Welcome Guest
[Log In]
[Register]

AFFL ROUND SEVENTEEN LOCKOUT:
| Welcome to AFFL. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Sign-up now and you could be the next AFFL coach! |
| 2017 Season Announcement | |
|---|---|
| Topic Started: Oct 9 2016, 08:53 PM (1,787 Views) | |
| Lliam | Oct 12 2016, 03:07 PM Post #41 |
|
Matthew Richardson
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
TIME LIMITS As has already been pointed out, the admin team made an oversight by not having time limits in place from the beginning of the draft. So that all 16 coaches are operating under the same drafting rules, a four hour time limit will come into effect at the start of the second round. These time limits will be in place between 8:00am - 10:00pm AEDST. We encourage coaches to leave a preference list if you know you won't be online. These can be left with a member of the admin team or with any other coach. |
![]() |
|
| Snappy | Oct 12 2016, 03:19 PM Post #42 |
|
#TeamLummas
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
No need to exempt me, I live in Melbourne now. |
| |
![]() |
|
| Stoney | Oct 12 2016, 03:21 PM Post #43 |
|
David Spriggs
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
#equality |
- 18/8/2017 | |
![]() |
|
| Schulzenfest | Oct 12 2016, 03:26 PM Post #44 |
|
Beau Dowler
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I live in Adelaide and therefore require an extension of 20 years to reflect my city's time zone. Thanks in advance. |
![]() |
|
| Schulzenfest | Oct 12 2016, 05:33 PM Post #45 |
|
Beau Dowler
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
So why only four rounds? Do the players remaining after four rounds go into the PSD, or could Stoney just not be bothered posting up the rest of the picks? |
![]() |
|
| Cleishy | Oct 12 2016, 08:19 PM Post #46 |
![]()
Jason Laycock
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Is there a new list maximum and player lodgement number now? |
| Home of Dustin Martin. | |
![]() |
|
| Lummas | Oct 13 2016, 03:43 AM Post #47 |
|
Beau Dowler
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
surely back up to 42? |
| Dockers are loading....... | |
![]() |
|
| Schulzenfest | Oct 13 2016, 08:40 AM Post #48 |
|
Beau Dowler
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Leave as is IMO. At least it might add some interest to the PSD and rookie drafts beyond "who's the best player who was accidentally left out of list lodgment". I'd actually like to see us have a similar system to the AFL. Capped at 44 players overall, maximum 40 senior list players and minimum 4 rookies, but if you have less than the maximum senior list players you have some freedom to add more rookies, e.g. if you only have 38 senior list players you can have 6 rookies. Not sure if that'll get any support outside of me, but I think it would add an interesting wrinkle to list management. |
![]() |
|
| Cleishy | Oct 13 2016, 08:43 AM Post #49 |
![]()
Jason Laycock
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I just hate to see players not on lists, prefer larger lists although that gives teams too much depth probably. What about the possibility of a mid season draft next season where teams can nominate to de-list players and pick up others from the remaining pool then. |
| Home of Dustin Martin. | |
![]() |
|
| Stoney | Oct 13 2016, 09:27 AM Post #50 |
|
David Spriggs
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
There will be a marginal shift in list sizes, but the new model will aim to ensure that the PSD becomes relevant again. |
- 18/8/2017 | |
![]() |
|
| Stoney | Oct 13 2016, 09:34 AM Post #51 |
|
David Spriggs
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I agree, but I think we need to consider a range of factors. The whole premise around this shift was to increase interest/activity. By simply giving every player to every club, ensures that the PSD continues to be seen as redundant. By also simply increasing list sizes to accommodate, means that there is no challenge around list management. There will also still be a need to cut back for list lodgement prior to the draft, and I'd be inclined to keep this at 35. The main outcomes I want to see - - The most competitive league we've ever had (close the gap as best we can between 1 & 16) - More "buzz" during the off-season - Increased relevance of the PSD - Increased challenge associated with list management None of that is official admin response, basically just my thoughts. |
- 18/8/2017 | |
![]() |
|
| Schulzenfest | Oct 13 2016, 09:45 AM Post #52 |
|
Beau Dowler
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
My thoughts exactly. |
![]() |
|
| Schulzenfest | Oct 13 2016, 06:14 PM Post #53 |
|
Beau Dowler
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
??? |
![]() |
|
| Lliam | Oct 13 2016, 06:27 PM Post #54 |
|
Matthew Richardson
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
We're still finalising the details for list numbers, but I suspect that was just the magic number of rounds Stoney decided to copy paste. |
![]() |
|
| Lliam | Oct 17 2016, 04:01 PM Post #55 |
|
Matthew Richardson
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
LIST SIZES With the move to a 16 team competition, admin has decided that during the season each team must have a minimum of 38 senior listed players and a maximum of 45 senior listed players. At list lodgement, teams must cut this down to a maximum of 35 senior listed players. |
![]() |
|
| Colby | Oct 17 2016, 04:06 PM Post #56 |
|
Tom Jonas Appreciation Society
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Wasn't the old list size 40? Would've liked to see us go to 42 at the most. |
| |
![]() |
|
| Schulzenfest | Oct 17 2016, 04:10 PM Post #57 |
|
Beau Dowler
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Yeah, agree with Colby. Not really a fan of that call TBH. Personally I would've rather it stayed at 40. |
![]() |
|
| Snappy | Oct 17 2016, 04:17 PM Post #58 |
|
#TeamLummas
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Instead of executive admin decision like this, perhaps gauging the opinions of the other coaches and then factoring that into the decision might work a little better. Because I also agree that 45 is a huge number, considering that numbers need to be at 35 before the draft. Not having a go at the admin though. |
| |
![]() |
|
| Lummas | Oct 17 2016, 04:34 PM Post #59 |
|
Beau Dowler
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
It was 42 a couple of years ago. Down to 35 is a bit extreme given the new max limit of 45. |
| Dockers are loading....... | |
![]() |
|
| Lliam | Oct 17 2016, 04:40 PM Post #60 |
|
Matthew Richardson
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I probably should have given a bit of the reasoning behind the decision ... - It ensures that all players in the competition can be on a AFFL list 'during' the season. - It makes the list lodgement aspect of our game more challenging going from 45 to 35. - It makes the PSD more interesting, as it's become a bit of a non-event of late. In saying that though, the admin team are always open to suggestions and can be open to change if it's what is best for the site, so keep the discussion going and in particular keep the ideas coming. |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Official Press Releases · Next Topic » |
| Track Topic · E-mail Topic |
6:29 PM Jul 11
|




![]](http://z1.ifrm.com/static/1/pip_r.png)




6:29 PM Jul 11