Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
AFFL
WELCOME TO AFFL!

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!

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
ANNOUNCEMENT regarding the 2017 season
Topic Started: Jul 14 2016, 12:49 AM (1,909 Views)
Colby
Member Avatar
Tom Jonas Appreciation Society
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
There's no such thing as precedent on a fantasy footy game lads, we're free to make whatever decision we want for the best interests of the site. I think looking back everyone would agree the Essendon draft was a clusterfuck stemming from our insistence on being 'objective' or whatever. I like Boof's idea a lot, if JM is willing to handle that I think it's how we should proceed.
Quote:
 
Stife
Just got out of a long, long relationship. Single living ftw. Freelance sex object ;)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Schulzenfest
Member Avatar
Beau Dowler
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
If we were to go down that path, I'm assuming each side's draft picks would be considered as part of the 'value of the list'?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Stoney
Member Avatar
David Spriggs
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Schulzenfest
Jul 26 2016, 01:31 PM
If you want to talk about 'setting precedents for future', we already have set a precedent for the future and it was to just use total points.
Correct - and I'm not against it. Precedents are basically just a guide to be considered in similar situations. So it's relevant.

But I'd also argue that if we're removing two teams from the competition, that's a unique situation. If there's an opportunity to do the equalisation aspect better than we have before, it would be remiss not to at least consider it.
Stoney
 
"Winter is coming for you Wacky.

Remember that."
- 18/8/2017
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Stoney
Member Avatar
David Spriggs
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Schulzenfest
Jul 26 2016, 02:17 PM
If we were to go down that path, I'm assuming each side's draft picks would be considered as part of the 'value of the list'?
It would make sense, as both players and picks are both assets that contribute to a clubs' overall value.
Stoney
 
"Winter is coming for you Wacky.

Remember that."
- 18/8/2017
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
boof
Member Avatar
John Meesen
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Essendon clearly the most valuable list on the site IMO. ;)
Unfinished business.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Schulzenfest
Member Avatar
Beau Dowler
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
boof
Jul 26 2016, 03:28 PM
Essendon clearly the most valuable list on the site IMO. ;)
Oh good, then Stife won't mind swapping me the entire Port list for the entire Essendon list.

Post it up Stife, I'll confirm
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Eskimo Brother
Member Avatar
#changethebanner
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Posted Image

Let's say I make the GF this year, but my list is full of older player's like Hodge, Burgoyne, Pavlich, Enright and Gibson to name a few.
Given their low value, I'd imagine I'd end up in the lower half of the competition for value.
Does everyone think it's fair I get the equalisation of a bottom team?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
boof
Member Avatar
John Meesen
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
I think you'd be more deserving than some lower teams who've been doing pretty well out of equalisation drafts for a few years now. That's not just Port by the way. Freo, North, teams like that have been given a significant amount of assistance to be where they are.
I reckon a system that rewards a team for going all out and then regenerating is a better system than one that rewards coaches for sitting on lists.
Edited by boof, Jul 26 2016, 05:12 PM.
Unfinished business.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Schulzenfest
Member Avatar
Beau Dowler
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
boof
Jul 26 2016, 05:06 PM
I think you'd be more deserving than some lower teams who've been doing pretty well out of equalisation drafts for a few years now. That's not just Port by the way. Freo, North, teams like that have been given a significant amount of assistance to be where they are.
I reckon a system that rewards a team for going all out and then regenerating is a better system than one that rewards coaches for sitting on lists.
I can't really argue with this. I just wish we'd thought of it last year.

I suppose if we're going by the opinions of each coach on the site, it's up to each individual to decide how they rate a team like the Swans or Cats with a lot of older scorers versus a team like the Bombers or Lions with lower scores this year but a lot of kids with potential.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Stife
Member Avatar
John Meesen
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Yeah look I knew I was opening a can of worms but Boof's idea is too severely weighted towards those deemed via a subjective process. I'd support the idea of a collective anonymous evaluation of value, but like stoney - would prefer it still work on a 1-18 and repeat format. Think that makes more sense given the subjectiveness of the process. Like looking at the proposal there's a heavy difference between reward of the 6th and 7th side on that ladder - which is a steep price to pay between what could be a 1% difference in 'assessment' between the two
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Lummas
Member Avatar
Beau Dowler
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Total points scored last year imo is best. Reverse order and repeat.
Dockers are loading.......
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Eskimo Brother
Member Avatar
#changethebanner
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
At the very least, you're all getting a very good idea of the pain the admin team went through in determining the draft order for the ESS top up draft.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Schulzenfest
Member Avatar
Beau Dowler
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Lummas
Jul 26 2016, 06:28 PM
Total points scored last year imo is best. Reverse order and repeat.
Why would you reverse the order? Each team isn't supposed to benefit equally from this draft, it's supposed to be about equalisation. The worst teams should continue to get the better picks throughout the draft. You'd only reverse the order if we were scrapping all of the lists and starting again, and therefore we would be looking for a fair result.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Colby
Member Avatar
Tom Jonas Appreciation Society
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Eskimo Brother
Jul 26 2016, 06:33 PM
At the very least, you're all getting a very good idea of the pain the admin team went through in determining the draft order for the ESS top up draft.
Different situation, this time you're actually considering alternative ideas lol.
Quote:
 
Stife
Just got out of a long, long relationship. Single living ftw. Freelance sex object ;)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Pinny
Member Avatar
John Meesen
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Or we have 18 teams and don't have to worry about it all?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Schulzenfest
Member Avatar
Beau Dowler
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Colby
Jul 26 2016, 08:02 PM
Eskimo Brother
Jul 26 2016, 06:33 PM
At the very least, you're all getting a very good idea of the pain the admin team went through in determining the draft order for the ESS top up draft.
Different situation, this time you're actually considering alternative ideas lol.
Lol, there's about 8 pages of discussion on alternative ideas in the Essendon players thread. Just because they (correctly IMO) didn't go with your idea, doesn't mean it wasn't considered.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Colby
Member Avatar
Tom Jonas Appreciation Society
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Schulzenfest
Jul 26 2016, 08:41 PM
Colby
Jul 26 2016, 08:02 PM
Eskimo Brother
Jul 26 2016, 06:33 PM
At the very least, you're all getting a very good idea of the pain the admin team went through in determining the draft order for the ESS top up draft.
Different situation, this time you're actually considering alternative ideas lol.
Lol, there's about 8 pages of discussion on alternative ideas in the Essendon players thread. Just because they (correctly IMO) didn't go with your idea, doesn't mean it wasn't considered.
I was pushing Lummas' proposal for the most part of that thread to be fair, but you're wrong anyway. There was a shared notion amongst the site that we should only stick to an objective method, the handcuff rule and subsequently retarded draft order decision were made purely out of a lack of any other objective option. We should've been subjective then and we should be subjective now.
Quote:
 
Stife
Just got out of a long, long relationship. Single living ftw. Freelance sex object ;)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
boof
Member Avatar
John Meesen
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Bump
Unfinished business.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
WAG
Member Avatar
The Texan
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
Controversial bump before the Grand Final. :P
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Schulzenfest
Member Avatar
Beau Dowler
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Sack the loser of the Grand Final IMO, add some stakes to it
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Official Press Releases · Next Topic »
Add Reply