Official Team Thread West Coast Wonders Team Thread S27 - B&F Winner U2tigers

Remove this Banner Ad

Position?
Welcome to the club CazC30. I hope you have as much fun as I have over the past couple of seasons.

Positions are usually announced a few days before the game. There are often a few changes from week to week. The captain puts people in the different positions. They can be a bit dependent on how much people post. If a player hasn’t been seen in the match threads for a while they might get put on the bench for a while. If people are around and active they tend to get put more positions. In my first I started in a forward pocket, moved to the forward flank, and finished the season on the wing. Next year I played half a dozen games on the wing and then moved into the centre. This year I’ll probably move somewhere again as new players push into the midfield.

As Ding said it is still a few weeks till the season kicks off. Some players will be amusing themselves in the media threads. I tend to prefer the banter in the match threads so I’ll just have a rest and wait for the season to fire up.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Are the Wonders going to count match thread posts this season?

I'd love to see something different proposed - potentially even instead of counting match thread posts, we do a grading system where the top contributors that week get an A, the next tier a B and so on. F is those who didn't post that week.

Remove the numerical aspect of quantity and instead, let's shift the trend to a more realistic approach.

We loved it when Dane Swan would accumulate 46 possessions some games but even then, some of those games weren't his best because w know most of them were Tom Mitchell-esque cheap handballs out the back of packs. I'd love to see a better form of grading and representing the Wonders contributors - who's with me?
 
Are the Wonders going to count match thread posts this season?

I'd love to see something different proposed - potentially even instead of counting match thread posts, we do a grading system where the top contributors that week get an A, the next tier a B and so on. F is those who didn't post that week.

Remove the numerical aspect of quantity and instead, let's shift the trend to a more realistic approach.

We loved it when Dane Swan would accumulate 46 possessions some games but even then, some of those games weren't his best because w know most of them were Tom Mitchell-esque cheap handballs out the back of packs. I'd love to see a better form of grading and representing the Wonders contributors - who's with me?
Like the suggestion. Do you want to run with it?
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Like the suggestion. Do you want to run with it?
i think we should lead from the front like we did all those seasons ago when we were one of the first to count posts.

It's pretty easy to do. Top 2-3 posters get a A, next 3-5 get a B, then next 4-6 get a C etc. Sure, record the posts internally but I don't think it's something we should ever want to publically count out loud.
 
You may have to wait a bit as I'm heavily pregnant... But maybe that doesn't stop Queenslanders?
Looking forward to the first ever Wonders Mother-Son/Daughter/Undecided Gender signing.
 
i think we should lead from the front like we did all those seasons ago when we were one of the first to count posts.

It's pretty easy to do. Top 2-3 posters get a A, next 3-5 get a B, then next 4-6 get a C etc. Sure, record the posts internally but I don't think it's something we should ever want to publically count out loud.
If other teams follow this method, income the spammers who'll just post random s**t to just get that A.
 
If other teams follow this method, income the spammers who'll just post random s**t to just get that A.
That's better than counting figuratively the actual number of posts. Everyone's trying to "outdo" each other, especially younger posters trying to show off.

A grading system would maintain the recognition of key contributors without whoring out the quality of match threads by spamming posters trying to reach a certain number of posts.
 
If other teams follow this method, income the spammers who'll just post random s**t to just get that A.
That's better than counting figuratively the actual number of posts. Everyone's trying to "outdo" each other, especially younger posters trying to show off.

A grading system would maintain the recognition of key contributors without whoring out the quality of match threads by spamming posters trying to reach a certain number of posts.
 
Are the Wonders going to count match thread posts this season?

I'd love to see something different proposed - potentially even instead of counting match thread posts, we do a grading system where the top contributors that week get an A, the next tier a B and so on. F is those who didn't post that week.

Remove the numerical aspect of quantity and instead, let's shift the trend to a more realistic approach.

We loved it when Dane Swan would accumulate 46 possessions some games but even then, some of those games weren't his best because w know most of them were Tom Mitchell-esque cheap handballs out the back of packs. I'd love to see a better form of grading and representing the Wonders contributors - who's with me?
But then I will find out what my team mates really think of me. Ouch
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top