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

[SandyMcManus]

Not sure if this has been posted, perhaps it's old news. But I know there has been a lot of conjecture amongst all the people I know who play DT about what is going to happen to DT once GC come in.

Karl Langdon on 6PR here in Perth said he contacted the guy in charge of Dream Team today and he said that the AFL will be holding a competition midway through this season to find the best idea for how to counter the problem of the fixture having a bye.

That's the first I've heard about it... Seems like a decent way to go about it because I'm sure they would of stuffed it up if they tried to make the changes themselves!

 

[samwise]

I think the most popular one on this board will win - Dual Positions and extended bench.
I also think there should be a cap on how many Gold Coast players you can have though.

 

[dylan123]

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).

 

[Anzac16]

I think I would like to see one of these two things happen-

Option 1- Just more bench players basically. Will have to make sure that you dont have bench players from the same team or too many of the same team players on the field so it will make it a lot harder with your team selection and trading.

Option 2- You can trade out the players that you have from that team for someone of equal or lesser value for just that one week, then the trade gets reveresed. This would not eat into your trades for the year and would provide you with a decent team each week.

So for example Geelong are having the bye, you could go Ablett (lets just say he's worth $500,000) to Dane Swan who's worth $485,000, and still have that same scoring potential in your team.

Just my 2 cents anyway

 

[Debating Society]

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).

 

[bones25]

Maybe a 10 player reserve pool that you have to use $ to hire for the day

One thing for sure, they will make it easy for the 90% that don't have a clue to grasp.

 

[The Falcon Strike]

sounds pro-active enough! best way to get free ideas !

the other issue is what to work out what constitutes a valid round.

Based on a 22 round season, each team is going to have 2 byes.

Which means, at best one AFL round will have something like 13 teams having a bye on the one weekend. This could easily then be ignored.

However if fixtures are such that throughout the year there are rounds with 3/5 teams having a bye - and this happens 4 or 5 times - that's a massive spanner in the works!

 

[The Falcon Strike]

Option 2- You can trade out the players that you have from that team for someone of equal or lesser value for just that one week, then the trade gets reveresed. This would not eat into your trades for the year and would provide you with a decent team each week.

I have an issue here - and something we all need to think about is how any new rule can be rorted - like the VC strategy in Rd 1 this year

Let's say you are out of trades in the last fortnight - and you have ablett - but he's gone down with a hammy - it would seem a little unfair that you substitute him out for a week to swan - even though he wouldn't have played.

 

[bones25]

The easiest solution is to massively increase the number of DP's.

 

[_RT_]

I'd like to see them just award the players average for the week their team has the bye. Obviously this would cause a problem for the players who have the bye in round 1 but given they keep tally of players DT scores during the preseason they could use that for round 1. The one restriction I would put on this is that you couldn't nominate the player as a captain/vice captain. Otherwise it takes away the challenge of picking a captain especially in the week when the Cats/GC have the bye and Ablett is in your side or at the start of the season when a player might put up a 140-150 score in their first game and then with the bye in round 2 nets you 280-300 points without even trying, yet someone else might get stuck with a captain who has a 110-120 average a couple of weeks later.

 

[Athomas]

They should do nothing, make you plan your team around the byes and not having too many players from one team.

 

[Jolldo87]

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.

 

[andrew81186]

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.

 

[Blues_FC]

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.

 

[Tom12]

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

 

[Papa Juggs]

I think picking subs is the way to go but only for players that are having the bye and only 2 per round.

 

[Narkee]

Man, I hope it doesn't get too complicated, I spend enough time researching my team in the preseason as it is!

Next year I might just have to take a DT bye and come back when things are back to normal in 2012 when GWS debut

 

[andrew81186]

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

not as gay as you.

 

[adelaidecrow]

I think I would like to see one of these two things happen-

Option 1- Just more bench players basically. Will have to make sure that you dont have bench players from the same team or too many of the same team players on the field so it will make it a lot harder with your team selection and trading.

Option 2- You can trade out the players that you have from that team for someone of equal or lesser value for just that one week, then the trade gets reveresed. This would not eat into your trades for the year and would provide you with a decent team each week.

So for example Geelong are having the bye, you could go Ablett (lets just say he's worth $500,000) to Dane Swan who's worth $485,000, and still have that same scoring potential in your team.

