WXV Discussion

[My Chumps]

We could add a you can only poach x players per team

But if say Dublin lose Rockliff, you'd theoretically be able to use that money to poach from someone else

2 players per team IMO. Would be a cool addition no doubt!

The only concern is the added workload for yourself Os!

[Boomz]

That sounds like a pretty interesting idea. I like it. Although it would be pretty hectic come poaching time lol

[Ringo]

Like the idea but have a little trouble understanding the reduction as to why the club expressing interest at the reduced price get him at that price.

Surely it should be Swan is devalued to $400k and if club x comes in and says I want Swan for say $450k Buenos Aries has the opportunity to increase to $450k or he goes to Club x for the $450K not $400k because Buenos Aires did not match.

May be missing something with this one so happy to have it explained further.

With Drafts will all players be allocated same price or will it be tiered, eg All new draftees at say $90k and rookies at say $50k or will top 10 draft picks have a premium applied.

Salary Cap will make trading and drafting interesting,

[ossie85]

Yeah happy enough with that suggestion Ringo :)

Reckon all newbies should be 100k, just for simplicity.  #1 not guaranteed and a pick 60ish player could win the rising star this year

[My Chumps]

What would the salary cap roughly be Oss? Out of interest.

Also, I wouldn't mind a sort of two (or three) year 'contract' for rookies making them unavailable via free agency for the first few years. Just because rookies can often have terrible averages over the first few seasons due to being the sub or having limited opportunities etc.

For example, say in the unlikely scenario that PNL ended up with the #1 pick last year (unlikely because what the hell would Daz actually gladly offer :P) and selected Tom Boyd, his price at the end of this season based on his average of 35 would be $175 000. Now we all know how much potential Boyd actually has, so say if PNL was teetering on the edge of the salary cap and couldn't afford that extra $225 000 that Beijing offered ($400 000, a pretty reasonable amount for a team that's keen on high end young talent), PNL would lose a potential star before they've really been able to assess his value or get anything of significance back.

tl;dr - I would like rookies to be unpoachable for their first two seasons at a club as they're too easy to pry away due to their low prices.

Sorry if that made little/no sense. I'm quite hungover.

[Purple 77]

This idea has me excited. Poaching/trading period would just get so much cooler.

MC raises a very good point. I'd even say a draftee/newbie should not be allowed to be poached for 4 years.

How would compensation picks work?

[Jukes]

Too complicated!

[Nige]

Too complicated!

[CrowsFan]

I dunno, it's an interesting idea, but I'm sceptical over how well it would actually go down. I know you're all thinking wow look at all the players I can just take and I don't have to trade them anyone in return. But I'll use my team as an example for why I'm not a big fan...

My current salary is $13,621,000, so already above the proposed $13,500,000, but I would be under after delisting.

Say for example I nominate my 5 franchise players as Ablett, Sloane, Jacobs, Gunston and Walker. (Note for this I will just use this years averages as I can't be bothered working out 3 year averages
From here some team who doesn't have a ruck comes along and decides that they would like to take Minson from me, being right at the salary cap already I can't offer to match it, so I lose Minson, but gain roughly 500k in my salary cap, nowhere near enough to find an able replacement for the rucks.
Then along comes 2 more teams lacking in forwards and decide to poach Roughy and Devon Smith, offering 900,000 and 840,000 respectively, with the extra 500k I got from losing Minson I can afford to pay the 675k and 630k (an extra 435k), so I manage to keep both.
But then what do you know another team is lacking defenders so is willing to pay the 850k to take Houli from me. Sadly I can't afford to pay extra to get him, so goodbye Bachar. But luckily I now have his 425k to go along with the 65k form the Minson loss, giving me a total of 490k. Oh boy I really look forward to replacing 2 starting players with just 490k! *Note heavy sarcasm.

All this salary cap is going to do is cripple the bigger teams who will have no chance at keeping many of their starting XV because they can't afford to.

The current way works, and if good enough at trading the lower teams can climb very quickly, case in point Holz going from wooden spoon first season to premiership favourite this year.

Seems like my opinion is in the minority however :-\

[Nige]

The current way works, and if good enough at trading the lower teams can climb very quickly, case in point Holz going from wooden spoon first season to premiership favourite this year.

^ That's pretty much how I feel but I normally don't make any sense when I try to put my thoughts into words when dealing with matters like this.  :P

[roo boys!]

Yeah I feel as though it would be a bit too tricky and absolute mayhem, and as the example CF just used about Dublin, they've shown that the current system ain't broke, and if it ain't broke.....

[CrowsFan]

The current way works, and if good enough at trading the lower teams can climb very quickly, case in point Holz going from wooden spoon first season to premiership favourite this year.

