WXV Discussion

[Nige]

just curious

if you end the season under the minimum salary cap what happens if anything if you don't start the year over the minimum cap via trading?

You get removed as coach and banished from WXVs forever.  :P

[CrowsFan]

just curious

if you end the season under the minimum salary cap what happens if anything if you don't start the year over the minimum cap via trading?

Nothing. Trading is just restricted that you can't lose points in a trade until you are above the minimum. You could chose not to trade at all if you wanted to.

[AaronKirk]

I tend to agree with Purps.

While we all appreciate the amount of time and effort you put into this oz, I just don't like the idea of a skewed competition.

If the idea suggested is implemented it would be very likely that there will be skewed results which don't reflect the strength of each individual team which will lead to results and ladder positions which alter significantly from the relative performances of other teams.

[Ringo]

Oss You have done a lot of work but to try and get an even tiered comp.  Whilst it looks good on paper the competition could still get a little bit uneven and have the effect of a team that may finish 3rd in a "Tier" which could easily defeat Teams 1 or 2 in another "Tier" and yet miss out on finals.

Correct me if I am wrong but as I understand Teams 1 & 2 in each "Tier" are guaranteed of finals regardless of outcomes in rounds 11 - 15 and teams 3 & 4 ine each "Tier" are then fighting for the final 2 positions in the 8.
If I am correct how much interest will teams 5& 6 in the "Tier" in competing knowing they will not get anywhere how hard they try. Could be a devastating blow to the competition.

Trading may strengthen a team and if we go down this track competition would need to reviewed and will be subjective as well.

The other problem I see at the moment it is based on where sides currently sit but it could be that some teams have played the Top teams and others yet to play as well.

One or 2 bad weeks by a team due to injuries etc under the tiered system could wreck a season whereas under the current system you get a chance to climb back up.

Trying to work out some out cons for the system but having a little trouble sorry oss. One possible change I may suggest countering my arguments is having the 5th and 6th "Tier" Teams fighting for draft order with the order decided on how the Teams finish with order highest to lowest.

May have interpreted it incorrectly so correct me if wrong Oss.

[ossie85]

^ yeah, understand correctly Ringo

Except I was only using this as an example, would have used the final ladder to decide the groupings!


Something I really would like to add to the comp are ways to impact the scoring of the opposition. Currently, it is just who scores more than who....

One way is I'd like to revamp the Flood and Attack rules.

Basically, if you FLOOD (5 defenders, 3 attack), you DECREASE the score of the opposition forwards by 10% each but increase the oppositions forwards by 10% (and vice-versa if you ATTACK). Unless the other team matches you.

And I'm still a huge fan of kilbluff's tagging idea. My take would be that you choose one player to tag the opposition, and the player tagged loses 25% of its score and the tagger loses 50%. The tagger would have to be in the same line though....

[Nige]

With that flood/attack idea though, if I see the Pumas attacking, couldn't I just employ the tactic to cancel it out?

Not really a fan of the tagging idea.

[kilbluff1985]

if the tagger loses 50% it seems pointless just seems like it cancels it out

[ossie85]

With that flood/attack idea though, if I see the Pumas attacking, couldn't I just employ the tactic to cancel it out?

Yes you could, and I think that's a great thing

if the tagger loses 50% it seems pointless just seems like it cancels it out

Has to be some risk involved...

[kilbluff1985]

With that flood/attack idea though, if I see the Pumas attacking, couldn't I just employ the tactic to cancel it out?

Yes you could, and I think that's a great thing

if the tagger loses 50% it seems pointless just seems like it cancels it out

Has to be some risk involved...

what risk? it would just be pointless

[elephants]

With that flood/attack idea though, if I see the Pumas attacking, couldn't I just employ the tactic to cancel it out?

Yes you could, and I think that's a great thing

if the tagger loses 50% it seems pointless just seems like it cancels it out

Has to be some risk involved...

what risk? it would just be pointless

It's stupid if its 50-50. I could just get Zac Dawson to tag the oppositions 100 ave backman every week and it would never fail. Fact is, tags don't always work. If a tagger scores 50 and loses 50% thats a 25 point loss. If GAJ scores 150 and loses 25% thats a 37.5 point loss.

Therefore, you'd consider the tag a win.

[Purple 77]

Big fan of the tagging idea. I can see it being used probably as regularly as resting, so that not often, but it would add a great element to this game.

Flood and Attack rules I could get behind as well.

[elephants]

I like resting but I'm not a huge fan of tagging/flood/attack...

If it ain't broke..

[kilbluff1985]

With that flood/attack idea though, if I see the Pumas attacking, couldn't I just employ the tactic to cancel it out?

Yes you could, and I think that's a great thing

if the tagger loses 50% it seems pointless just seems like it cancels it out

Has to be some risk involved...

what risk? it would just be pointless

It's stupid if its 50-50. I could just get Zac Dawson to tag the oppositions 100 ave backman every week and it would never fail. Fact is, tags don't always work. If a tagger scores 50 and loses 50% thats a 25 point loss. If GAJ scores 150 and loses 25% thats a 37.5 point loss.

Therefore, you'd consider the tag a win.

yeah but your playing the tagging instead of someone you have that could surely score like even 70 so really it's like 45 points your losing by playing a tagger in Dawson

[elephants]

With that flood/attack idea though, if I see the Pumas attacking, couldn't I just employ the tactic to cancel it out?

Yes you could, and I think that's a great thing

if the tagger loses 50% it seems pointless just seems like it cancels it out

Has to be some risk involved...

what risk? it would just be pointless

It's stupid if its 50-50. I could just get Zac Dawson to tag the oppositions 100 ave backman every week and it would never fail. Fact is, tags don't always work. If a tagger scores 50 and loses 50% thats a 25 point loss. If GAJ scores 150 and loses 25% thats a 37.5 point loss.

Therefore, you'd consider the tag a win.

yeah but your playing the tagging instead of someone you have that could surely score like even 70 so really it's like 45 points your losing by playing a tagger in Dawson

lol, I think we're a bad example at NDT ;) #DawsonvsRuttenforD4

[kilbluff1985]

flower me scooter is out for the rest of the year

flowering flowered