Discussion If you were to take over Champion Data, What would you change?

Remove this Banner Ad

Log in to remove this ad.

Pocket Aces

Club Legend
Mar 4, 2009
2,084
1,098
Crown Poker Room
AFL Club
Hawthorn
You have way too much faith in CD my friend if you think they don’t pay some first possessions at stoppages as clangers. I agree there’s a lot of “ineffective” clearances (ie dump kick 30m around the body to a 50/50) but there’s absolutely a fair portion that get paid as clangers.

For me I think the biggest problem with scoring for kicks is that there’s no reward for difficulty - lets take 2 players. One takes a mark in the back pocket from a kick in, the other takes a mark later in the chain on half back.

Player 1 chips the ball back to the original kicker in the goalsquare. They get +2 for the uncontested mark, +4 for an effective kick. Total +6 and the game has gone nowhere.

Player 2 rips a 45m bullet into the corridor which opens up the game and initiates a scoring chain. +2 for uncontested mark, +4 effective kick. Total +6 yet their disposal has had infinitely more impact than the seagull getting his chip in D50.

There needs to be something that takes into account the level of difficulty for a given possession but again I think until we have Opta level insight it’s going to remain a bit frustrating and seagull friendly
Points for score involvements would help address the player 1 vs player 2 issue, but I have notice there is more intricacies that arent advertised with the scoring such as I have noticed backwards effective kicks not scoring much if anything. Still trying to work out if you get a R50/I50 boost as well which would explain the kickouts getting a decent score.

Clangers are generally given when your possession results in an uncontested possession to the opposition gets grey who gets the clanger if a forward falls over for instance but generally goes to the distributor. A handball straight to oppo players who are tackled for a stoppage is deemed ineffective, if your team loses the next clearance then you get a turnover recorded(no SC impact) but no clanger I am led to believe.
 

Loose at HB

Professional Melter
Apr 20, 2018
3,048
11,350
Melbourne
AFL Club
Carlton
Points for score involvements would help address the player 1 vs player 2 issue, but I have notice there is more intricacies that arent advertised with the scoring such as I have noticed backwards effective kicks not scoring much if anything. Still trying to work out if you get a R50/I50 boost as well which would explain the kickouts getting a decent score.
I’m not even sure that fixes it. Score involvements are credited as long as your possession is part of the chain - it doesn’t take into account the level of difficulty of a given possession. If we assume in my scenario that Player 1 and 2 are part of the same unbroken chain of possession then if we give them extra points for a “score involvement” then both benefit and we have the same issue.

Interesting comment though about the ?R50/I50 boost. Supports the common theme in this thread that what we really need is transparency
 

SC fish

Norm Smith Medallist
Apr 5, 2014
8,484
13,165
Adelaide
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
My SuperCoach team
So Buttox how are you suggesting this point be addressed ....without disadvantaging those that have chosen less injury prone players, or saved trades

IMO one of the biggest frustrations is getting a player injured in the first 20 min of play .....an injury trade or ability to use an (E) player in a circumstance where a player is injured early in a game

I haven't thought it through ....so not sure of how the mechanics would work
One way might be using the best of the onfield scores on a given line plus the emergency.

So in DEF you get the best six scores out of your six onfield players plus your emergency. So if an onfielder scores a 30 and your E scores a 50 then the 50 scores and not the 30.

Sort of like best 18 except its on each line
 

jdeezy

Club Legend
Jul 6, 2013
2,867
7,290
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
I haven't played this game as long as you many of you so I don't know what it was like before 30 trades, but reducing the trades back down is interesting to me. I feel like it could almost turn the end teams into a bit more of a G'n'R vs MPM situation, do you prioritise the real top shelf premos with one up one downs but possibly blow all your trades before seasons end or sideways rookies to mid pricers and hold a trade each time? At the very least I feel like teams would be different which is fun.

Wild card seems an interesting idea but seems massive, could something like you get two wildcards but they only work for one area of the field work? So like you have to work out whether you gut your midfield for SPs, or your forwards when they have peaked, etc? Seems it could add strategy without being too broken. I don't know though.

