AFL Team Manager Rules - OLD

[sausageroll]

Re: AFL Team Manager Rules (updated October 07)

Agree with this. The 3 day rule needs to stay in effect, and I like that we can only make two opposition bids at a time (requires strategy, I'm finding). However, loopy brought up a good point yesterday about some of the exorbitant bidding that has happened on players such as Goddard, Corey and Power. So:

Firstly, I think everyone agrees so far that all trades that have been made thus far stay in place. I am yet to see an objection to this.

I would suggest that if we are going to overhaul the bids (I don't mind if we don't, I'm easy either way), each team can put together a list of ten 'required players'. These required players are bid on first by the team that owns them, ensuring that they have first say on contract length, prices, etc. Once the first bid on one of these players is made, the 72 hour rule takes effect. All other players who aren't part of this required ten are bid on as we were before. This means that players need to decide which of their players are more important and will need to bid accordingly, but opposition players will still be able to get players cheap if the opposition aren't paying attention.

Thoughts?

Edit: By first bid I mean first opposition bid, in regards to the 72 hour rule.

Agree with this.

Maybe 6 players at first but can add more if people start bidding on the original 6 on a 1 for 1 basis.

Maybe a 7 day rule for players offered re-signing contracts. If no-one has bidded on them in that time they are re-signed. That gives plenty of time for any other clubs to show their interest.

Any player that has been bidded on goes to the 72 hour rule.

 

[peterss]

Re: AFL Team Manager Rules (updated October 07)

So whats happening then?

 

[Virgil]

Re: AFL Team Manager Rules (updated October 07)

While we are exploring new ideas, I wouldn't mind seeing the criteria for matching or beating a bid changed. The PSD part is fine, as is the money, obviously. But length of a contract I reckon could change.

If someone bids $130,000 for a 5 year deal, not even a $1,000,000 offer on a 4 year deal would beat it. This doesn't reflect reality.

I propose:

* A 5 year offer can be bettered by a 4 year offer, if the cash offer is minimum 10% higher and the PSD pick is at least matched.
* A 5 year offer can be bettered by a 3 year offer, if the cash offer is minimum 20% higher and the PSD pick is at least matched.

Same rule applies for a 4 year offer which is countered by a 3 or 2 year offer.

Same rule applies for a 3 year offer which is countered by a 2 year offer.

Same rule applies for a 2 year offer which is countered by a 1 year offer.

Thats just a rough outline but you get the point.

Can't honestly say I like that idea. It's a whole lot more to implement with minimal benefit. If you were to add something like that though, the numbers would have to increase dramatically (say 25% for one less year, 50% more for two less years).

 

[Russian]

Re: AFL Team Manager Rules (updated October 07)

I don't think you can wait until the end to have a player confirmed as yours - stuffs up salary cap estimates of what you can and can't afford which effects the whole process.

Edit: By first bid I mean first opposition bid, in regards to the 72 hour rule.

I'll deal with this bit first. The 72 hour rule on opposition bids is in no danger. That will stay. The discussion is about how long we wait for an opponent to respond to the first bid before we assume nobody is interested. That can't be 72 hours as that would put us in the same hole that produced the 'new rule' in the first place. My suggestion is 30 days, which would still leave you 6ish weeks to sort things out after that.

I would suggest that if we are going to overhaul the bids (I don't mind if we don't, I'm easy either way), each team can put together a list of ten 'required players'. These required players are bid on first by the team that owns them, ensuring that they have first say on contract length, prices, etc. Once the first bid on one of these players is made, the 72 hour rule takes effect. All other players who aren't part of this required ten are bid on as we were before. This means that players need to decide which of their players are more important and will need to bid accordingly, but opposition players will still be able to get players cheap if the opposition aren't paying attention.

That's the system we're talking about using but I don't see why we need the limit of 10. The current owner is only setting a starting point, either it's too low and somebody outbids, or it's high enough to put anyone else off, then the current owner has to pay that price.

so what are we doing.

are we restarting all the bids, if so thats pretty stiff for me because i have 4 uncontracted players about to be resigned at 4:30

they are pretty good players aswell;

cross
gia
aker
kosi

You won't get them at 4:30. There will still be 4.5 hours on the clock if and when we resume. Now that you've pointed that out you're no chance of getting them anyway

* A 5 year offer can be bettered by a 4 year offer, if the cash offer is minimum 10% higher and the PSD pick is at least matched.
* A 5 year offer can be bettered by a 3 year offer, if the cash offer is minimum 20% higher and the PSD pick is at least matched.

