WXV Discussion

[elephants]

Yeah intro it next season but I don't like changes happening mid-season thats all.

[Nails]

It's not a rule change though.

The rule has been to have positions as the SC/AF/RDT competitions have listed them. It has been the same as all 3 comps as these 3 have always been identical for positions.

To adjust positions to match what AF is changing to is simply refreshing/updating/keeping fresh our positions. It's not changing any rules. It's sticking to the rules.

[Nige]

I'm for it. Let's do it.

It doesn't disadvantage anybody, and if anything... will only help. Just because you didn't see it coming and didn't "trade for it" in anticipation of it is no reason to oppose it.

[elephants]

It's not a rule change though.

The rule has been to have positions as the SC/AF/RDT competitions have listed them. It has been the same as all 3 comps as these 3 have always been identical for positions.

To adjust positions to match what AF is changing to is simply refreshing/updating/keeping fresh our positions. It's not changing any rules. It's sticking to the rules.

But by following AF we're ignoring what DT and SC are doing.

If we were really committing to this, something should have been said prior to round 1 imo. AF does tend to make rules up on the fly though haha

I'm for it. Let's do it.

It doesn't disadvantage anybody, and if anything... will only help. Just because you didn't see it coming and didn't "trade for it" in anticipation of it is no reason to oppose it.

Not entirely true, other teams can be disadvantaged if they don't get favourable dpp changes yet everyone else around them does!

[Nige]

I'm for it. Let's do it.

It doesn't disadvantage anybody, and if anything... will only help. Just because you didn't see it coming and didn't "trade for it" in anticipation of it is no reason to oppose it.

Not entirely true, other teams can be disadvantaged if they don't get favourable dpp changes yet everyone else around them does!

Well, I guess that's just kind of bad luck (tbh, if I was one of those that didn't get a DPP gain I wouldn't be cut). I mean, I suppose there are some obvious candidates for gains, but it's not like 12 teams will get a DPP change and 4 won't - not very probable.

[elephants]

Just looking, we have 1203728637812678 midfielders and like 4 backs and 3 fwds... This is probably worth it for NDT...

I like it ;D

[Nige]

If Worlds does go with the changes, I really hope Nippa Gordon gets F eligibility as he really should already have it.  ::)

Matt McDonough would have to be a chance of gaining D eligibility too (who has him?).

[elephants]

I'm mainly looking at Welly (possible fwd) and Hutchy (unlikely but possible fwd).

Would be so handy since we have 3 playing fwds atm!

[Nige]

I'm mainly looking at Welly (possible fwd) and Hutchy (unlikely but possible fwd).

Would be so handy since we have 3 playing fwds atm!

Mark Hutchings woud look good in Cairo's forward line.  ;D

[Purple 77]

If Worlds does go with the changes, I really hope Nippa Gordon gets F eligibility as he really should already have it.  ::)

Matt McDonough would have to be a chance of gaining D eligibility too (who has him?).

>:D

[Purple 77]

First feeling was against it. Mainly because its AF doing it, not the pacesetters in SC and DT. To me, this is SC linked game and should remain linked through their positions. If all comps were doing it, I guess I have no problem.

Sort of feels like we are using a third party to have a say in our positions, and I don't like it. Not a fan unless the big boys follow suit (SC and DT, christ AF is bad). Feels unprofessional on top of all things.

[Vinny]

I don't actually have my own team here but I'm opposed to it completely.

It is unfair on the teams that don't receive any changes that would help them. I'm sure many people would have traded differently if they knew these changes were coming. Pretty much like Ele said, any mid-season rule change is abit stupid IMO.

[Torpedo10]

First feeling was against it. Mainly because its AF doing it, not the pacesetters in SC and DT. To me, this is SC linked game and should remain linked through their positions. If all comps were doing it, I guess I have no problem.

Sort of feels like we are using a third party to have a say in our positions, and I don't like it. Not a fan unless the big boys follow suit (SC and DT, christ AF is bad). Feels unprofessional on top of all things.

I don't think it will hurt the comp but more against it because this is SC based, SC aren't doing this.

[DazBurg]

First feeling was against it. Mainly because its AF doing it, not the pacesetters in SC and DT. To me, this is SC linked game and should remain linked through their positions. If all comps were doing it, I guess I have no problem.

Sort of feels like we are using a third party to have a say in our positions, and I don't like it. Not a fan unless the big boys follow suit (SC and DT, christ AF is bad). Feels unprofessional on top of all things.

I don't think it will hurt the comp but more against it because this is SC based, SC aren't doing this.

i agree with this

2 things
1.we usually do not change things mid season - i know it isn't a rule change per se but regardless things always get changed at EOS

2. We use SC as our base game scoring and  all that so i do not think using AF position changes is the right way to go
whats happens if say next season SC doesn't follow suit or AF keeps changing to what they feel like - for example
next season AF says Cox is back to R/F but SC says his simply R - what then?
yes i know usually they follow each other but obviously they are breaking tradition by doing this in the first place

dunno i know it is only a little thing like positions and we really can all benefit so not a problem their i just think it opens a can of worms imo

(lol even though i'm just an assistant that is my 2 cents :P )

[Master Q]

This ain't Euros.

No from me at this stage, but will have to discuss with my Co-Coach.