WXV Rules Discussion 2017

[Holz]

Question for Holz

Just spent an hour going trough the thread to see if mentioned. In your proposal what value for cap purposes will we place on 1st and 2nd year players not playing the full number of games.
eg Witherden has only played 7 games so how is his value calculated,

Also reckon the durability factor should be removed to try and keep rule simple.

Was initially convinced by scrap the cap but seeing the effect on competition this year (also may be other factors involved) but was the closest for a number of years.

yes this i need to think about, 1st and 2nd year players i haven't identified and i do need to look into this.

So with Witherden Ossie's cap has him at a 86.8 average and considering my rule is


18+ games: 100% of the current season is their average
11-17 games: 50% of the current average 30% of last years and 20% of the year before
6-10 games: 35% of the current average 40% of last years and 25% of the year before
5 or under: 20% of the current average 50% of last years and 30% of the year before.
0 games: 60% of last year and 40% of the year before.

so he has played 7 games so is 6-10 games: 35% of the current average 40% of last years and 25% of the year before

However given he has only played the 1 season he would then also be 86.8 under my cap so the exact same.

Now for 2nd year players it would be different. If they didnt play a full year.

So for Oliver: Ossie has it as a 95 average and I have it as a 112 average as he played 18 games plus.

But for Hopper:

Ossie has him as a 70 average

Now my rule again is  6-10 games: 35% of the current average 40% of last years and 25% of the year before. Now obvuiously he has only played 2 seasons so all that happens is the 3rd year is just removed and the weighting is the same.

So it would be 46.7% this year and 53.3% last year.

Now if you pick a 2nd year player with a large discrepancy in years per scoring and only played half a season.

Matthew Kennedy: Under Ossies system he is a 63.5

Under my system 11-17 games: 50% of the current average 30% of last years and 20% of the year before

As he doesnt have a 3rd year its then 62.5% and 37.5% so he would be a 60 average.

[Purple 77]

ML arguably has the best contributions-to-posts ratio in this comp.

Always a pleasure :P

[meow meow]

Opposite of me then.

[MajorLazer]

Who's arguing? I'll beat them.

[meow meow]

13. VOTING

I think we should have a vote on having to vote. All this voting makes me tired and I think we should have the option to opt out of voting. Putting it to a vote seems like the logical thing to do.

[DazBurg]

13. VOTING

I think we should have a vote on having to vote. All this voting makes me tired and I think we should have the option to opt out of voting. Putting it to a vote seems like the logical thing to do.

LOLOL love it meow

[Hellopplz]

Can I opt out of the vote to not vote for the vote?

[Nige]

Can I opt out of the vote to not vote for the vote?

Probably need to vote on the ability to opt out of the vote to not vote for the vote.

[Hellopplz]

Can I opt out of the vote to not vote for the vote?

Probably need to vote on the ability to opt out of the vote to not vote for the vote.

I refuse to opt into the vote to opt out to vote.

[Levi434]

Suggested Rule:
Players on the rookie list should NOT be counted under the cap.

Explanation:
If I have to use someone on my rookie list it generally means someone on my main list has an LTI.

For example, this year I had 400k of dead weight from Mitch Robinson sitting on my list all year because he had a season ending injury. There is no reason I shouldn't have been able to ditch his 400k for someone decent e.g. Tom Lonergan to replace him.

For those who don't know, Tom Lonergan is NOT currently on a WXV list because I had to delist him due to cap.

If I had of had Lonergan on my rook list, he would have played at least 4-5 games for me because I was decimated down back. May not have affected any results but still.

[GoLions]

Suggested Rule:
Players on the rookie list should NOT be counted under the cap.

Explanation:
If I have to use someone on my rookie list it generally means someone on my main list has an LTI.

For example, this year I had 400k of dead weight from Mitch Robinson sitting on my list all year because he had a season ending injury. There is no reason I shouldn't have been able to ditch his 400k for someone decent e.g. Tom Lonergan to replace him.

For those who don't know, Tom Lonergan is NOT currently on a WXV list because I had to delist him due to cap.

If I had of had Lonergan on my rook list, he would have played at least 4-5 games for me because I was decimated down back. May not have affected any results but still.

Or you can trade me Robbo

[RaisyDaisy]

Feel like this got burried amongst all the cap talk

Again, there is zero malice in any of this. I genuinely believe that I am raising completely fair and valid points, and believe that what I am saying has merit. Might not be the most comfortable topic to talk about, but I'd hate to see it just ignore or not taken seriously, because I know I'm not the only person who doesn't think this

I'm going to suggest something which might be a bit contentious, but I cannot stress enough that this has nothing to do with each individual and their character - there is nothing personal or malice, it is purely based on...