Maybe just set up Twitch style streaming live reactions for some of the best melts each week. That'd get people on board.
 

ImissFrosty

E-Girl Hunter
Mar 4, 2020
10,502
18,830
home
AFL Club
Melbourne
Other Teams
Fighting Furies Atlanta Reign (OWL)
I haven't played this game as long as you many of you so I don't know what it was like before 30 trades, but reducing the trades back down is interesting to me. I feel like it could almost turn the end teams into a bit more of a G'n'R vs MPM situation, do you prioritise the real top shelf premos with one up one downs but possibly blow all your trades before seasons end or sideways rookies to mid pricers and hold a trade each time? At the very least I feel like teams would be different which is fun.

Wild card seems an interesting idea but seems massive, could something like you get two wildcards but they only work for one area of the field work? So like you have to work out whether you gut your midfield for SPs, or your forwards when they have peaked, etc? Seems it could add strategy without being too broken. I don't know though.

Maybe just set up Twitch style streaming live reactions for some of the best melts each week. That'd get people on board.
Supercoach T**ty streamers would be great.
 

ForeverHardcore

Premiership Player
Sep 9, 2016
4,572
10,113
AFL Club
Richmond
I think an obvious one that would make it more appealing throughout the year is rolling dpp changes like they do in fantasy

Pendles m- m/f Darcy r-r/f mills d- d/m ziebell f- f/d hall f-f/d all popular player who gained extra positions through the year due to how they were playing in real life. Imagine having those guys as dpps as options throughout the year? Also rookies like gulden gained m/f dpp Bergman d/f dpp tom Powell m/f dpp

I think it creates more flexibility and appeal throughout the year as well as more options trade wise. Thoughts?
 

Jiska

Moderator
Feb 24, 2013
36,619
54,651
Melbourne
AFL Club
Melbourne
Other Teams
Storm
Hi folks,
We get plenty of anti CD posts each week. We all love a good rant.
If you got the job to write the rules of SC. What would you change?
For me personally its only a couple of things I would do differently.
1. Start of year pricing for rookies to be unchanged if they have played less than 3 games.
2. Introduction of a wild card once a year to cash your whole team in for same current value. This is a fantasy EPL wild card. Can be used any round. This will increase participation late in seasons. Also it adds a level of strategy to the game.
Anyone else have any ideas?
I guess more transparency in scoring is another.
You’re not talking about CD, you’re talking about SC. I don’t mind the scoring system. I think it works well. Removing the kick out (even if playing on) would restore a bit more integrity.

In terms of SC itself:

Agree with point 1, but not point 2

Reduce starting salary cap by at least 25-30%. This will stop everyone getting to full promo and bring mid price players in to the game. Sick of seeing the same vanilla sides in GF week with only 5-6 differences out of 22.

Increase trades to 36. I understand the argument to reduce them instead, but keeping people involved in the game is key. By reducing the salary cap it’s no longer about full premo, it’s about predicting which mid pricers will have a run of good games.

Remove Captains and Vice Captains. Complete guess work and pointless.
 

Jiska

Moderator
Feb 24, 2013
36,619
54,651
Melbourne
AFL Club
Melbourne
Other Teams
Storm
Definitely transparency. Somebody might have an answer already, but I'd like to know why the scaling takes the time it does. Surely the computer program just takes into account when the points were scored by the player and what the scores were throughout the game. What do the people running it actually have to do?
I reckon it would be great to have full transparency. Line by line for SC Plus subscribers on the website.

Geelong T Hawkins effective kick 40m +6
Richmond S Bolton Clanger -4
Richmond D Martin Ball watching -80
 

Kadog

Brownlow Kentallist
Feb 16, 2013
16,091
37,454
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Liverpool Detroit Lions
I’d like to see player positional changes made during course of the year. Players like Ziebell/Hall should’ve had defender eligibility at some point.

