FanFooty   FanFooty
Australian Rules
Fantasy Football
Blog Forum App
 
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Name: Pwd: Login for:

    Advanced search
Home Help Login Register
+  FanFooty Forum
|-+  AFL fantasy competitions
| |-+  XVs Competitions
| | |-+  Asia XVs (Moderators: nas, JBs-Hawks, Rids)
| | | |-+  AXV 2017 Rule Discussion
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 6 Go Down Print
Author Topic: AXV 2017 Rule Discussion  (Read 3366 times)
JBs-Hawks
Moderator
Seasoned Coach
*****
Online Online



Forever 63 Not Out

« on: August 30, 2016, 05:20:30 PM »

Soo with another season over and dusted and before we get into the trade period.

Does anyone have any rules they would like to bring into review, any new rules they would like brought into debate.

A new coach for Taiwan will be advertised for shortly and the trade period will begin after that is finalised!

Awards night will be coming soon too! Will Danger win it?
Logged
iZander
Bench Steward
*
Offline Offline



GUN

« Reply #1 on: August 30, 2016, 05:35:51 PM »

Will Danger win it?
Id hope so or ill be calling for a recount
Logged
Koop
Coach
Training Scout
*
Online Online



Melt this curse away

« Reply #2 on: August 30, 2016, 05:45:56 PM »

Will be very interested in the Taiwan job when it becomes available.  ;D

Logged
tbagrocks
Veteran Coach
****
Offline Offline



Inaugural i5s Premiership Coach of the Irish!

« Reply #3 on: August 30, 2016, 06:20:58 PM »

Will Danger win it?
Id hope so or ill be calling for a recount
He has done a remarkable job convincing everyone he is a nice person, but leading the stats? Someone had more ball in the AXV ;)
Logged
iZander
Bench Steward
*
Offline Offline



GUN

« Reply #4 on: August 30, 2016, 06:23:04 PM »

Will Danger win it?
Id hope so or ill be calling for a recount
He has done a remarkable job convincing everyone he is a nice person, but leading the stats? Someone had more ball in the AXV ;)
2 players had more ball, but no1 had more points!!! :D
Logged
Nige
Master Coach
*****
Online Online



SANDBAE

« Reply #5 on: August 30, 2016, 06:28:31 PM »

I'd kinda like to just be able name teams in the format we do in all the other comps if that's a rule we can maybe change?
Logged
Jay
Veteran Coach
****
Offline Offline



« Reply #6 on: August 30, 2016, 06:32:58 PM »

I'd kinda like to just be able name teams in the format we do in all the other comps if that's a rule we can maybe change?
Our format is a Colliwobblers tradition!
Logged
Ricochet
Coaching Legend
*****
Offline Offline



2014 AF Elxam Champ; Dublin are pie

« Reply #7 on: August 30, 2016, 09:07:57 PM »

I have an idea to help with equalization

But i don't think it will be very popular lol



I don't think top 4ish teams should get first round draft picks...



The best way for teams to rise up is to give them more ammo to trade with, and less to the top teams.

A cap is ok too, but giving teams more to trade with is more effective

This is what I'd propose the draft to look like

1st Option                         

1st Round
1. 16th
2. 15th
3. 14th
4. 13th
5. 12th
6. 11th
7. 10th
8. 9th
9. 8th
10. 7th
11. 6th
12. 5th
Like normal

Then
13. 16th
14. 15th
15. 14th
16. 13th

2nd round
17. 12th
18. 11th
19. 10th
20. 9th
21. 8th
22. 7th
23. 6th
24. 5th
25. 4th
26. 3rd
27. 2nd
28. 1st
29. 16th
Etc...
Or a second more extreme option

1st Round
1. 16th
2. 15th
3. 14th
4. 13th
5. 12th
6. 11th
7. 10th
8. 9th
Like normal

Then the bottom 4 again to help them out
9. 16th
10. 15th
11. 14th
12. 13th

Then the rest of the 8
13. 8th
14. 7th
15. 6th
16. 5th

2nd round
17. 12th
18. 11th
19. 10th
20. 9th
21. 8th
22. 7th
23. 6th
24. 5th
25. 4th
26. 3rd
27. 2nd
28. 1st
29. 16th
Etc...

Now we could say that this is what priority picks are for. But teams who win less than 4 games only get a priority pick at the end of the 1st round for the 1st season, and then only after the 2nd season do they get one pick at the start of the 1st round (if they lose less than 4 again). So its not until 2 years that they get some real additional ammo to trade with

Normally i like these comps to reflect real life as much as possible but to keep interest levels up and allow teams to rebuild quickly i truly think this is the best way.

It will also make it harder for strong teams to bring in established players. A late first rounder is still great value in a trade and can be paired with other players for upgrades. Taking that away from teams like the Crocs will make it harder to improve further

Anyway feel free to rip it apart :P
Logged
iZander
Bench Steward
*
Offline Offline



GUN

« Reply #8 on: August 30, 2016, 09:10:17 PM »

The teams on top are way way to far ahead for this to have a significant impact in the next few years, think a cap would be alot more effect.

Having said that i think i dont care if there is nothing done tbh :)

iZander
Logged
Ricochet
Coaching Legend
*****
Offline Offline



2014 AF Elxam Champ; Dublin are pie

« Reply #9 on: August 30, 2016, 09:12:19 PM »

The teams on top are way way to far ahead for this to have a significant impact in the next few years, think a cap would be alot more effect.

