Posting and Premiership points

[doggiesin08]

Should there be some sort of link between the two? Not a system to reward post whores (although the league does enjoy them) but rather to filter out the inactive teams from finals football. Over the last couple of seasons the Mods have been a concern and there are worries that if the Roys join the league it could just be a one man show.

A possible idea could simply be that teams are deducted 1 premiership point for any game where they don't have at least 4 different club members post.

Other ideas are welcome, as is the notion that any link is ridiculous. Just wanting to hear people's opinions (will not be a majority decision).

 

[boncer34]

Ridiculous idea. You want teams to be able to retain posting players but at the same time your going to knock points of teams teams that are struggling, meaning the posting players they currently have will jump ship to a club that wouldn't lose points under any system.

It's not lost on me who the most active team is at the moment either.

 

[pacemaker]

NO

 

[doggiesin08]

Ridiculous idea. You want teams to be able to retain posting players but at the same time your going to knock points of teams teams that are struggling, meaning the posting players they currently have will jump ship to a club that wouldn't lose points under any system.

It's not lost on me who the most active team is at the moment either.

Which is why I suggested number as low as 4.

Also in response to you '' sentence, the proposed system clearly hinders ridiculously inactive teams from finals contention, it does not reward ridiculously active teams so don't know how you could suggest a bias on that regard.

 

[boncer34]

You're saying this rule doesn't advantage active teams?

 

[doggiesin08]

You're saying this rule doesn't advantage active teams?

I'm saying it doesn't advantage the most active teams over other active teams and then those over teams with just a handfull of posters.
Also worth noting its only a proposed/suggested rule.

 

[boncer34]

Its worth noting its a pretty crappy suggestion and you went to a lot of trouble to say no there is no advantage.

 

[Zainta]

Its worth noting its a pretty crappy suggestion and you went to a lot of trouble to say no there is no advantage.

There is one advantage...you get pissed off if it goes through.

 

[boncer34]

Lol. Pissed off? Nope.

 

[doggiesin08]

Its worth noting its a pretty crappy suggestion and you went to a lot of trouble to say no there is no advantage.

Hardly a lot of trouble. I just made sure to make it nice and clear for you. I know your ability to twist anything which isn't perfectly straight forward

 

[boncer34]

So if a team misses out on the finals by 1 premiership point because they dont have as many posters as someone else..................... does it still not advantage more active teams?

 

[doggiesin08]

So if a team misses out on the finals by 1 premiership point because they dont have as many posters as someone else..................... does it still not advantage more active teams?

It would advantage the single team who gets to take their place as a result of the team missing out. Tbh, the intended impact would be to make sure all teams are active to atleast an acceptable level and reduce instances like we had this year where half the matches posts came from me simming the game. How is that good for the league.

 

[pacemaker]

At least 4 posters posters??

To tell you the truth the only club to get points taken off will be the mod squad. The next least active club would be Fitzroy ATM and no one is sure how the players will re-act to posting during the season. After that the wonders are probably are next in terms of being inactive. But including myself, Rick, Croweater, kerrby will be back in the season and a list of other names are coming back the point deduction wont affect us either.

 

[Mobbs]

I oppose the concept purely because it is completely out of kilter with the spirit of the sim. The whole concept of the game is to enable results to be determined randomly. This would adulterate that purity, as posting is a feature that can be affected by the real players.

This is purely my own opinion, but I have always held firm that nothing the real people participating, barracking or managing do, should ever affect the outcome of a match or season.

If this moral rule gets chucked, the next logical step would be to re-arrange shot-at-goal accuracy in terms of the real person's activity level.

If you want to go down this road, I suggest working with the 'dreamteam' concept, rather than the fantasy sim one.

There, that's me.

 

[okeydoke7]

At least 4 posters posters??

To tell you the truth the only club to get points taken off will be the mod squad. The next least active club would be Fitzroy ATM and no one is sure how the players will re-act to posting during the season. After that the wonders are probably are next in terms of being inactive. But including myself, Rick, Croweater, kerrby will be back in the season and a list of other names are coming back the point deduction wont affect us either.

All you have done there is back up Doggies' idea. I do not have a clear cut opinion on this suprisingly, but like the logic of the rule. The 4 posting players in a match thread guarantees that the pressure is on. Take your wonders for example, if you are quiet, you will all be under pressure to make sure you have 4 of your players posting. The pressure is what increases activity.

If the mods can't get 4 individual posters, then it will be brought to everyones attention. Is it good for the league to have teams with less than 4 individual posters? Hell no.

I am hesitant to link posting and premiership points, but completely understand the criteria of this rule and its potential benefits. I wont push for it, but definately wouldn't argue it.

 

[pacemaker]

All you have done there is back up Doggies' idea..

Maybe I'm sitting on the fence thus far

 

[pacemaker]

If the mods can't get 4 individual posters, then it will be brought to everyones attention. Is it good for the league to have teams with less than 4 individual posters? Hell no.

I am hesitant to link posting and premiership points, .

And this is the other side of it, the rule will really only disadvantage the Mod squad and puts a question mark of the Roys

 

[FattyLumpkin]

no no no

 

[FattyLumpkin]

no link

 

[FattyLumpkin]

ufywefywe9ry34gh34q

 

[FattyLumpkin]

easy way to get some stats up

 

[FattyLumpkin]

now to get 3 others to quote this drivel & we're set

 

[doggiesin08]

I oppose the concept purely because it is completely out of kilter with the spirit of the sim. The whole concept of the game is to enable results to be determined randomly. This would adulterate that purity, as posting is a feature that can be affected by the real players.

This is purely my own opinion, but I have always held firm that nothing the real people participating, barracking or managing do, should ever affect the outcome of a match or season.

If this moral rule gets chucked, the next logical step would be to re-arrange shot-at-goal accuracy in terms of the real person's activity level.

If you want to go down this road, I suggest working with the 'dreamteam' concept, rather than the fantasy sim one.

There, that's me.

Analysing persuasive language was a bitch to learn for english but you understand it completely

Do you also oppose the rule for deduction of premiership points for not submitting a team on time or for playing an ineligible player?

In all likelihood the (proposed) rule will never go through, just wanted to get opinions.

 

[Mobbs]

The team submission rule is really tricky and I just lean towards backing it. the alternative is to have a rule stipulating if they don't supply one they get no change.

Now, if, just say, unique-poster-dearth penalties were to be applied, players would gravitate towards high-post average teams, more so than currently. The circle would permeate itself.

You would need an activity-cap, whereby all players are rated by their activity, say Zainta is a 90 (out of 100) cause he is very active, and our seldom-seen Caveman is a 5. Your lists would need to be capped at an activity total (eg, and just guessing) of about 1250. So if you got 10 players as active as Zainter, you've got 900 points gone and 350 left to spread over another (what's the min?) say 12 players ... 10 30-pointers and 2 25-pointers.

Umm ... while attempting to disagree with you, I may have enabled another concept. Ha, imagine this in practice, don't penalise teams for low-posting, but instead enforce an activity-cap, ensuring the high-posters get spread over more clubs

 

[Mobbs]

now to get 3 others to quote this drivel & we're set

yeah what he ... ahhrg dammit it needs to be someone else ...