It's hard because you can't sort the players by the league or free agents, but it looks as if they're going to have most players who've played at least a couple game in the wafl.
I tend to agree with the requirements for the higher ratings but I still think new draftees should be a bit lower towards the low 60s, this is excluding the obvious standouts (Ashcroft, daicos, sheezel, etc) who are already best 22 players. Just using freo as an example I can't see players like...
Obviously, the ratings are all subjective but there is never enough spread in the ratings, it should take a solid year of consistent performances to get a rating of 75+, and a rating above 85 should be reserved for elite players and 90+ ratings should only be for Top 5 players.
Yeah. Can’t have teams who were top 8 last year same rating as the wooden spooners. The best thing about the original afl live was the fact that good teams played like good ones and shit ones played like shit teams
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.