World 15 Discussion

[meow meow]

I believe the AFL has a salary cap, does it not?? So teams are restricted to who they can and cannot get. Plus it's a pretty lenient cap that ossie's suggested.

Having a $ cap based on the upcoming year's SC prices would be more accurate then.

If it's extremely lenient then what is the point of it?

[ossie85]

I believe the AFL has a salary cap, does it not?? So teams are restricted to who they can and cannot get. Plus it's a pretty lenient cap that ossie's suggested.

Having a $ cap based on the upcoming year's SC prices would be more accurate then.

If it's extremely lenient then what is the point of it?

I think a salary cap based on SC prices would be far worse for you meow. All the newbies will quickly rise in price, even if they only play say 8 matches.


Think of it this way --> A player averaging 110 is going to cost the same whether he's played 10 matches or 22 matches. So which is more valuable to the SC game?

And I want it lenient, so we get rid of extremes, I don't want to impact too much people building for the long haul, but the competition will suffer if 1 team has 40 players playing each week, while others can't put 15 on the park. Poor management? Sure. But that's the same logic with the AFL one.

[Purple 77]

Ossie have you thought any more about this Cap business?? I for one was for this idea.

One such club traded Scott Thompson for Lynden Dunn, took Scully and Trengove over Martin and Fyfe, and took Watts over NicNat. Melbourne don't get a crack at securing Jobe Watson and Daniel Wells simply because they're experienced.

:(

Sorry to be off topic but i just wanna say:
Well, Scott thompson wanted to leave...... we only got the draft pick that got dunn....
Scully and trengove were the no-brainer decisions at the time and i still think trengove is, sorry, will be, just as good as martin and fyfe
Watts suffers too much criticism, he is a better player than cloke was at his age, just have to look at stats. Different player to naitanui and (here comes the controversial statement):
Nick Nat is over-rated and I'd pick Watts anyday!  ;)
I dont hurt at all that we missed out on nick nat. We needed a forward an we are slowly but surely getting one. Of course Nick nat is a freak and will be a helluva ruckman, but do we need that? No.
I do have bad dreams over the flowering shower recruiting over the past years though.

But ironically I agree with meow. He does have a good point. A team should be rewarded not penalized for recruiting well, unlike me  :(

[c4v3m4n]

Thought...

Come the end of the season, should we have a period before the drafts whereby people can delist players from their playing squad which then go into a "free-agency pool" where other teams can select them? Or would these delisted players head straight into the pre-season draft?

[Boomz]

Thought...

Come the end of the season, should we have a period before the drafts whereby people can delist players from their playing squad which then go into a "free-agency pool" where other teams can select them? Or would these delisted players head straight into the pre-season draft?

I like this idea...

[Purple 77]

as do i

[PowerBug]

Thought...

Come the end of the season, should we have a period before the drafts whereby people can delist players from their playing squad which then go into a "free-agency pool" where other teams can select them? Or would these delisted players head straight into the pre-season draft?

I like this idea...

If you delist Sam Blease then i will too. :D

[c4v3m4n]

Of course the only drawback with such an idea is how would other teams select players once in this "pool"? Would it be on a first come-first served basis or structured by ladder positioning? If the latter, then there isn't much point in having it.

[ossie85]

Yeah, not sure how it would work :/

Reckon it is worth a vote, once someone says how it will exactly work

[PowerBug]

Everyone delists their players, they go into a pool, then everyone is given a certain amount of points to bid on those delisted players. So if 4 players from each side were delisted then there's 96 players available. each team get 6 points to bid on them. This could span over a week.

Probably not very good, but that's the best i could think of.It eliminates the first in first served and the ladder position too.

[ossie85]

Everyone delists their players, they go into a pool, then everyone is given a certain amount of points to bid on those delisted players. So if 4 players from each side were delisted then there's 96 players available. each team get 6 points to bid on them. This could span over a week.

Probably not very good, but that's the best i could think of.It eliminates the first in first served and the ladder position too.

Hmmm, interesting concept! Needs some work (especially your math lol) but I'm liking the idea more and more.

[CrowsFan]

Everyone delists their players, they go into a pool, then everyone is given a certain amount of points to bid on those delisted players. So if 4 players from each side were delisted then there's 96 players available. each team get 6 points to bid on them. This could span over a week.

Probably not very good, but that's the best i could think of.It eliminates the first in first served and the ladder position too.

Hmmm, interesting concept! Needs some work (especially your math lol) but I'm liking the idea more and more.

Haha yeah how does 4 times 18 equal 96? :P

[PowerBug]

oops :-[

[Ringo]

Been giving this a bit of thought and throwing out there for discussion:

Each team is required to delist three players.
These 54 players go into the end of season draft. (teams may pass in the Draft)
We have a draft for 36 players
1st Draft Team 18 (Pick 1) in ascending order to Team 1 (Pick 18)
2nd Draft Team 1 (Pick 19) in descending order to Team 18 (Pick 36)

Remaining 18 players into preseason draft.

[c4v3m4n]

Been giving this a bit of thought and throwing out there for discussion:

Each team is required to delist three players.
These 54 players go into the end of season draft. (teams may pass in the Draft)
We have a draft for 36 players
1st Draft Team 18 (Pick 1) in ascending order to Team 1 (Pick 18)
2nd Draft Team 1 (Pick 19) in descending order to Team 18 (Pick 36)

Remaining 18 players into preseason draft.

I too have been giving this some thought and an extending thought into the drafting periods.

Come the end of the season, we have three drafts.

1. The National Draft (ONLY PLAYERS IN THE AFL 2012 NATIONAL DRAFT ARE TO BE SELECTED HERE)
2. The Pre-season Draft (THIS IS WHERE 2012 DELISTED PLAYERS, 2011 "LEFTOVERS" AND REMAINING NATIONAL DRAFT PLAYERS WOULD GO)
3. The Rookie Draft (ANY AND ALL REMAINING PLAYERS)

Now, assuming we DO have a playing squad limit of 46, in order to recieve picks in ANY of these drafts, you'll have to delist players (DUH).

However, depending on the number of delisted players, will depend on the number of picks you can use and you should be able to also spread the picks.

For example, if the Islanders were to delist 7 players, I might nominate to have just 3 National Draft picks, 2 Pre-season Draft picks and then 2 Rookie Draft picks. Or if we were to delist just 4 players, I might opt for 2 National Draft picks and 1 pick in each the Pre-season and Rookie Draft picks.

The draft order would work like the AFL's current system; the reverse ladder order.

This is probably going to be the easiest and fairest system, instead of having this "pool" I have suggested earlier.

Thoughts?