My email to VirtualSports (Vapormedia)

[Scrads]

Hey guys, just sent this into Vapormedia (VS) in the feedback section. What do you guys think ? :)would love to hear some of your opinions.

Hello,

My name is Bradley and I have played the AFL Dream Team competition for about 7 years now. I have just a couple of suggestions for he 2013 competition where it looks almost certain that there will be 6 'multi-bye rounds' instead of 3 like this year.

First, I would like to say no major changes should be needed. It should be a priority for you to keep the rules of AFL Dream Team reasonably simple to appeal to some of the 'less-interested' crowd. I have seen suggestions such as trades that are auto-reversed at the end of each bye round. I think ideas such as this would be too complicated and are not needed.

My formal suggestion for this however is simply a return to the 2011 team format where each position (except for ruck) had an extra bench position (making a total of 3). This is very easy to initiate and needs very little explanation to the public and will not over-complicate things for people. It will mean during these bye rounds, coaches will have an extra 3 players they can choose from and hopefully it means they do not suffer such lower scores like this year. This is also important because next year there will be 6 rounds of byes instead of 3!!

My other suggestion concerns the player-position eligibility. Some players (known as DPP or MPP) are eligible to be selected in 2 positions (e.g. Brendon Goddard is a Defneder/Midfielder). There has been a year-to-year evolution of this rule as at first it simply meant players could be selected in different positions and thats it. Then came in the rule that let you swap or 'sub' these players between another, so you could swap say Goddard (DEF/MID) from your backline with Deledion (DEF/MID) in your midfield, offering a unique flexibility teams had not seen before. This year, the DPP trade was introduced where we could trade say Travis Cloke (FWD), move Adam Goodes (MID/FWD) from the midfield to the forward line and trade in Dane Swan (MID), effectively trading a pure FWD for a pure MID.

Next year, I would absolutely love to see the introduction of the TPP, or 'Triple-Position-Player'. Players like Bryce Gibbs, Shaun Burgoyne, Brendon Goddard, Luke Hodge, Jimmy Bartel are sometimes used for a LOT of roles in their respective AFL sides. It would be reflective of this if players such as these were rewarded with DEF/MID/FWD status, thus could be played anywhere on the ground just like they do for their side. Other options for this could be Patty Ryder (DEF/RUC/FWD), Jared Petrenko (DEF/MID/FWD), Paul Puopolo (DEF/MID/FWD). This would take flexibility of coaches teams to the next level, which would also assist them considerably with their management of the multi-bye rounds. This rule is also very simple to integrate, and would need very little explanation to the public as it is merely an extension of a rule already in place.

I hope you consider and think about my suggestions for the fantastic product that is AFL Dream Team very carefully, regardless of whether they ever have a chance of being implemented or not.

I would love to hear some feedback about them if that is at all possible, many thanks,

Bradley ######.

[Scrads]

And before anyone says anything... I probably should have proof-read it to iron out the mistakes :P

[TheHanger]

Triple Position Players will NEVER happen, no player plays all three roles equally or enough to constitute them being given that position in DT/SC

If a player is seen all over the ground, HE IS A MIDFIELDER

Ryder on the other hand hasn't played DEF for more than a cameo appearance in 3/4 years

maybe next time be a little bit easier on "the people" who you made me believe were morons, something like the PROLES from 1984 ;)

Otherwise well done on this  :)

probably should have proof read, lol nah people understand typos

[Scrads]

Triple Position Players will NEVER happen, no player plays all three roles equally or enough to constitute them being given that position in DT/SC

If a player is seen all over the ground, HE IS A MIDFIELDER

Ryder on the other hand hasn't played DEF for more than a cameo appearance in 3/4 years

maybe next time be a little bit easier on "the people" who you made me believe were morons, something like the PROLES from 1984  ;)

Otherwise well done on this  :)

probably should have proof read, lol nah people understand typos

You know what I mean though with making things simple right ? I probably should have mentioned it but when I said that I was referring to the casual DTers, who like the game but aren't prepared to put in significant time and effort into their teams.

[monstrum]

be awesome but i reckon there's just not enough players that genuinley play 3 differant roles just like the ruc/fwd i wouldn't think that many ppl use that do they?.. maybe a few

[TheHanger]

Triple Position Players will NEVER happen, no player plays all three roles equally or enough to constitute them being given that position in DT/SC

If a player is seen all over the ground, HE IS A MIDFIELDER

Ryder on the other hand hasn't played DEF for more than a cameo appearance in 3/4 years

maybe next time be a little bit easier on "the people" who you made me believe were morons, something like the PROLES from 1984  ;)

Otherwise well done on this  :)

probably should have proof read, lol nah people understand typos

You know what I mean though with making things simple right ? I probably should have mentioned it but when I said that I was referring to the casual DTers, who like the game but aren't prepared to put in significant time and effort into their teams.

yeah totally agree with keeping it accessible to the people who do it for fun as a 1 hour a week thing

you just sounded a bit harsh on the 'common man'

[Capper]

nice ideas Scrads

Just one thing though, 3 extra bench spots with no extra money and no new teams next year makes it hard to get rookies that will play in those spots

[Scrads]

nice ideas Scrads

Just one thing though, 3 extra bench spots with no extra money and no new teams next year makes it hard to get rookies that will play in those spots

re: the money, I figured it was self-explanatory that the salary cap would increase to accomodate the extra spots.

re: the rookies, people forget that in 2010 and in previous years we had no franchise teams yet still had rookies to choose. It just meant there were less, which may mean an extra mid pricer or two. At this rate, half the league next year will be discounted players, so it will be manageable for sure.