Take away the capts loophole. Lock in vc & c prior to first game. In a ‘coaching sense’ If we’re selecting best 22 on field, your vc/c should be fixed. You don’t change your captain mid way through a game because he’s playing poorly. Shouldn’t be different in fantasy. You gotta back in your selection based on form/history and lock it in.

To spice up locked selections your vc scores 1.5x and Captain x2
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Kadog

Brownlow Kentallist
Feb 16, 2013
16,091
37,454
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Liverpool Detroit Lions
I reckon they should make a native fan based set up where all the folks at home (us campaigners) can hit a button on our phones with our chols to generate more points for our selected player.

Like a play at home KOTD enabler type thing :moustache:
You know what’d be funny? A gogglebox type event with all us SC campaigners linked up, drinking and losing our sh*t/gloating with our players.
 

Sherman41

Premiership Player
May 3, 2006
3,606
4,093
Ballarat
AFL Club
Collingwood
You know what’d be funny? A gogglebox type event with all us SC campaigners linked up, drinking and losing our sh*t/gloating with our players.

As long as pants are optional I’m fine with that 😀

1627420271080.gif
 

Andrew Birch

The Night Manager
Dec 3, 2017
16,686
50,017
AFL Club
Melbourne
Other Teams
🇦🇺
I think an obvious one that would make it more appealing throughout the year is rolling dpp changes like they do in fantasy

Pendles m- m/f Darcy r-r/f mills d- d/m ziebell f- f/d hall f-f/d all popular player who gained extra positions through the year due to how they were playing in real life. Imagine having those guys as dpps as options throughout the year? Also rookies like gulden gained m/f dpp Bergman d/f dpp tom Powell m/f dpp

I think it creates more flexibility and appeal throughout the year as well as more options trade wise. Thoughts?

It's the one part where I prefer AF to SC. The Utility position (instead of M11) is also very useful in facilitating player movement across multiple positional lines.
 

keithrichards

Club Legend
Dec 11, 2008
2,682
3,144
Shepparton
AFL Club
Melbourne
Hi folks,
We get plenty of anti CD posts each week. We all love a good rant.
If you got the job to write the rules of SC. What would you change?
For me personally its only a couple of things I would do differently.
1. Start of year pricing for rookies to be unchanged if they have played less than 3 games.
2. Introduction of a wild card once a year to cash your whole team in for same current value. This is a fantasy EPL wild card. Can be used any round. This will increase participation late in seasons. Also it adds a level of strategy to the game.
Anyone else have any ideas?
I guess more transparency in scoring is another.
These are SuperCoach suggestions, nothing to do with Champion Data
 

hoddo

Norm Smith Medallist
Mar 13, 2005
6,483
9,473
Geelong
AFL Club
Melbourne
Other Teams
Chelsea, Oakland Raiders, Celtics
I'm sure there are countless minor changes that could be made to improve the game, but my most preferred ones would be:

Minor changes:
1- No points for disposals resulting from kick-ins after behinds or from OOB on the full / deliberate OOB / insufficient intent to keep the ball from going OOB. The player has done nothing to earn that disposal. However, negative points can be applied if the player butchers the kick with dire results.
2- No value change to rookie players who played less than 5 games in the previous season.
3- More points allocated to actions by forwards, such as pressure acts that help lock the ball in the forward line. This will help end the imbalance for forward line players who score so poorly unless they kick a bag even when they have had a big influence on the game.
4- Instead of having bench players tied to position simply have 8 bench players and allow us to number them 1-8 each week with them coming on in that order regardless of the position of the player they replace. After all, in the real world, if Maxy Gawn goes down in a match he doesn't have to be replaced with another ruckman.

Major changes:
A- Do away with the 3300 points a game restriction and end of match scaling. If two teams play a high quality match with players scoring lots of SC points then they deserve those points far more than two teams playing an error ridden skill-less game where the SC points are low. Some liken the 3300 point restriction to having 4 premiership points per game regardless of quality, but they are two different competitions. I see the 3300 point rule as being about as crazy as having goal scoring for the Coleman changed and scaled up/down to a nominal 20 goals per match total.

