Remove this Banner Ad

Desired SuperCoach Improvements

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: Supercoach Scoring Gripes: Solution?

The Swert said:
Anybody notice Aaron Edwards scoring 61 points from 4 possessions?
Click to expand...

Also had 7 tackles.

Probably scored so highly because he helped contribute to 22% of North Melbourne's goals for the afternoon, with a goal and a goal assist. I didn't watch the game, but he had 20DT by quarter time (when the game was still somewhat of a contest) so he would have recieved some extra points for that.

But yeah, still very weird to see someone score decently from 4 touches, when I had to suffer watching Nick Malceski not crack 45 points from 18 possessions.
 
Re: Logical Suggestion

Wharf said:
May have been a bit rash with this thread. Just pissed off that i'm dropping wins in a big $$$ league. Oh well, plenty of the season left. At the end of the day, current format works well.
Click to expand...

Its just bad luck mate, current format is fine.

I know how you feel though, overall im rankd 2078 and in my mates league i'm 1st for points scored but also 1st for points against, im sitting 12th at 3-5

The bloke sitting 1st on the ladder had had 1700 fewer points scored against him than i have. ahh to have had his draw.....
 
Re: Logical Suggestion

Boiled Geezer said:
Yeah, while they're at it the AFL should scrap points and rank teams by total for/against.

Logic fail.
Click to expand...


In the real world a team's score will vary depending upon who they play. In SC it won't, your score will be the same regardless of who you play on the ladder.

While I'm not complaining about it, I think the OP is right, there is huge amount of luck to SC. In one of my leagues, the team on the top of the ladder had a lesser overall score than everyone else in the 8!
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Re: Logical Suggestion

Wharf said:
Ok, this is has happened to me twice this season and i'm playing in a supercoach league with big stakes.
This week i scored 2345 and i'm happy with that but i "versed" a guy who scored 2383. I came second overall in the league this week and get a loss... this has happened to me twice this year and it is frustrating as ****. Supercoach is all luck :thumbsdown:
Why isn't it just a points tally and the people with the top 8 most points go into the final. Makes sense .
Click to expand...

You must hate me then :eek:

In my league I'm on top at 8-0 but im only the 4th- 5th highest scorer overall :eek: I've already beaten 3 of guys that have the overall higher score than me too. :thumbsu:

I got 2381 this week and that's with a zero on the ground. Maybe you just aren't very good :thumbsu:
 
Better way for Supercoach to handle 3 "Bye Weeks"

I think the way that Supercoach (& Dreamteam) have handled the bye rounds this year is not ideal, and in future years I believe I have a better way for it to be handled.

Hear me out.

There are 23 Rounds this year
20 "Regular" Rounds
3 "Bye" Rounds

For each league you have

17 Home & Away
4 Finals

So, instead of everyone being shot up by 6 teams having a bye for 3 weeks, the comps should roll all 3 Bye Rounds into 1 SUPER ROUND. (Where (in theory) each of your players plays twice).

Therefore you have team matchups starting in Round 1 (instead of Round 3).

This year would be

Rounds 1-10 (10 Rounds)
Rounds 11-13 (1 "Super" Round)
Rounds 14-19 (6 Rounds)
17 Rounds of Home & Away matches

Rounds 20-23 (Finals)

I think it works perfectly and frankly I thought this would be how it was done before it came out that instead we have 3 weeks of instability.

I like the concept of the Super-Round - perhaps they could put up $5,000 for the highest score for that 3 weeks.

Really make it into something.

What do people think???
 
Re: Better way for Supercoach to handle 3 "Bye Weeks"

Good idea! Or alternatively they could just start the comp from week 1 and then just have the buys off...
 
have a side comp where a league of 18 where each player gets dealt the same random 30 players
give them 4-5 trades the first week and then standard trades
Then they have to trade to win and gain value. the skill is then purely in the trding
 
This one might be just semantics, but I'd like to see score assists instead of goal assists. I shouldn't have to rely on your goal kicking to improve my stats.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

a good idea if there are 2 byes next year or even 1 would be to be able to have say 300k or so to spend on 3 extra players during the bye rounds because its shit having so many 0's this year

hope thats not "to easy" of course :rolleyes:
 
For anyone asking how the system works, here is a good summary. http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/...s/roachies_five_secrets_to_supercoach_success
And to be honest whilst it isn't transparent, i will say i feel that watching the games, the scores they give to the players are accurate. Everyone was complaining about pendlebury getting 95 for a half before he was injured, but to watch him for that half, he played amazingly. He was super efficient in his disposals, made contested possessions and kicked goals. Each to their own, but i believe the DT system has flaws as well. A simple posession should not constitute a score, its what you do with the ball that counts.
 
Lukeaye said:
For anyone asking how the system works, here is a good summary. http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/...s/roachies_five_secrets_to_supercoach_success
And to be honest whilst it isn't transparent, i will say i feel that watching the games, the scores they give to the players are accurate. Everyone was complaining about pendlebury getting 95 for a half before he was injured, but to watch him for that half, he played amazingly. He was super efficient in his disposals, made contested possessions and kicked goals. Each to their own, but i believe the DT system has flaws as well. A simple posession should not constitute a score, its what you do with the ball that counts.
Click to expand...
I’ve always been pretty happy with SC scoring. The only time I’ve ever genuinely thought it was wrong was Pav's 99 against Richmond. Under no scoring method did Pav deserve 99. His impact was huge, his stats were huge. It threw me completely.
 
MightyMark said:
I’ve always been pretty happy with SC scoring. The only time I’ve ever genuinely thought it was wrong was Pav's 99 against Richmond. Under no scoring method did Pav deserve 99. His impact was huge, his stats were huge. It threw me completely.
Click to expand...

I would ask that AFL coaches consult with BF members before making decisions that impact on my mental and physical well-being
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

toxic said:
I would ask that AFL coaches consult with BF members before making decisions that impact on my mental and physical well-being
Click to expand...
That would be awesome. I'm sure I could convince Mcartney to let Hargraves play. :thumbsu:
 
have the players price also fluctuate on the number of teams owning him.

that way its a bit like shares, you get a better price if you get in early, buy or sell

Might also have supercoach futures and derivatives
 
Pessimistic said:
have the players price also fluctuate on the number of teams owning him.

that way its a bit like shares, you get a better price if you get in early, buy or sell

Might also have supercoach futures and derivatives
Click to expand...
That’s starting to get complicated, but it would bring a new dimension to the game. Doubt anything like that would ever happen though; maybe it could be something they bring into Supercoach Pro.
 
Get rid of the ruck position altogether. There's just not enough players to select from. Rucks instead can be selectable as a midfielder.
So then you could have a team makeup of 7 back/7 mid/7 forward.
3 bench players for each.
It would allow for a lot more flexibility.
 
DragonLass said:
Get rid of the ruck position altogether. There's just not enough players to select from. Rucks instead can be selectable as a midfielder.
So then you could have a team makeup of 7 back/7 mid/7 forward.
3 bench players for each.
It would allow for a lot more flexibility.
Click to expand...

Lol not a single ruck would be picked. To many injuries to ruck man, and to expensive for potential scoring. They would never do this. And its a part of the game
 
Lukeaye said:
Lol not a single ruck would be picked. To many injuries to ruck man, and to expensive for potential scoring. They would never do this. And its a part of the game
Click to expand...
They could reduce it to a single ruck instead of 2. Most clubs are only playing one true ruckman these days anyways, thanks to the sub rule.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top