12. Participation

What makes WXV the best XV is it's people. There's no doubt this is the most attractive and active XV because of the people involved. There is constant discussion all year around and because of most of the coaches commitment we have an excellent and very even comp

I do think however, some changes in personal are required to ensure that WXV continues to prosper moving forward and I'd like to see more participation from more coaches

As I understand it, we currently have a process on how we vote new coaches into WXV, but what about the opposite? It won't take a genius to figure out the sort of teams I am referring to, but we have several coaches/teams who are barely ever around and hardly ever contribute to discussions, whether they be general banter or about important things like rule changes and reviews

We have so much going on here, and it's the same majority who all contribute to make this such a great comp but it's the minority who don't bring much, if anything at all that I think needs to change

Naming your team every week, and nothing more is not enough to maintain a coaches position in WXV, especially when we have several people on FF who are chomping at the bit to get a coaching gig here

Furthermore, if you cannot make yourself available regularly, especially during the trade period than again you are hindering the competition and not participating enough. I get it, we all have lives and are busy, and that's completely fine but if you don't have the time to engage in regular trade talks, weekly round discussions etc then I really don't think I am being out of line by suggesting you shouldn't be a coach anymore

It can't be a surprise to see that teams with active coaches are improving every year, while teams with inactive coaches continue to struggle and get nowhere.

So what is the actual rule I am suggesting? If we as coaches vote on who will enter WXV, then we should also have a yearly review and cast a vote if we think there is a coach who should no longer be in WXV

It's not like I'm asking for a lot. In order to continue making WXV the number 1 XV we need to continue to have coaches who give 100% and make themselves available regularly. You don't need to spend hours a day here, heck you don't need to be here every day but you do need to be here often enough to engage and respond during trade period, and even more importantly just regularly engage in discussion and simply participate :)

[Nige]

I was just about to bump that suggestion but it was taking me ages to find searching on my phone haha.

[Ringo]

Feel like this got burried amongst all the cap talk

Again, there is zero malice in any of this. I genuinely believe that I am raising completely fair and valid points, and believe that what I am saying has merit. Might not be the most comfortable topic to talk about, but I'd hate to see it just ignore or not taken seriously, because I know I'm not the only person who doesn't think this

I'm going to suggest something which might be a bit contentious, but I cannot stress enough that this has nothing to do with each individual and their character - there is nothing personal or malice, it is purely based on...

12. Participation

What makes WXV the best XV is it's people. There's no doubt this is the most attractive and active XV because of the people involved. There is constant discussion all year around and because of most of the coaches commitment we have an excellent and very even comp

I do think however, some changes in personal are required to ensure that WXV continues to prosper moving forward and I'd like to see more participation from more coaches

As I understand it, we currently have a process on how we vote new coaches into WXV, but what about the opposite? It won't take a genius to figure out the sort of teams I am referring to, but we have several coaches/teams who are barely ever around and hardly ever contribute to discussions, whether they be general banter or about important things like rule changes and reviews

We have so much going on here, and it's the same majority who all contribute to make this such a great comp but it's the minority who don't bring much, if anything at all that I think needs to change

Naming your team every week, and nothing more is not enough to maintain a coaches position in WXV, especially when we have several people on FF who are chomping at the bit to get a coaching gig here

Furthermore, if you cannot make yourself available regularly, especially during the trade period than again you are hindering the competition and not participating enough. I get it, we all have lives and are busy, and that's completely fine but if you don't have the time to engage in regular trade talks, weekly round discussions etc then I really don't think I am being out of line by suggesting you shouldn't be a coach anymore

It can't be a surprise to see that teams with active coaches are improving every year, while teams with inactive coaches continue to struggle and get nowhere.

So what is the actual rule I am suggesting? If we as coaches vote on who will enter WXV, then we should also have a yearly review and cast a vote if we think there is a coach who should no longer be in WXV

It's not like I'm asking for a lot. In order to continue making WXV the number 1 XV we need to continue to have coaches who give 100% and make themselves available regularly. You don't need to spend hours a day here, heck you don't need to be here every day but you do need to be here often enough to engage and respond during trade period, and even more importantly just regularly engage in discussion and simply participate :)

As I suggested earlier and it may have also got lost - Have Purps and Nige (Think you have been helping Puros a bit Nige so why I included you) do a review of the coaches similar of clubs review of Football Department. Know an additional task and then advise coaches individually of result and for those who they consider ineffective ask them to justify retaining coaching position.

[Nige]

I can (help) do that if Purps is keen.