^ That's pretty much how I feel but I normally don't make any sense when I try to put my thoughts into words when dealing with matters like this.  :P

Lucky you have the friendly neighbourhood badger to help then ;)

[ossie85]

Yeah I feel as though it would be a bit too tricky and absolute mayhem, and as the example CF just used about Dublin, they've shown that the current system ain't broke, and if it ain't broke.....

I think the system is a bit broke to be honest. Would have worked well, but unfortunately some teams were driven into the ground by some coaches (who are no longer part of the game).

Dublin did a fantastic job getting off the bottom.... but they were really the only terrible team that year, and now we have 4 teams that are struggling really badly... One or even 2 might be able to compete in a couple of years, but really struggle to see how all 4 can.

[ossie85]

What would the salary cap roughly be Oss? Out of interest.

Also, I wouldn't mind a sort of two (or three) year 'contract' for rookies making them unavailable via free agency for the first few years. Just because rookies can often have terrible averages over the first few seasons due to being the sub or having limited opportunities etc.

For example, say in the unlikely scenario that PNL ended up with the #1 pick last year (unlikely because what the hell would Daz actually gladly offer :P) and selected Tom Boyd, his price at the end of this season based on his average of 35 would be $175 000. Now we all know how much potential Boyd actually has, so say if PNL was teetering on the edge of the salary cap and couldn't afford that extra $225 000 that Beijing offered ($400 000, a pretty reasonable amount for a team that's keen on high end young talent), PNL would lose a potential star before they've really been able to assess his value or get anything of significance back.

tl;dr - I would like rookies to be unpoachable for their first two seasons at a club as they're too easy to pry away due to their low prices.

Sorry if that made little/no sense. I'm quite hungover.

Currently have the salary cap at $13.5m, but that's just an initial estimate.

Happy enough for rookies to be unpoachable for a couple of years.

I dunno, it's an interesting idea, but I'm sceptical over how well it would actually go down. I know you're all thinking wow look at all the players I can just take and I don't have to trade them anyone in return. But I'll use my team as an example for why I'm not a big fan...

My current salary is $13,621,000, so already above the proposed $13,500,000, but I would be under after delisting.

Say for example I nominate my 5 franchise players as Ablett, Sloane, Jacobs, Gunston and Walker. (Note for this I will just use this years averages as I can't be bothered working out 3 year averages
From here some team who doesn't have a ruck comes along and decides that they would like to take Minson from me, being right at the salary cap already I can't offer to match it, so I lose Minson, but gain roughly 500k in my salary cap, nowhere near enough to find an able replacement for the rucks.
Then along comes 2 more teams lacking in forwards and decide to poach Roughy and Devon Smith, offering 900,000 and 840,000 respectively, with the extra 500k I got from losing Minson I can afford to pay the 675k and 630k (an extra 435k), so I manage to keep both.
But then what do you know another team is lacking defenders so is willing to pay the 850k to take Houli from me. Sadly I can't afford to pay extra to get him, so goodbye Bachar. But luckily I now have his 425k to go along with the 65k form the Minson loss, giving me a total of 490k. Oh boy I really look forward to replacing 2 starting players with just 490k! *Note heavy sarcasm.

All this salary cap is going to do is cripple the bigger teams who will have no chance at keeping many of their starting XV because they can't afford to.

The current way works, and if good enough at trading the lower teams can climb very quickly, case in point Holz going from wooden spoon first season to premiership favourite this year.

Seems like my opinion is in the minority however :-\

I agree HB that it will make it hard on the bigger teams, but that's kind of the point of the cap :P


But, Reckon if we limit it to:

- Max 1 Franchise, Max 1 'other' and 2 max on Reserve players. So at worst you'd lose 4 players. BUT if you've had to raise the price of any of your players because of it, that counts as 1. Sound fairer?

e.g. You've had to raise Ablett's salary to keep him to $800k. That counts as the franchise player they've tried to poach, so now nobody can steal any of your franchise players?

[CrowsFan]

I agree HB that it will make it hard on the bigger teams, but that's kind of the point of the cap :P


But, Reckon if we limit it to:

- Max 1 Franchise, Max 1 'other' and 2 max on Reserve players. So at worst you'd lose 4 players. BUT if you've had to raise the price of any of your players because of it, that counts as 1. Sound fairer?

e.g. You've had to raise Ablett's salary to keep him to $800k. That counts as the franchise player they've tried to poach, so now nobody can steal any of your franchise players?

Haha I know that is the point of the cap to level the playing field, just felt that it wasn't really leveling it as much as it was crushing the big teams.

Those additions do make it more interesting though. Would there still be a trade period though or would it only be poaching of players? If there is still one, would it be before, after or at the same time as the poaching?