scoring power and scoring relevancy, not trade value.

Thats fine if the case.

But thats why my rule changes need to go through.

Kelly should be 111and shaw 85 as that reflects their scoring power not 95 for kelly and 97 for shaw.

I dont think anyone in this comp would bet that shaw averages more then kelly next year.

And if we are talking this year then the cheaper guy averages 26 more points

How about reflect with a bigger sample size than 2

[meow meow]

11. Utilities.

If you want to make the competition even more even maybe we should limit it to being able to play only one midfielder in the utility position. Everyone has the 6 mid dream but it rarely happens anyway, usually some pretender like Plowman sneaks in there. It may help even things up a tad, not that the comp really needs anything else since it's already spot on. I'm just looking for someone to trade me a mid.

[Torpedo10]

11. Utilities.

If you want to make the competition even more even maybe we should limit it to being able to play only one midfielder in the utility position. Everyone has the 6 mid dream but it rarely happens anyway, usually some pretender like Plowman sneaks in there. It may help even things up a tad, not that the comp really needs anything else since it's already spot on. I'm just looking for someone to trade me a mid.

I fully support this motion.

[Nige]

11. Utilities.

If you want to make the competition even more even maybe we should limit it to being able to play only one midfielder in the utility position. Everyone has the 6 mid dream but it rarely happens anyway, usually some pretender like Plowman sneaks in there. It may help even things up a tad, not that the comp really needs anything else since it's already spot on. I'm just looking for someone to trade me a mid.

I fully support this motion.

Add spice, I like it.

[iZander]

11. Utilities.

If you want to make the competition even more even maybe we should limit it to being able to play only one midfielder in the utility position. Everyone has the 6 mid dream but it rarely happens anyway, usually some pretender like Plowman sneaks in there. It may help even things up a tad, not that the comp really needs anything else since it's already spot on. I'm just looking for someone to trade me a mid.

[Ringo]

11. Utilities.

If you want to make the competition even more even maybe we should limit it to being able to play only one midfielder in the utility position. Everyone has the 6 mid dream but it rarely happens anyway, usually some pretender like Plowman sneaks in there. It may help even things up a tad, not that the comp really needs anything else since it's already spot on. I'm just looking for someone to trade me a mid.

I fully support this motion.

Further support and I need mids too so I can play one there as well.

[Holz]

To clarify, IMO, salaries should be a reflection of scoring power and scoring relevancy, not trade value.

Thats fine if the case.

But thats why my rule changes need to go through.

Kelly should be 111and shaw 85 as that reflects their scoring power not 95 for kelly and 97 for shaw.

I dont think anyone in this comp would bet that shaw averages more then kelly next year.

And if we are talking this year then the cheaper guy averages 26 more points

How about reflect with a bigger sample size than 2

I have can you find a case where the other cap is superior?

[JBs-Hawks]

To clarify, IMO, salaries should be a reflection of scoring power and scoring relevancy, not trade value.

Thats fine if the case.

But thats why my rule changes need to go through.

Kelly should be 111and shaw 85 as that reflects their scoring power not 95 for kelly and 97 for shaw.

I dont think anyone in this comp would bet that shaw averages more then kelly next year.

And if we are talking this year then the cheaper guy averages 26 more points

How about reflect with a bigger sample size than 2

I have can you find a case where the other cap is superior?

The 2017 season, the most even season yet.

[meow meow]

11. Utilities.

If you want to make the competition even more even maybe we should limit it to being able to play only one midfielder in the utility position. Everyone has the 6 mid dream but it rarely happens anyway, usually some pretender like Plowman sneaks in there. It may help even things up a tad, not that the comp really needs anything else since it's already spot on. I'm just looking for someone to trade me a mid.

DPP mids should be allowed.

And we'd need to take it to 4 emergencies since the mid emg would be rendered useless on occasion.

[meow meow]

12. WXV scores

Am I the only one who is bothered by a team playing poorly and scoring 120 points? I want the multiplier changed. I also want the draw to be in play. If it's 1302 vs 1301 that's 130 vs 130 in WXV and should be a draw!

[Torpedo10]

12. WXV scores

Am I the only one who is bothered by a team playing poorly and scoring 120 points? I want the multiplier changed. I also want the draw to be in play. If it's 1302 vs 1301 that's 130 vs 130 in WXV and should be a draw!

Do you not remember the 2012 Preliminary Final between the Swedish Metal and the Spanish Stallions?

Do not ruin the competition.  :P

[Purple 77]

12. WXV scores

Am I the only one who is bothered by a team playing poorly and scoring 120 points? I want the multiplier changed. I also want the draw to be in play. If it's 1302 vs 1301 that's 130 vs 130 in WXV and should be a draw!

An interesting idea, purely for dramatic purposes.

But really, the team that scores the most should win.