Just my 2 cents anyway

i like option 2keep it simple i say...trading out a player for equal or less average is best option imo.also good for the trade happy coaches like myself

 

[Lakey91]

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).

I'd like to see them just award the players average for the week their team has the bye. Obviously this would cause a problem for the players who have the bye in round 1 but given they keep tally of players DT scores during the preseason they could use that for round 1. The one restriction I would put on this is that you couldn't nominate the player as a captain/vice captain. Otherwise it takes away the challenge of picking a captain especially in the week when the Cats/GC have the bye and Ablett is in your side or at the start of the season when a player might put up a 140-150 score in their first game and then with the bye in round 2 nets you 280-300 points without even trying, yet someone else might get stuck with a captain who has a 110-120 average a couple of weeks later.

I have said it before, but I seriously don't think that giving the average is fair.

Firstly, there are a few too many loopholes and places of conjecture - I think we need to remember that the comp had only 250,000 teams, and probably only the top 50,000 keep an eye on whats happening each round.

Do the players not in the teams best 22 get the average for the week?

What if mitch duncan gets dropped with a one week injury, misses a game, but has the bye the following week when he would of played?

What if riewoldt does a hamstring the week before his bye? Do you still get his average?

I also think it is unfair for players who start the year well - if Shaw scores 150 in round one, I think it is unfair for him to get that the next week when he obviously will not average 150 over the course of the year.

Will their bye score be included in their yearly average?

I think it is unlikely that a player will be able to score points for your team, without actually playing.

I like the replacement option for one week - I think this will greatly reduce the popularity of some mid pricers though - at prices of low 200s you would probably do best to bring in a rookie for the round.

You would also have to make sure that in round one you can distinguish between those who have been selected in your original team, have the bye and have thus been traded out. That can be worked around though...

Overall, Id say more DPs, more bench spots and more cap is most likely.

 

[pillager]

I have said it before, but I seriously don't think that giving the average is fair.

Firstly, there are a few too many loopholes and places of conjecture - I think we need to remember that the comp had only 250,000 teams, and probably only the top 50,000 keep an eye on whats happening each round.

Do the players not in the teams best 22 get the average for the week?

What if mitch duncan gets dropped with a one week injury, misses a game, but has the bye the following week when he would of played?

What if riewoldt does a hamstring the week before his bye? Do you still get his average?

I also think it is unfair for players who start the year well - if Shaw scores 150 in round one, I think it is unfair for him to get that the next week when he obviously will not average 150 over the course of the year.

Will their bye score be included in their yearly average?

I think it is unlikely that a player will be able to score points for your team, without actually playing.

I like the replacement option for one week - I think this will greatly reduce the popularity of some mid pricers though - at prices of low 200s you would probably do best to bring in a rookie for the round.

You would also have to make sure that in round one you can distinguish between those who have been selected in your original team, have the bye and have thus been traded out. That can be worked around though...

Overall, Id say more DPs, more bench spots and more cap is most likely.

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.

 

[maculosus]

I think picking subs is the way to go but only for players that are having the bye and only 2 per round.

This is the way to go i reckon.

However it seems most people are assuming that only one team will have the bye each round and they will be missing only 2 or 3 players. What if an earlier poster is correct and some weeks there will have to be 2 or more bye teams.

With 17 teams and having 1 bye team each week means there must be a 17 week season. Any more and it gets complicated but be assurred that some weeks will have 2 or more bye teams.

Another point of interest is what came out of the meeting between the clubs and the AFL recently and that is the possibility of a conference system as in american sports. Three conferences of 6,6, and 5 teams was mentioned. This would not only make the bye situation worse but team selection would now involve consideration of strong and weak conferences.

This is too complicated - doing my head in thinking about it.
Next year i'm definitely not bothering with leagues, maybe not DT at all.

 

[bombermick]

Whatever they choose, it has to be incredibly simple or large swathes of people will not bother playing next year. A larger bench and a larger cap sounds like the easiest option. If the game becomes more complicated and takes up more time, how many of us will play next year?

 

[Tom12]

I think DP will play a huge role in DT2011. Obviously they've looked to utilise it, so I can guess it might mean more DPs, & more bench spots to utilise them.

Of course this makes the game somewhat harder.

 

[DIG]

Yep, just increase the bench and cap. An extra player in defence, mids and forwards. More multis too.

I hope they don't screw it up with a stupid idea like capping players you can pick per club at 2.