B- Make byes a non-issue by allowing any player you have who will be missing due to a bye in the coming week to be traded within salary cap limits. These trades will not count against your yearly trade total BUT they will revert after the round. You can also make the normal 2 trades involving non-bye players in those rounds, but those trades will be permanent and count against your yearly total.

I agree with comments that most of the suggestions here are more about SC coring than actual changes to CD, but I suspect that's what the OP really intended. If you want to restrict it to changes to CD specifically I'd just suggest a rule saying CD staff can't have a SC team.
 
Last edited:

ForeverHardcore

Premiership Player
Sep 9, 2016
4,572
10,113
AFL Club
Richmond
It's the one part where I prefer AF to SC. The Utility position (instead of M11) is also very useful in facilitating player movement across multiple positional lines.
100% mate
I tried using m11 differently this year for that exact reason after putting the utility spot to use in fantasy last season! A Fyfe has been very handy for loops but cash gen is also more important in supercoach imo. So weighing all that up again for next year

Just think fantasy has absolutely nailed that aspect with dpp and supercoach is lagging behind
Be interesting if anyone of note at champion data actually reads any of our ideas
 

1989

Club Legend
Mar 29, 2010
2,654
3,555
Victoria
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Manchester United
I'm sure there are countless minor changes that could be made to improve the game, but my most preferred ones would be:

Minor changes:
1- No points for disposals resulting from kick-ins after behinds or from OOB on the full / deliberate OOB / insufficient intent to keep the ball from going OOB. The player has done nothing to earn that disposal. However, negative points can be applied if the player butchers the kick with dire results.
2- No value change to rookie players who played less than 5 games in the previous season.
3- More points allocated to actions by forwards, such as pressure acts that help lock the ball in the forward line. This will help end the imbalance for forward line players who score so poorly unless they kick a bag even when they have had a big influence on the game.
4- Instead of having bench players tied to position simply have 8 bench players and allow us to number them 1-8 each week with them coming on in that order regardless of the position of the player they replace. After all, in the real world, if Maxy Gawn goes down in a match he doesn't have to be replaced with another ruckman.

Major changes:
A- Do away with the 3300 points a game restriction and end of match scaling. If two teams play a high quality match with players scoring lots of SC points then they deserve those points far more than two teams playing an error ridden skill-less game where the SC points are low. Some liken the 3300 point restriction to having 4 premiership points per game regardless of quality, but they are two different competitions. I see the 3300 point rule as being about as crazy as having goal scoring for the Coleman changed and scaled up/down to a nominal 20 goals per match total.

B- Make byes a non-issue by allowing any player you have who will be missing due to a bye in the coming week to be traded within salary cap limits. These trades will not count against your yearly trade total BUT they will revert after the round. You can also make the normal 2 trades involving non-bye players in those rounds, but those trades will be permanent and count against your yearly total.

I agree with comments that most of the suggestions here are more about SC coring than actual changes to CD, but I suspect that's what the OP really intended. If you want to restrict it to changes to CD specifically I'd just suggest a rule saying CD staff can't have a SC team.
I like this idea, but it would be open to exploitation by selecting extra premiums from certain positions and looping them onto the field.

For example, there is an extra premium midfielder that I want, but my midfield is finished. My forward line is incomplete, but I don't like any of the options. I'll bring in the midfielder that I want, nominate him as my number one emergency, and loop him by playing a donut in the forward line.

I guess we have other loop situations and it would just become part of the game, but you could potentially stack one line by looping.
 