I don't know if a 4 year 275k deal would beat a 5 year 250k deal

I think if we're going to change this we also have to look at the other way and ask if a 1 year 700k deal would beat a 5 year 400k deal

How about we use overall contract value and say...
If you take a year off, the overall contract value must remain the same i.e. 5 years 300k is matched by 4 years 375k, 3 years 500k, 2 years 750k, 1 year 1.5mill
If you add a year on, the overall contract value must increase by half a year of the old salary. i.e. 1 year 1mill is matched by 2 years 750k, 3 years 625k, 4 years 547k, 5 years 493k

 

[loopy_cam]

Re: 2008/09 Bidding/Trading/Father-Son

Where was that idea on Tuesday?

Not in that exact form but would've been a better solution than the extra bid limit.

You can't rush genius.

While we are exploring new ideas, I wouldn't mind seeing the criteria for matching or beating a bid changed. The PSD part is fine, as is the money, obviously. But length of a contract I reckon could change.

If someone bids $130,000 for a 5 year deal, not even a $1,000,000 offer on a 4 year deal would beat it. This doesn't reflect reality.

I propose:

* A 5 year offer can be bettered by a 4 year offer, if the cash offer is minimum 10% higher and the PSD pick is at least matched.
* A 5 year offer can be bettered by a 3 year offer, if the cash offer is minimum 20% higher and the PSD pick is at least matched.

Same rule applies for a 4 year offer which is countered by a 3 or 2 year offer.

Same rule applies for a 3 year offer which is countered by a 2 year offer.

Same rule applies for a 2 year offer which is countered by a 1 year offer.

Thats just a rough outline but you get the point.

I don't like this idea because it means you can still play $700,000 for a one year deal. This is exactly what I wanted to stop with my rule. I'd say that most players would take a four/five year deal over a one year deal every day of the week.

 

[BW]

Re: 2008/09 Bidding/Trading/Father-Son

I don't like this idea because it means you can still play $700,000 for a one year deal. This is exactly what I wanted to stop with my rule. I'd say that most players would take a four/five year deal over a one year deal every day of the week.

Only in realistic circumstances. A 4 or 5 year deal couldn't be matched by a 1 year deal. Under my proposal you would have to bid at least 3 years if the first offer is for 5 years, at least 2 years if the original offer was for 3 or 4 years (for 4 years it could even be 3), and at least 1 year if the original offer was 2 years. This takes into account that the longer the contract, the more wanted and secure a player would feel, but also takes into account that a player would jump at more money if the contract length was in the ball park of the original deal.

That said Russians one sounds pretty good. Players would jump at stupid money for a 1 year deal over a 5 year deal, especially seeing the types who will recieve these bids know they have an assured long term future. Those 10/20% figures I just pulled out of nowhere, would obviously have to be more.

 

[loopy_cam]

Re: 2008/09 Bidding/Trading/Father-Son

Only in realistic circumstances. A 4 or 5 year deal couldn't be matched by a 1 year deal. Under my proposal you would have to bid at least 3 years if the first offer is for 5 years, at least 2 years if the original offer was for 3 or 4 years (for 4 years it could even be 3), and at least 1 year if the original offer was 2 years. This takes into account that the longer the contract, the more wanted and secure a player would feel, but also takes into account that a player would jump at more money if the contract length was in the ball park of the original deal.

That said Russians one sounds pretty good. Players would jump at stupid money for a 1 year deal over a 5 year deal, especially seeing the types who will recieve these bids know they have an assured long term future. Those 10/20% figures I just pulled out of nowhere, would obviously have to be more.

Ahh I see. I didn't realise that there was only a certain amount of years that you could go back. I assumed you meant that if I offered a five year deal, you could offer a one year deal with a massive pricetag.

Not a bad idea then.

 

[Virgil]

Re: AFL Team Manager Rules (updated October 07)

I don't know if a 4 year 275k deal would beat a 5 year 250k deal

I think if we're going to change this we also have to look at the other way and ask if a 1 year 700k deal would beat a 5 year 400k deal

How about we use overall contract value and say...
If you take a year off, the overall contract value must remain the same i.e. 5 years 300k is matched by 4 years 375k, 3 years 500k, 2 years 750k, 1 year 1.5mill
If you add a year on, the overall contract value must increase by half a year of the old salary. i.e. 1 year 1mill is matched by 2 years 750k, 3 years 625k, 4 years 547k, 5 years 493k

This is all just way too complex, I don't see why we couldn't leave that part of the bidding the way it was. Contracts either have to be bettered on years, salary or a PSD pick. It's simple and it works.

 

[Elite Pete]

Re: AFL Team Manager Rules (updated October 07)

I say keep bids on contracts the same. Rival clubs have to better years or money.

Trades stay if confirmed

 

[andrew_embley]

Re: AFL Team Manager Rules (updated October 07)

This is all just way too complex, I don't see why we couldn't leave that part of the bidding the way it was. Contracts either have to be bettered on years, salary or a PSD pick. It's simple and it works.

I say keep bids on contracts the same. Rival clubs have to better years or money.

Trades stay if confirmed

Exactly. Its far too complex, and with running the simultaneous 2 bid rule, the last thing we need is someone stuffing up their maths and posting a bid that creates uncertainty.

Trades to stay confirmed also.

 

[Elite Pete]

Re: AFL Team Manager Rules (updated October 07)

just a question why are trades not done after the free-agent signing it would make this easier and more realistic i think

 

[peterss]

Re: 2008/09 Bidding/Trading/Father-Son

I think rather then waiting 30 days after a team trys to re-sign a player we make it "7 days" - We are all on regularly enough to show interest in a player within a week period. 30 days is to long.

7 days after opening bid by the players current side - If noone has bidded on them then he re-signs.

If a player gets bidded on after the initital re-signing bid then its back to the 72 hour rule or whatever it is.

 

[loopy_cam]

Re: 2008/09 Bidding/Trading/Father-Son

7 days is too short for mine.

In that time teams could be bidding on 4 other players for 6 of the 7 days.

 

[peterss]

Re: 2008/09 Bidding/Trading/Father-Son

Im just trying to think if ways so that its easier for us all to work out our salary caps without leaving it to late and realising we are over by alot etc.

 

[sausageroll]

Re: 2008/09 Bidding/Trading/Father-Son

I think rather then waiting 30 days after a team trys to re-sign a player we make it "7 days" - We are all on regularly enough to show interest in a player within a week period. 30 days is to long.

7 days after opening bid by the players current side - If noone has bidded on them then he re-signs.

If a player gets bidded on after the initital re-signing bid then its back to the 72 hour rule or whatever it is.

I agree with this

 

[Elite Pete]

Re: AFL Team Manager Rules (updated October 07)

Heres my suggestion

If you wish to resign your players you put in a offer at the start. That being a $ amount and years of the contract. Any players you dont put offers on are now free-agents.

The bidding stays the same. Rivals bids have to better and equal the 3 options (PSD Pick,$,Yrs). 72 hr rule stays so if no-one out bids after that period you have now signed that player. After 30 days any of your players you offered a contract that hasn't been out bid on is now your player.

The bidding stops at the 30 day dead-line in which the players original club gets 3 days to choose to match or let go.
*If the Original club opts to match the highest bid on the players. That players then stays at his club
*If the club chooses to not match, That player then goes to a silent auction that only involves the top 3 teams that bid on that player. They then pm Russian they're bid which must top the the last bid. Whoever bids the highest at this stages takes the player

This gives the players original team the last option on that player which i think is fair.

What do ya think?

 

[Marklar_33]

Re: AFL Team Manager Rules (updated October 07)

In regards to the idea of all teams placing their opening contract offers and if they last 30 days, they keep their player... what about selecting 2-4 players each 7 days that if not bidded on, will be yours after 7 days, then once you are under your player limit, you select another player to put up, until the bid period is over and you will resign all other remaining players at that point

Poeple saying that they should have their players signed after 7 days are missing the big picture! That would make the bidding period END after 7 days, and with bidding restrictions of 2 every 3 days, theres only the possibility of 96 players being bid on at all!

 

[Marklar_33]

Re: AFL Team Manager Rules (updated October 07)

And I am totally for resetting the bidding, but keeping the trades

And also for BW's years to %age theory, if done right

 

[loopy_cam]

Re: 2008/09 Bidding/Trading/Father-Son

Im just trying to think if ways so that its easier for us all to work out our salary caps without leaving it to late and realising we are over by alot etc.

If the deadline is 30 days, there is still 6 weeks to realise how much you're over.

 

[Virgil]

Re: AFL Team Manager Rules (updated October 07)

In regards to the idea of all teams placing their opening contract offers and if they last 30 days, they keep their player... what about selecting 2-4 players each 7 days that if not bidded on, will be yours after 7 days, then once you are under your player limit, you select another player to put up, until the bid period is over and you will resign all other remaining players at that point

The problem with that is that it actually forces bids on EVERY player, which will become incredibly tedious once you get down to the players nobody wants.

Poeple saying that they should have their players signed after 7 days are missing the big picture! That would make the bidding period END after 7 days, and with bidding restrictions of 2 every 3 days, theres only the possibility of 96 players being bid on at all!

No it wouldn't. Firstly, the majority of bids don't last three hours, let alone three days. In the space of a week I'm sure some of us could rack up 10 or so bids. Secondly, that seven day restriction would only apply to a small percentage of the players. Thereafter, it goes back to the free-for-all that we had before.

I think this is the simplest solution: Every player starts the bid on 5 of their own players. These bids must last 14 days to be successful. Players other than the original 5 go by the normal 72 hour rule, as do any of the original 5 that get bid on by opposition players. You can never start more than 5 bids on your own players at any time (preventing you from starting bids on your other players while everyone else is bettering your original bids), but you can always match rival bids.

To better a bid you must better one of the following criteria, and match the other two:

• Contract length
• Price per year
• PSD pick (where applicable)

 

[Marklar_33]

Re: AFL Team Manager Rules (updated October 07)

The problem with that is that it actually forces bids on EVERY player, which will become incredibly tedious once you get down to the players nobody wants.


No it wouldn't. Firstly, the majority of bids don't last three hours, let alone three days. In the space of a week I'm sure some of us could rack up 10 or so bids. Secondly, that seven day restriction would only apply to a small percentage of the players. Thereafter, it goes back to the free-for-all that we had before.

I think this is the simplest solution: Every player starts the bid on 5 of their own players. These bids must last 14 days to be successful. Players other than the original 5 go by the normal 72 hour rule, as do any of the original 5 that get bid on by opposition players. You can never start more than 5 bids on your own players at any time (preventing you from starting bids on your other players while everyone else is bettering your original bids), but you can always match rival bids.

To better a bid you must better one of the following criteria, and match the other two:

• Contract length
• Price per year
• PSD pick (where applicable)

The new rule with you not being able to start a new bid while a player you started a bid on is still active will prevent people having 10 bids in a week. If this rule is in, and a players bidding is active for a full week, then even less players will be able to be bid on

Anyways, I think we are arguing a similar side, with what you said towards the bottom of the quote being along the jist of my post haha

 

[BW]

Re: AFL Team Manager Rules (updated October 07)

Sounds like its becoming more complicated than it has to be.

Each player can bid up to 5 (Russian can pick the exact number) of there own players. People can counter bid on however many players they want. Free for all. No bid on them in 3 days, you get the player. Someone bids on them, the 3 days restarts. Whenever the 3 days ends on a player and that player has a team, a team can bid on another of there own players, as long as they don't bid on any more than 5 at any one time. Whenever the bidding dries up completely, the bidding period ends. A 2nd bidding period can then start with the 2 starter bid rule in place with the 3 day rule for any other players anyone wants. Bidding goes until it ends.

As for the length of contract discussion, I like either my suggestion or Russians. Happy for Russian to implement one or not worry about it at all.

 

[Marklar_33]

Re: AFL Team Manager Rules (updated October 07)

I think there needs to be something implemented to stop a spate of 700k/1 year deals too. Hopefully something will come about there

 

[Virgil]

Re: AFL Team Manager Rules (updated October 07)

I think there needs to be something implemented to stop a spate of 700k/1 year deals too. Hopefully something will come about there

It wouldn't make a difference. A 2 year 700k deal is actually cheaper than a 1 year 700k deal, because next year the salary cap will rise and 700k will become a smaller percentage of the total cap than it is this year. I have no problem with those bids, if you can match them then by all means do so. If you aren't willing to match it then bid 650k on someone else .

 

[peterss]

Re: AFL Team Manager Rules (updated October 07)

I think there needs to be something implemented to stop a spate of 700k/1 year deals too. Hopefully something will come about there

If you cant match him coz of your salary then you dont deserve the player