Having said that i think i dont care if there is nothing done tbh :)

iZander
NDT in worlds went from last to 6th largely due to priority picks. It can be done

A cap simply reduces depth. It doesn't reduce guns. Unless it is ridiculously tight. It does work but giving teams more to trade with is more effective
Logged
Ricochet
Coaching Legend
*****
Offline Offline



2014 AF Elxam Champ; Dublin are pie

« Reply #10 on: August 30, 2016, 09:14:28 PM »

I'd be all for a cap as well btw
Logged
iZander
Bench Steward
*
Offline Offline



GUN

« Reply #11 on: August 30, 2016, 09:17:40 PM »

The teams on top are way way to far ahead for this to have a significant impact in the next few years, think a cap would be alot more effect.

Having said that i think i dont care if there is nothing done tbh :)

iZander
NDT in worlds went from last to 6th largely due to priority picks. It can be done

A cap simply reduces depth. It doesn't reduce guns. Unless it is ridiculously tight. It does work but giving teams more to trade with is more effective
There was a cap in place in worlds....how do you know it wasnt because of the cap?

They both obviously would help, to say which one was more effective seems difficult :P

But i think the cap would be better in such a heavily uneven comp :)
Logged
Ricochet
Coaching Legend
*****
Offline Offline



2014 AF Elxam Champ; Dublin are pie

« Reply #12 on: August 30, 2016, 09:21:24 PM »

The teams on top are way way to far ahead for this to have a significant impact in the next few years, think a cap would be alot more effect.

Having said that i think i dont care if there is nothing done tbh :)

iZander
NDT in worlds went from last to 6th largely due to priority picks. It can be done

A cap simply reduces depth. It doesn't reduce guns. Unless it is ridiculously tight. It does work but giving teams more to trade with is more effective
There was a cap in place in worlds....how do you know it wasnt because of the cap?

They both obviously would help, to say which one was more effective seems difficult :P

But i think the cap would be better in such a heavily uneven comp :)
Because I coach NDT lol. And it allowed us to trade for established players.

With a cap, top teams simply trade away depth for picks or lesser depth and keep their guns. It does hurt them because injuries obviously happen, but in terms of their starting XV strength, it doesn't really impact them too much
Logged
iZander
Bench Steward
*
Offline Offline



GUN

« Reply #13 on: August 30, 2016, 09:31:37 PM »

The teams on top are way way to far ahead for this to have a significant impact in the next few years, think a cap would be alot more effect.

Having said that i think i dont care if there is nothing done tbh :)

iZander
NDT in worlds went from last to 6th largely due to priority picks. It can be done

A cap simply reduces depth. It doesn't reduce guns. Unless it is ridiculously tight. It does work but giving teams more to trade with is more effective
There was a cap in place in worlds....how do you know it wasnt because of the cap?

They both obviously would help, to say which one was more effective seems difficult :P

But i think the cap would be better in such a heavily uneven comp :)
Because I coach NDT lol. And it allowed us to trade for established players.

With a cap, top teams simply trade away depth for picks or lesser depth and keep their guns. It does hurt them because injuries obviously happen, but in terms of their starting XV strength, it doesn't really impact them too much
Being a coach of NDT doesnt mean you know who which factor it was that made the improve/decrease (yes, decrease, it makes top teams harder to improve), lets be honest it was a factor of both (and a factor of good trading if your scully trade is anything like your last years ones). To, which one was the strongest factor i dont think we will ever know.

Plus if top teams have less depth than that depth is moved to other teams, which are then starters and helps even up the comp. Also it gives top teams a weakness, and they might rethink having a killer best 15 in search of depth since injuries do happen.

Basically you nailed what a cap does above, which is why i think its better :) Its the quickest way to even up the comp imo :D

Logged
Ricochet
Coaching Legend
*****
Offline Offline



2014 AF Elxam Champ; Dublin are pie

« Reply #14 on: August 30, 2016, 09:44:04 PM »

The teams on top are way way to far ahead for this to have a significant impact in the next few years, think a cap would be alot more effect.

Having said that i think i dont care if there is nothing done tbh :)

iZander
NDT in worlds went from last to 6th largely due to priority picks. It can be done

A cap simply reduces depth. It doesn't reduce guns. Unless it is ridiculously tight. It does work but giving teams more to trade with is more effective
There was a cap in place in worlds....how do you know it wasnt because of the cap?

They both obviously would help, to say which one was more effective seems difficult :P

But i think the cap would be better in such a heavily uneven comp :)
Because I coach NDT lol. And it allowed us to trade for established players.

With a cap, top teams simply trade away depth for picks or lesser depth and keep their guns. It does hurt them because injuries obviously happen, but in terms of their starting XV strength, it doesn't really impact them too much
Being a coach of NDT doesnt mean you know who which factor it was that made the improve/decrease (yes, decrease, it makes top teams harder to improve), lets be honest it was a factor of both (and a factor of good trading if your scully trade is anything like your last years ones). To, which one was the strongest factor i dont think we will ever know.

Plus if top teams have less depth than that depth is moved to other teams, which are then starters and helps even up the comp. Also it gives top teams a weakness, and they might rethink having a killer best 15 in search of depth since injuries do happen.

Basically you nailed what a cap does above, which is why i think its better :) Its the quickest way to even up the comp imo :D
I agree a cap can help. Just don't agree its the quickest way :P

On the bold though. Most depth moved from top teams is pretty weak from what i've seen. So its just shifting guys like say a  Frawley-type to a bottom team. Which really doesn't help them too much in the long run. His value won't dramatically increase and he won't help them tooooo much on field.

Plus bottom teams will value youth over establish depth

Also on the weakness (lack of depth). A team would be unlucky to missing 4-5+ of their starting XV in a GF. So top teams would most likely just risk it without quality depth.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 6 Go Up Print 
« previous next »
 


FanFooty Contact Us About Us Advertising Site Map Copyright © 2004-2011 Paul Montgomery.
SMF 2.0 RC5 | SMF © 2014, Simple Machines