WXV Discussion

[elephants]

Here's an idea to make Wellington a top 16 contender: They get 5 captains.  ;D

Their list is better than ours, we should get 14 captains + Zac Dawson gets tripled.

[Nails]

Here's an idea to make Wellington a top 16 contender: They get 5 captains.  ;D

Are you willing to stand by this idea when they beat you?

They get 100 x2, 90 x 2 then they stuck with 30x2x3. Not a big issue.

[MajorLazer]

I like the idea. Takes a little bias out of the equation.

Although I'm still gonna be really dodgy.  8)

Mad consultation about our imminent shifty tactics.  :P

Nah that's purely me. :P

[ossie85]

Sup guys?

Currently we have a squad of 45 (41 senior, 4 rookie). Due to numbers,  reckon we reduce seniors to 40

[Justin Bieber]

Doesn't sound too bad to me really, although cutting down my list may be hard as grown attached :(.

[Memphistopheles]

Sup guys?

Currently we have a squad of 45 (41 senior, 4 rookie). Due to numbers,  reckon we reduce seniors to 40

I think we almost ran out of players to draft last time? I think this might be a decent idea.

[Ricochet]

yeh and smaller lists should help with equality as well

[Holz]

yeh and smaller lists should help with equality as well

Not sure I agree, can only talk for dublins case but I have experience on both sides.

When my list was bad I had a lot of speculative young guys on the bench, some of those punts turned out like black atley hill Anderson etc.. and I used them to improve my list and kept me comperetive. Now I'm up the top I have guys who play every week so don't need these fringe guys to name a squad. Cutting players now would be easy, but when I was bad I could have cut guys like black which would have really hurt my development.

[Ricochet]

yeh and smaller lists should help with equality as well

Not sure I agree, can only talk for dublins case but I have experience on both sides.

When my list was bad I had a lot of speculative young guys on the bench, some of those punts turned out like black atley hill Anderson etc.. and I used them to improve my list and kept me comperetive. Now I'm up the top I have guys who play every week so don't need these fringe guys to name a squad. Cutting players now would be easy, but when I was bad I could have cut guys like black which would have really hurt my development.

Yeh but those with strong depth have to cut "better" players from their list which weaker clubs can pick up. Also have less players to use to acquire premo's through trades and take advantage of weaker teams. Stronger teams will also take less picks in the national draft, meaning more quality kids for weaker teams to pick up. Can work both ways though

[Justin Bieber]

Or strong clubs can easily pick up these better mature players during the draft while the weaker teams go for youngsters so may end up not doing much to close the gap.

What could work is if teams trade their depth to the lower teams to help them out, what I am probably going to do with 1-3 teams.

[ossie85]

I wonder if instead of a points cap we have a list size


.... So The Premiers have a list of 35 and the Spooners 52...

[kilbluff1985]

I wonder if instead of a points cap we have a list size


.... So The Premiers have a list of 35 and the Spooners 52...

i prefer that, i don't like the points cap

[JBs-Hawks]

Nah points cap is good!

[elephants]

Haha when we finally look to get over the points cap!

I reckon a max cap is ok, but the min cap restricted our trading a lot last season.

Don't mind the list size changes either actually...

[Ricochet]

Yeh gotta keep the points cap, its probably the most effective way. Just might need a few alterations like Ele said