WaynesWorld19

Moderator
Nov 6, 2003
100,841
125,889
Melbourne
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
🇦🇺 🇦🇺 🇦🇺 West Adelaide
I'm sure there are countless minor changes that could be made to improve the game, but my most preferred ones would be:

Minor changes:
1- No points for disposals resulting from kick-ins after behinds or from OOB on the full / deliberate OOB / insufficient intent to keep the ball from going OOB. The player has done nothing to earn that disposal. However, negative points can be applied if the player butchers the kick with dire results.
You've put some thought into this post ....great stuff

Totally agree this point

2- No value change to rookie players who played less than 5 games in the previous season.
If 3 games is the point for price increases ....IMO this should apply to rookies playing the previous year
If under 3 games .....no rookie price change

3- More points allocated to actions by forwards, such as pressure acts that help lock the ball in the forward line. This will help end the imbalance for forward line players who score so poorly unless they kick a bag even when they have had a big influence on the game.
IMO too hard to score pressure acts
What the HS have done to compensate is have more DPP FWD / MIDS than in DEF .....that seems enough

4- Instead of having bench players tied to position simply have 8 bench players and allow us to number them 1-8 each week with them coming on in that order regardless of the position of the player they replace. After all, in the real world, if Maxy Gawn goes down in a match he doesn't have to be replaced with another ruckman.
IMO makes the game too easy .....but like Andrew Birch , the introduction of a utility position in Fantasy has been great & enabled bench manipulation where DPP links don't exist

Maybe have that utility as an injury trade ....to automatically replace any injure player in the fisrt Qtr ....at least it would force the utility to be a "live" player ....whereas in Fantasy AFL ATM that player usually is a dead duck

Major changes:
A- Do away with the 3300 points a game restriction and end of match scaling. If two teams play a high quality match with players scoring lots of SC points then they deserve those points far more than two teams playing an error ridden skill-less game where the SC points are low. Some liken the 3300 point restriction to having 4 premiership points per game regardless of quality, but they are two different competitions. I see the 3300 point rule as being about as crazy as having goal scoring for the Coleman changed and scaled up/down to a nominal 20 goals per match total.
interesting .....what about teams that play a lot of games in the weather protected Marvel Stadium .....would they have an advantage over clubs playing outside in Winter ?

B- Make byes a non-issue by allowing any player you have who will be missing due to a bye in the coming week to be traded within salary cap limits. These trades will not count against your yearly trade total BUT they will revert after the round. You can also make the normal 2 trades involving non-bye players in those rounds, but those trades will be permanent and count against your yearly total.

Maybe have the 3 trades per round as currently the situation .....but the extra trade per round is not deducted from your 30 trades

Again the SC comp is now impacted more by injuries than I believe was intended by the SC rulemakers .....the concussion rule has not been reflected in changes to the trade allowance, and IMO it should

As Jiska says, increase the trades to 36 ....but 6 should be injury trades .....how the software can be altered to deliver this is questionable .....but the system allows for the red/white injury symbol to be appalied now, so it can't be that difficult
 

Jiska

Moderator
Feb 24, 2013
36,619
54,651
Melbourne
AFL Club
Melbourne
Other Teams
Storm
You've put some thought into this post ....great stuff

Totally agree this point


If 3 games is the point for price increases ....IMO this should apply to rookies playing the previous year
If under 3 games .....no rookie price change


IMO too hard to score pressure acts
What the HS have done to compensate is have more DPP FWD / MIDS than in DEF .....that seems enough


IMO makes the game too easy .....but like Andrew Birch , the introduction of a utility position in Fantasy has been great & enabled bench manipulation where DPP links don't exist

Maybe have that utility as an injury trade ....to automatically replace any injure player in the fisrt Qtr ....at least it would force the utility to be a "live" player ....whereas in Fantasy AFL ATM that player usually is a dead duck


interesting .....what about teams that play a lot of games in the weather protected Marvel Stadium .....would they have an advantage over clubs playing outside in Winter ?



Maybe have the 3 trades per round as currently the situation .....but the extra trade per round is not deducted from your 30 trades

Again the SC comp is now impacted more by injuries than I believe was intended by the SC rulemakers .....the concussion rule has not been reflected in changes to the trade allowance, and IMO it should

As Jiska says, increase the trades to 36 ....but 6 should be injury trades .....how the software can be altered to deliver this is questionable .....but the system allows for the red/white injury symbol to be appalied now, so it can't be that difficult
I really like the 6 dedicated injury trades rule
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad