WXV Discussion

[ossie85]

It is a valid argument, I agree (part of the reason I'd like to rules in this game that allowed you to impact the other coaches score... but can never get a rule up lol).

But if you want to use total points as an indicator, I think you may as well not have head to head matches and just have the top scoring coaches for the year win. Far less exciting, but probably a more accurate reflection of the game. Because head to head games are also based on the luck of the draw (just like the score against).

For instance, if you switched Christchuch and Berlin's fixture, chances are Berlin would be pushing top 4. Surely Berlin, being the 4th-5th scoring team be in the finals?

So I think you use percentage still, as it reflects the week to week variability that makes the game exciting.

The other side has a valid argument, just mine is more valider.

[Holz]

It is a valid argument, I agree (part of the reason I'd like to rules in this game that allowed you to impact the other coaches score... but can never get a rule up lol).

But if you want to use total points as an indicator, I think you may as well not have head to head matches and just have the top scoring coaches for the year win. Far less exciting, but probably a more accurate reflection of the game. Because head to head games are also based on the luck of the draw (just like the score against).

For instance, if you switched Christchuch and Berlin's fixture, chances are Berlin would be pushing top 4. Surely Berlin, being the 4th-5th scoring team be in the finals?

So I think you use percentage still, as it reflects the week to week variability that makes the game exciting.

The other side has a valid argument, just mine is more valider.

The fixture is basically luck and your scoing is basically all that you can control in using skill to improve your list. We should never want to take all the luck out of the game so keep the head to head but having points scored means there is a combination of luck and skill in finishing higher up on the ladder.

teams who have lots of points scored against them already are unlucky is they might get a few losses that they probably should have won its compounded if it also hurts their percentages.

By the way the biggest winner of the % situation is Dublin as teams rest players against us some weeks so i have a reasonably low Points against. Also kinda helps the bottom teams abit as people also rest. It will help the middle teams who everyone goes full strength on and these are the teams who are trying to make the 8 and care the most.

[Purple 77]

You people speak of "can't impact other teams scores", well, you could if you were willing to implement those negating tactics :P

I feel hard done by on luck for sure, but not hard done by in the system. I like it the way it is personally, because tbh it is less exciting if the more "deserving" teams make finals, if that makes sense.

I mean, in 2013, I think I sat 10th on total points, but made the prelims.

Keep luck in it I say

[Holz]

You people speak of "can't impact other teams scores", well, you could if you were willing to implement those negating tactics :P

I feel hard done by on luck for sure, but not hard done by in the system. I like it the way it is personally, because tbh it is less exciting if the more "deserving" teams make finals, if that makes sense.

I mean, in 2013, I think I sat 10th on total points, but made the prelims.

Keep luck in it I say

In 2013 i was the in form team in the comp and i think i worked out i would have lost in the grand final but never made finals.

[RaisyDaisy]

I think it needs to stay as is, because that's just how any sport ladder and league works

Sometimes you get lucky, and sometimes you get unlucky, but instead of trying to decide between % vs Overall, maybe we can leave things as is, but let's talk about ideas of the possibility of implementing something extra for overall?

Keep this in mind too - you might have scored higher overall than a team who is above you on the ladder, but at least you will get higher draft picks ;) Pro's and con's to both

Hmmm, is there something extra we could add or do for overall?

[Holz]

Keep this in mind too - you might have scored higher overall than a team who is above you on the ladder, but at least you will get higher draft picks ;) Pro's and con's to both

That means weaker but luckier teams are worse off and when the luck runs out will struggle more.

In terms of finals spots its very important big difference between 4th and 5th

[RaisyDaisy]

Keep this in mind too - you might have scored higher overall than a team who is above you on the ladder, but at least you will get higher draft picks ;) Pro's and con's to both

That means weaker but luckier teams are worse off and when the luck runs out will struggle more.

In terms of finals spots its very important big difference between 4th and 5th

Can't have it both ways though

You either make finals, or you miss out and get a higher pick

[Holz]

Keep this in mind too - you might have scored higher overall than a team who is above you on the ladder, but at least you will get higher draft picks ;) Pro's and con's to both

That means weaker but luckier teams are worse off and when the luck runs out will struggle more.

In terms of finals spots its very important big difference between 4th and 5th

Can't have it both ways though

You either make finals, or you miss out and get a higher pick

or you finish 9th and have a worse pick then finishing 11th

[RaisyDaisy]

I think we're the perfect example

We are 4th for overall points scored, but currently sit 8th on the ladder

To be honest, I think that's a fair reflection of the year we've had. Yes when we're on we're on and can score well, but we still have plenty of stinkers and when we do teams that would be seen to be below us have beaten us and got the points

That being said, I don't think we should be 4th on the ladder at all because we have been poor on many occasions, so I guess this is an argument to leave things as is based on %

You can score all you like, but you have to beat who is put in front of you each week and do it enough to qualify for finals

[GoLions]

Is it necessary to draft all players on an AFL list each year? I dunno about all the other comps, but in British we always have some leftover players due to our set list sizes. What usually happens is that each year, there will be a few "gems" that appear out of nowhere, and these guys can then be picked up in the next rookie draft by the bottom teams, to help them improve that little bit quicker. It also makes rookie picks a lot more valuable for trading which, again, helps out those bottom teams a little bit more.

I bring this up because I was trying to find who we could take in the rookie draft this year and then realized there are no leftover players :P

[ossie85]

Brits have less teams I think

[GoLions]

Brits have less teams I think

Yes, but reducing team list sizes by 1 could easily fix that. Also, I'm not sure if the Essendon saga has anything to do with it, but checking our list size against Berlin's, seems like we have 2 extra players?

[GoLions]

So, can we change this rule?

[Purple 77]

Brits have less teams I think

Yeah this, and also, we have 18 teams, AFL has 18 teams, so why should there be leftover players?

I find it more enjoyable when a player does come out of no where and he is on someones list. The Rookie draft also has VERY little quality in it, with say, Tom Ruggles (Toronto), Daniel Talia (Berlin), Dale Morris (Cairo) and Kade Stewart (Beijing) being the best to come from it. So I don't think Rookie draft picks would attract any more value if there were left overs.

So, can we change this rule?

Anything anyone brings up in the Rule Discussion thread that normally opens in September will be voted on, so feel free to bring it up then :)

But I know I sure don't wanna change it  :-X but that's just me and my OCD of having all players drafted. Don't forget there are teams struggling to field 15-20 players each week, so I don't want to cut back on their potential depth either by having available players not on a WXV list

[Nige]

I'm with Dave on this one, he explained it pretty well.