[Jukes]

Maybe not triple-position players mate but perhaps a lot more players with DPP.

[Spinking]

Maybe not triple-position players mate but perhaps a lot more players with DPP.

I agree with this.  In the real stuff players are very rarely limited to one position on the field and even blokes like Ablett are regularly sent down for a spell in the forward line.

I understand the reasoning behind suggesting 3 bench players rather than 2, and would like to see this.  The downside I saw in 2011 was that with this resulted in an extra cash cow on the bench, which meant it was much easier to make money and build a good side. This meant that by seasons end most of the experienced DTers had almost identical midfields.  This season has been harder, but more interesting in my opinion.

[Capper]

nice ideas Scrads

Just one thing though, 3 extra bench spots with no extra money and no new teams next year makes it hard to get rookies that will play in those spots

re: the money, I figured it was self-explanatory that the salary cap would increase to accomodate the extra spots.

re: the rookies, people forget that in 2010 and in previous years we had no franchise teams yet still had rookies to choose. It just meant there were less, which may mean an extra mid pricer or two. At this rate, half the league next year will be discounted players, so it will be manageable for sure.

just like my team this year. If they go with this i can see alot of teams with GC and GWS mid pricers next year but i think everyone will have the same rookies and mid pricers so the only difference will be the prems

Also on TPPs, i was talking about this earlier in the year with my mates and there are several players that could be in this category, i agree with Puopolo and Petrenko but not Ryder. He is just a FWD/RUCK. But some others could be LRT (BACK/RUCK/FWD), ROK (BACK/FWD/MID) and at a stretch Goodes (MID/FWD/RUCK). Also some (not all) utility players could become TPPs (BACK/FWD/MID)

[Spinking]

nice ideas Scrads

Just one thing though, 3 extra bench spots with no extra money and no new teams next year makes it hard to get rookies that will play in those spots

re: the money, I figured it was self-explanatory that the salary cap would increase to accomodate the extra spots.

re: the rookies, people forget that in 2010 and in previous years we had no franchise teams yet still had rookies to choose. It just meant there were less, which may mean an extra mid pricer or two. At this rate, half the league next year will be discounted players, so it will be manageable for sure.

just like my team this year. If they go with this i can see alot of teams with GC and GWS mid pricers next year but i think everyone will have the same rookies and mid pricers so the only difference will be the prems

Also on TPPs, i was talking about this earlier in the year with my mates and there are several players that could be in this category, i agree with Puopolo and Petrenko but not Ryder. He is just a FWD/RUCK. But some others could be LRT (BACK/RUCK/FWD), ROK (BACK/FWD/MID) and at a stretch Goodes (MID/FWD/RUCK). Also some (not all) utility players could become TPPs (BACK/FWD/MID)

I like it.  What about some players just being named as 'Utilities' and you could play them anywhere?

[ossie85]

Good stuff!

I think it is a great idea for all of us to write it to express our displeasure of the current system, and adding suggestions can only help

[Andrew]

Thanks heaps for e-mailing VS and suggesting 3 on the bench - I completely agree. As already mentioned about, triple position players will never occur, and I'm not too bothered by it. But we definitely need 3 on the bench.

[Capper]

nice ideas Scrads

Just one thing though, 3 extra bench spots with no extra money and no new teams next year makes it hard to get rookies that will play in those spots

re: the money, I figured it was self-explanatory that the salary cap would increase to accomodate the extra spots.

re: the rookies, people forget that in 2010 and in previous years we had no franchise teams yet still had rookies to choose. It just meant there were less, which may mean an extra mid pricer or two. At this rate, half the league next year will be discounted players, so it will be manageable for sure.

just like my team this year. If they go with this i can see alot of teams with GC and GWS mid pricers next year but i think everyone will have the same rookies and mid pricers so the only difference will be the prems

Also on TPPs, i was talking about this earlier in the year with my mates and there are several players that could be in this category, i agree with Puopolo and Petrenko but not Ryder. He is just a FWD/RUCK. But some others could be LRT (BACK/RUCK/FWD), ROK (BACK/FWD/MID) and at a stretch Goodes (MID/FWD/RUCK). Also some (not all) utility players could become TPPs (BACK/FWD/MID)

I like it.  What about some players just being named as 'Utilities' and you could play them anywhere?

I wouldnt say anywhere but definitely BACK/MID/FWD and if they are tall enough RUCK