A semi-answer to what happens to Dream Team when GC enter the league

[Lunatic Fringe]

There won't be too many weeks where there are two bye teams.

Based on a 24 round season, you would expect 5 weeks where three teams are not playing.

If its a 22 round season, then 6 weeks.

If they decide to go with 5 or even 7 bye teams for a couple of weeks, then DT would be pretty pointless in those weeks.

 

[bris2008]

I recon there are two possible options-


1-Everyone can elect one round throughout the season where they will elect to have a bye as well. This way If a team is stacked full of say Geelong players, Dream team coaches can elect to have there dream team have a bye in the same round.

2- Option two would be that everything stays the way it is now however at the end of the season every team has its lowest score wiped from their total points.

 

[PC-04]

how about the idea of having a dream team coach as well.

the coach can be either awarded for his TEAMS average and there is a certain formula to determine the amount of points this is, or whether his team wins or not. For ex; the higher a coaches team wins by the more you score. Coaches can be selected each week.

Coaches can score double the points, and we can ditch the idea of having a captain as this is getting old.

Huh? You win the prize for most homo idea ever.

hahahah
harsh

I love this. And Ablett and J Selwood could play for the Cats when GC have their bye

 

[bailz66]

Which ever way you do it it works out better for the people that put in the time.

If you have an extra person on the bench they would need to increase the salary cap.

But for me i would select all my premiums early based on late byes

And then trade in premiums after they have had a bye to get the most points. Get rookies with early buys and it doesnt hit your bottom line as much.

So many variables.

I think if you are given the option to sub players out then that also becomes a bit unfair as you can select players that have byes early so you get the best of both worlds.

What about you select a team of 30 players in x positions. If a player misses then his prices score (Ie a 500k player) gives you the average points for a 500k player. A rookie gives you 15 points or what ever. It doesnt go onto their totals but is added to your score.

Means there is no real penalty for selecting a given player nor is there a penalty for not selecting him due to bye. Improvers are penalised (IE malceski this week) and you would know what score you would get for a player before round starts.

Alternatively multi captains. for each person missing on your field you can select a player of equal or lesser value to be your fill in sub captain and their points are doubled.

I dont really know but it should be interesting when the time comes

 

[Falchoon]

I'd rather they just take the players average if the have a bye, but not have it affect their price (be it positively or negatively).

Rather than average I'd say take the players present value divided by the Magic number.

 

[The Falcon Strike]

Perhaps the simplest solution is the best solution.

How about we leave it as it is.

Yes it means people cop more donuts, however everyone is still in the same boat. It may even shake up people's strategy a little bit, with extra focus that year on rookies being players who will regularly get a game, not just cash cows - and also perhaps the idea of having a Ladson or a Ballantyne starting on your bench isn't that bad an idea, if it means they are going to rotate on and off the pitch every second week.

 

[WoGiTaLiA]

I think perhaps one extra bench player in the forwards, mids and backs should suffice.

I like the idea that bye weeks should require planning, like they do in NFL fantasy football. So if you load up your team with 10 Geelong players(for example) you get smashed in that bye week. Could come down to strategy, I know that I had like 7 cats and 7 saints at the end of last season, perhaps if this was different more people would have had less of those two teams and more the guys from other teams.

Still, going to be interesting, I still intrigued how they are going to work the bye in overall just from an AFL view point, nevermind the DT implications. I mean how do they account for the 22 rounds, obviously they are going to need to do something to make sure everyone plays the same amount of games, I still can't really see the way they do it without other changes.

 

[West123]

Lower the magic number and give us an extra bench spot for def, mid, fwd. The simple way to be safe is never have too many from one team.

The big problem is if there are rounds with more than one team not playing.

 

[Papa Juggs]

Keep the cap the same but with more bench players

I'm sure there will be enough rookies if the GC guys are all cheapies.

 

[Saints08]

I would have to agree with you lakey that more DP's, more bench spots and more cap is likely.

However, I would actually like to see a similar setup to actual teams in the AFL. Let teams pick a list of 40 players. Week to week any 22 players from the list may be selected. 18 of which go onto the field and 4 on the bench as emergencies. This would leave 18 players on the sidelines each week, this would be more than enough to cater for byes each week. This would also make DP players far more powerful and maybe they would have an increase in value of 10%?

If this was to be implemented, the initial team selection becomes far more crucial. I would also be inclined to reduce the number of trades during the season to 10. I know this idea completely changes the tactics in the game but I believe it would also make it more interesting.

Love this idea - won't happen though... maybe it could be a seperate game to dt

 

[The Falcon Strike]

Love this idea - won't happen though... maybe it could be a seperate game to dt

I like that idea as well - with the exception that you can't trade.

Perhaps you're allowed a rookie list - so you can elevate a player off the rookie list - but then you can't use your LTI for 8 weeks.

 

[54Dogs]

Simplicity will be the answer.

More DPs will still be confusing for the masses.

Most likely will be increased trades (say 30) with 3 pw maximum or increased number of bench players. Either will be simple for most people to work through.

 

[DERIBERATE]

Don't do anything. Everyone will cop donuts evenly, why create more problems with more rule changes? Have to remember that DT is big enough that you have to cater for average joe who can't figure out how to select emergencies let alone DP rules.

 

[Thumpy]

Thanks for the update, will be interesting to see what is chosen. Tbh I would rather just an extra bench position for each part of the field, whilst it seems simple the planning/trading of your team will involve much more thinking. I am not a fan of DP because so few players have it but if they decided to give it to a fair few more it might have merit but I still would prefer something like an extra bench position for each spot on the ground (other then ruck).

Extra bench position sounds good I was also thinking of a flexible bench system where you can choose what position your reserves are.

For example you have about 12 reserves but you can choose what positon they are. For instance 4 backs, 3 mids, 1 ruck, 4 forwards - but it could be whatever you choose (but a minimum of 1 per position).

We'll probably see a salary cap increase aswell meaning the mid-priced/cash cows are going to become a lot less common as people opt for the pure guns/rookies strategy (VS was a lot more generous in prices than FF planner was so perhaps they are experinmenting with that this year as well).

Finally, VS will need to classify a lot more players as DP if they want this to work out. ATM most of us proabably have these players in the non-midfield position. That won't be a good idea next year otherwise you'll be copping donuts left right and centre

 

[Spider Klein]

All these people whinging and saying that if DT gets too hard they will quit playing next year.

Personally I think that dream team has become ridiculously easy. With so much information available to every tom dick and harry out there everybody is getting a good team.

I'm not against these boards or the information being out there due to popularity of DT but if the challenge is out there for next year and some work is required to separate the good players from the bad then I will be embracing the challenge and doing the best I can next year

 

[Mancey]

Agree with a few on here

Keep DP (with a few more eligible players), bit of extra cap, maybe 4 extra trades and 3 bench players for each possie.

Average idea sounds good to start with, but just too many potential issues and openings for rorting the system when you think about it.

Guns miss a week here and there now with injury/suspensions, and a smart person just covers them with the bench. Will be exactly the same situation, except you know when that week off is coming so its easy to plan for

It's the same for everyone, just need to be more flexible.

 

[phealey]

Bugger changing DT, its the AFL that needs to change.

The team that is supposed to have the bye plays the local high school team in their district. All points are halved to ensure it's an even playing feild and Gablett doesnt score 400 during the bye. Leigh Brown and Presti are exempt from the halving rule.

This would also ensure that Channel 10 keep Kelli Underwood employed but not in a public broadcast.

 

[Spider Klein]

Bugger changing DT, its the AFL that needs to change.

The team that is supposed to have the bye plays the local high school team in their district. All points are halved to ensure it's an even playing feild and Gablett doesnt score 400 during the bye. Leigh Brown and Presti are exempt from the halving rule.

This would also ensure that Channel 10 keep Kelli Underwood employed but not in a public broadcast.

Love this. Hate sitting down to watch the footy and hearing her voice....

 

[_RT_]

The reason I suggested averages is because there will be rounds next year where multiple teams have the bye, IIRC there is supposedly a round where upto 5 teams could have the bye and another where 3 have the bye.

As it is I don't mind the idea of selecting squads of 38, which could be broken up into 11 defenders, 11 mids, 5 rucks & 11 forwards. Each week you would pick your 22 based on 7 defenders & forwards, 6 mids & 2 rucks. You would then be free to pick any 3 players as emergencies regardless of position. To accomplish the increase in squad size an increase of the cap of 10% would be needed, which roughly equates to 8 players @ $100k each. This means people wouldn't be able to load up on extra premiums and would have to do a bit more research when it comes to selecting their sides. I would also leave the trades at the current 20

 

[Benno_900]

They won't keep it as it is, they want to keep as many players as they can. So they'd want the change to make it 'easier' not more challenging.

I'd say they'll probably increase the cap by 400K - 500K and add an extra reserve player in each position ... or even 1 mil and add two in each position giving you a 38-man squad.

 

[got_im]

Maybe the use of dual position players without the need for the matching pairs could be something to look at. ie. You've got Hodge in the mids and you need him in the backs you can swap him there and have 10 backs and 7 mids for that week. Obviously you couldn't then trade Hodge as a backman unless you swapped another B/C into the mids.

Either that or increase the amount of rookies with DP eligibility.

+1 For this.

Make everyone pick 33 players (+1 each position, with more cap), then the 'bench' effectively becomes a pool, in which you can have unlimited players.
This is where DP comes into play, I can stick hodgey in the mids for a week to cover ablett's bye with a rookie coming on in the backs. So for the week I have 4 (3+1) mid bench and 2 (3-1) back bench. Number of emergencies remains at 3 (fair enough I think)

Trick would be that everyone is reset to the positions you picked them in after every week, and you can't make any trades unless you have the correct amount of players in each position.

A touch complicated, but I really don't like the 'get the player's average' idea - that has way too many corner cases that can be exploited. Sure, people can gain advantage from this method, but it will be pretty legit and your players still need to perform.

The other method I have seen is the '1 trade per week gratis, but each additional one is gonna cost you 50 points'. Balances nicely, but really changes the game we know and love. Wouldn't recommend it.

 

[Jan Juc]

Whatever may happen it will make the majority of the legwork people do between Oct-Jan next to useless - planteams etc. - when nobody will have any idea of what rules we'll be playing by next year...

 

[PL4ST1CV1K1NG]

Increase the trades to 30 (just like NRL DT) and leave it. Simple.

 

[Dr Awkward]

Some of these suggestions are too complicated. You have to remember that about 80% of registered users are not hardcore BF posters. Dream Team has to remain relatively simple and accessible to the public.

I actually think they should do nothing. Except maybe increase the squad size by about 2 players.

 

[Moogs]

Rather than average I'd say take the players present value divided by the Magic number.

We have a winner...