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

[magpies03]

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.

+1 No One knows exactly what the solution will be but IMO whatever it is it will be very simple. The key point is the majority of dream teamers arnt sitting on forums, checking break evens doing research etc etc. Im in the BF Division 5 Dream team league but also in a league with my mates. My mates wouldnt have a clue how scores are calculated and have never herrd of prospectus in their life. Majority of dream teamers are guys who enter for fun or with a work group. I have a neighbour who enters a team with all the players she thinks are hot lol
Point is majority of people do this for fun and dont take it half as seriously as we do. For this reason whatever the solution is it i rekon it will be very simple and plain obvious.

 

[samwise]

I think they will end up using the Premier League's system. Unlimited trades but they cost you. I think premier league is like 2 points per trade and average score is something like 50 so like maybe 1 trade would cost you 50-90 points. Would take a bit of time to work out the right number.

 

[shirtfront_wa]

My 2 cents worth...

Would giving every player dual position status and an extra reserve in each position work?

That way you would have 12 reserves and the ability to swich them around weekly.

 

[Lakey91]

We have a winner...

Good idea, but 85% of the DT population have no idea what the MN is, how it works, how its calculated and will think its **** having players assigned scores "randomly".

Never going to happen.

 

[theCATSfromHELL]

Good idea, but 85% of the DT population have no idea what the MN is, how it works, how its calculated and will think its **** having players assigned scores "randomly".

Never going to happen.

That's why they explain it to the general public, like they explained dual position players this year.

I think it's the best solution to the problem.

 

[Lakey91]

That's why they explain it to the general public, like they explained dual position players this year.

I think it's the best solution to the problem.

The public dont care - half the public didnt even figure out DP was in place (and probably still havent!). This includes mates of mine ranked top 20k or so (who were obvilious until I told them).

The general DT public dont care - they log on, pick ablett, riewoldt, brown, etc and be done with it.

 

[DaVe86]

I absolutely hate the idea of using a players average, but hard to see any other way it works.

I suppose it leaves the coach with the option of using the players average, or subbing him off for someone else on your bench that you hope will beat that score.

I just hate it. Surely someone can come up with something better. It really takes all the fun out of it because a number of scores are locked it.



The problem is, that from what I can figure, there may be rounds where there are 2 or 3 teams having a bye. It's impossible to cover for that.


Remember there are 22 rounds to fit 17 teams in...and we can't have some teams having 2 byes and some 1. So there will certainly be rounds with multiple byes. I can even foresee a round with 5 teams having a bye.

 

[magpies03]

I absolutely hate the idea of using a players average, but hard to see any other way it works.

I suppose it leaves the coach with the option of using the players average, or subbing him off for someone else on your bench that you hope will beat that score.

I just hate it. Surely someone can come up with something better. It really takes all the fun out of it because a number of scores are locked it.



The problem is, that from what I can figure, there may be rounds where there are 2 or 3 teams having a bye. It's impossible to cover for that.


Remember there are 22 rounds to fit 17 teams in...and we can't have some teams having 2 byes and some 1. So there will certainly be rounds with multiple byes. I can even foresee a round with 5 teams having a bye.

I dont think there will be any drastic changes to the current system. As stated numerous times in this thread it must be kept simple as 90% of dream teams arnt that serious and are just in it for fun and to compete with mates and work colleagues. Most of my mates wouldnt even have a clue what their ranked! They dont care. They go staight into the league pages coz thats all they care about!
I think in someways it will be good! It will force people to have a spread of players over all 17 clubs rather that 8 geelong players an 6 fremantle because the weeks those clubs have a bye they will get rolled.

 

[The Falcon Strike]

Can someone explain to me the issue of just leaving it as it is?

Sure you cop more zeros - but so does everyone.

It'll make it more strategic. Your bench will need to have job security rather than just cash cow for 5 weeks.

As mentioned the only issue is if a round only involves 3 games.

But ultimately - you'll know this in advance and plan your inital squad/trades around it.

 

[magpies03]

Can someone explain to me the issue of just leaving it as it is?

Sure you cop more zeros - but so does everyone.

It'll make it more strategic. Your bench will need to have job security rather than just cash cow for 5 weeks.

As mentioned the only issue is if a round only involves 3 games.

But ultimately - you'll know this in advance and plan your inital squad/trades around it.

Thats basically what i said above as it is the simplest solution to the problem. Basically just encourages people to select a wider range of players from different clubs rather than all geelong, stkilda, freo and bulldogs and no players from 4 other clubs. I sthe best solution to the problem imo leave it as is. WIll make it much more interesting and strategic.

 

[qldbluesman_43]

I think i'm liking just leaving it. Brings more stategy into it. THe need to pick players from different teams even if it means choosing a lesser player. The need to possibly spend more on bench players. It brings in lots of extra things to think about. Would be good.

Also another idea maybe a 31st player, a supersub or 'on loan player' who comes under the salary cap but is exempt from trading rules, so you can trade whoever's in that position as much as you want. So that one player is in a special category that doesn't get you any points except you can swap them with any player. This player would be tagged as the loan player though so you can only trade out him in that way.

 

[DaVe86]

Like I said above,

No one has yet to take into consideration that there may be multiple teams with a bye on a particular round. Mathematics suggest there could be rounds with as many as 3 teams having a bye...especially since the afl is locked into a pre-season comp next year which means the season won't/can't be extended.



How on earth would teams cope this year if Geelong/Hawthorn and Freo all had a bye in the same round?

You could rub out 10 players from my side right there.



I cannot foresee a way that the AFL can fit 17 teams into 22 rounds without rounds with multiple teams with byes....or the season is shortened to 16 rounds and an extended finals series.

 

[DaVe86]

Following on from my post above, and the issue of multiple teams having byes....this is my proposed solution.


I've tried to keep it simple for the nuffs that don't read the rules.



Every round you get 1 additional bonus trade that is purely to swap players who are having a bye.

This trade is not counted in your 20.

You use what's already in your bank.

Then at the conclusion of the round, the trade is reversed. You get your money back, you lose the player.



That's pretty simple, i can't see too many people being confused about that.


You simply get 1 extra trade a round reserved for trading players who are having a bye. It's an incentive to keep a bit of money in the bank as well...and because you only get the 1 trade, you still need a good spread of players across a number of teams.



Of course, this is only reserved for players from team with the bye. So for example, if Collingwood has a bye, only Collingwood players can be traded out with this bonus trade. You couldn't sub a player out who has a 1 week injury or suspension.




In fact, the website itself could alert you.

All players who have a bye that week are highlighted so you can't miss it. If you click on that player, a screen comes up saying .....

"As this player is having a bye this round, you may substitute him for another player...You have $$$ in your account to make this trade. Please note that at the conclusion of the round, this trade will be reversed and the money refunded into your bank"

 

[bris2008]

Like I said above,

No one has yet to take into consideration that there may be multiple teams with a bye on a particular round. Mathematics suggest there could be rounds with as many as 3 teams having a bye...especially since the afl is locked into a pre-season comp next year which means the season won't/can't be extended.



How on earth would teams cope this year if Geelong/Hawthorn and Freo all had a bye in the same round?

You could rub out 10 players from my side right there.



I cannot foresee a way that the AFL can fit 17 teams into 22 rounds without rounds with multiple teams with byes....or the season is shortened to 16 rounds and an extended finals series.

IMO The best way to deal with this would be leave everything team wise the same but make a couple of changes to how the leagues are run and how the overall rankings are made.

A good change for the leagues would be that each player can elect for there team to have a Bye as well during the season. This would mean that you could make sure your team has a bye the week that you would have the most players out.

To make the overall player rankings fare it would be a good idea if at the end of the seasons every teams lowest weekly score from through out the season is taken from the overall score,

This would mean that the week that you are most affected by player outages due to byes will not count towards your overall score or ranking.

 

[Butane]

You can be assured the answer will be simple. They really don't want to complicate matters because they want more people playing and doing well so they make more $$$

I reckon just add an extra bench spot to each position. The good teams at the end of the season will have awesome teams and the scoring will be a lot higher but Virtualsports won't care - in fact they'll love it!

 

[The Falcon Strike]

I get the feeling the solution won't come until they see the draw.

Each teams need 2 byes - so that's 34 byes throughout the year.

Given there will be 24 rounds, best case scenario is there is 23 rounds with one team missing and 1 round with 11 teams missing.

I think in this circumstance, the solution would be leaving it as it is and just ignoring the round with massive outages.

Worst case scenario is there are 19 rounds with one bye and 5 rounds with 3 teams having the bye. If this was the case - i think they'd just leave it as it is.

What many people have missed is that the rounds will be increasing from 22 to 24 - not sure how this will affect DT in total, but it would have some effect on the eliminator and the league structure.

 

[Jolldo87]

What many people have missed is that the rounds will be increasing from 22 to 24 - not sure how this will affect DT in total, but it would have some effect on the eliminator and the league structure.

I'm guessing the leagues will have 17 in each with each team getting one bye and the eliminator will just start two rounds later.

 

[borrat]

had a look at the gold coasts current players

i wonder how they will be priced???

hopefully the same as a player who was drafted at pick 23 for example

but no doubt they will more than likely be more expensive

 

[Jan Juc]

Current ''league'' finals series is RDS 19-22 of the H&A season.

My guess is next year, someone will be having a bye sometime during the last four weeks, possibly multiple teams?

DT League finals will be turned upside down.

 

[Benatration]

Current ''league'' finals series is RDS 19-22 of the H&A season.

My guess is next year, someone will be having a bye sometime during the last four weeks, possibly multiple teams?

DT League finals will be turned upside down.

Jeez saving trades will be oh so crucial with that

 

[borrat]

why not make it simple and make all 30 players interchangable???

 

[54Dogs]

Further to Dave86s post earlier, the AFL / VS will definitely want to keep it simple for the masses but need to get past the issue of multiple byes.

Each team must have 2 byes next year but there are 17 teams and only 22-24 rounds. Could be multiple rounds with 3 teams having the bye or (more likely IMO) a split round mid year where plenty of teams who are not playing get the bye.

Something like this, 34 byes required (2 per team):

Rd 1-10 (1 team has bye) = 10 byes
Rd 11 (6 games - 5 teams have bye) = 5 byes
Rd 12 (5 games - 7 teams have bye) = 7 byes
Rd 13-24 (1 team has bye) = 12 byes

Therefore each team plays 22 games and has 2 byes

Problem with this for DT is so few teams in round 11 and 12. Those two middle rounds would be awkward for DT if they go that way.

 

[West123]

Where is round 8 & 9?

 

[54Dogs]

Where is round 8 & 9?

haha

And even Rd 10

I originally thought they may do it twice with a bye in Rd 8-9 for multiple teams and another in Rd 16.

Then tweaked it to 1 bye but forgot to add in the other rounds.

Would simply mean a couple less byes in the split Rd, maybe 5 games each weekend.

I'll tweak the post

 

[West123]

IMO...

24 rounds.

20 weekends with 8 games. (160 games & 20 byes)
3 weekends with 7 games. (21 games & 9 byes)
1 week with 6 games. (6 games & 5 byes)

Thats 187 games (17 teams x 22 games each) and 34 byes (17 teams x 2 byes).

Basically we are screwed with the 7 or 6 game weekends.

Another option is...
23 rounds of with 8 games (184 games & 23 byes)
1 round of 3 games (3 games & 11 byes)

This works for us. Simply exclude the 1 round with only 3 games completely, this is a little unfair because it means that those 6 teams would have 1 bye during the actual competition but it works from the perspective of having less weeks that have the potential for missing players.