Ultimate Footy - Norm Smith League

[scarlett 247]

He, like me is uncompetitive anyway. And it's not tanking, it's trading short term success for the long term, he becomes less competitive as a result. But it isn't the deliberate losing of games For the sake of losing games as is the case with tanking.

i'm sorry but you are deliberately losing games, i view it the same as rr saying he was going to put all his players on a waiver, that is what happened with murphy, was i tempted to throw something at him? yes did i, no, i thought it was against the morale of the game.

[H_T 3,049]

I'd recommend everyone stick at it, agree with what Scarlett just mentioned. Although its hard to argue when a Scott Thompson or Gary Ablett get 50+ possessions.

I believe we voiced some concerns at the start of the season then recognized that the keeper league should continue.

JA I think you've done a fantastic effort and it doesn't go unnoticed. I think your recent proposal or suggestion of 2-2(>100) is a good olive branch you've extended.

RR, whilst I understand some misgivings you may have, I'd implore you to re-consider your "out stance" and suck it up; continue the contest and extend the rivalries being created by UF.

JCB, you've asked JA numerous times regarding the keeper league. As I've already pointed out to you. It's well documented in this thread.

Basically you pick 4 players you want to take into next year from your side this year. Or if JA's extended olive branch comes to fruition, it may be two players, plus two more players ranked higher than 100.

Now, who wants to trade with me ? because I'll be hitting you all up over the next 3 weeks to encourage movement of players and get my side back into contention for the UFFlag!

[Mad_Melbourne 877]

I like the keeper idea, But I like starting fresh at the end of theyear!

I do hate the fact that people are throwing away their season for a keeper player, Or two keeper players and I think the largest flaw in it will be seen over the next few weeks with players who get their keepers not showing interest in the game anymore! Jlh has no reason to look at his team until draft day, as he has his four keepers! He has no reason to trade, no reason to fix his line up because he has already accepted the fact he no longer has a season. He has officially tanked

[Range Rover 1,935]

JA I think you've done a fantastic effort and it doesn't go unnoticed. I think your recent proposal or suggestion of 2-2(>100) is a good olive branch you've extended.

Okay how about we go with this? It would seem a very fair compromise to me. Players get to keep their Buddies and their Abletts, the best 2 players in their team ... plus two up and comers from outside the top 100.

Either that or just lock it down to two keepers. Straight up.

I'll stay and post a retraction if other players are amenable to this.

It's much fairer and keeps the spirit of 'keeper' comp for you aficionados who like it.

Edited June 5, 2012 by Range Rover

[Old Man Rivers 326]

Okay how about we go with this? It would seem a very fair compromise to me. Players get to keep their Buddies and their Abletts, the best 2 players in their team ... plus two up and comers from outside the top 100.

Either that or just lock it down to two keepers. Straight up.

I'll stay and post a retraction if other players are amenable to this.

It's much fairer and keeps the spirit of 'keeper' comp for you aficionados who like it.

I now like the 2 Keepers plus 2 keeper players 21 or under idea!

That really puts an interesting real twist into draft day.& will leave plenty of Star players up for grabs.

[Old Man Rivers 326]

If the criteria is set & agreed upon by all how is this a problem?

21 & Under is the cut Off.

22 or 23 year Old Guns don't fit the agreed criteria therefore can't be retained unless included as one of your

2 Open Aged Keepers.

Whatever we go forward with we simply all have to agree to avoid any future confusion.

Confident we can all work through this Wooders, stick around.

[Mad_Melbourne 877]

I personally would think the mixture of it all would be the best, 2 players of your choice, one over 100, one under 21, the under 21 could be of any number so if you get lucky anD have a good young player you aren't hindered by him being top 100

Although this seems selfish because on inspection there are only four in the top 100, I think Mitch wallis, Anthony miles, days on hepell and David swallow. And I have swallow.

Edit found heppell

Edited June 5, 2012 by Mad_Melbourne

[Mad_Melbourne 877]

I was going to say ... 'you're not specifically thinking about David Swallow" with that last line are you MM?

It honestly looks like that but I honestly thought players like shuey, sloane, hartlett were under 21 but they just turned 21 so I guess that is why it came across like that, so I'm happy to proceed with the u21 being out of the 100 I just don't have one on my list haha

Correction I have caddy

Edited June 5, 2012 by Mad_Melbourne

[rpfc 28,779]

Ok, wow.

A lot has happened since I have been going around in circles with hardnut...

I think 2 keepers of any age, 1 player outside the top 100 of any age, and an U/21 player who is also outside the top 100 is a fair way to go.

The U/21 outside the top 100 is to stop teams essentially having 3 keepers with the rare team that would apply to.

[DeeVoted 583]

Some interesting discussions

Having slept on this and again gave it some more thought this morning

Here is what I have

1: we want a workable fair and uncomplicated method for keepers

2: it also needs to cut and dried so there isnt any confusion

3: when a new coach comes into UF, he doesnt needs to have a degree in law to understand the rules of keepers

4: the Admin of the league, doesnt have to spent their entire free time working on a workable draft method

So this what I am proposing

The formula that JA came up with ,, even though it come from left field, was a beauty, it worked, he is familar with it

there wasnt any disputes and it added some intrigue to how we selected our picks in the draft. - Keep

The variation for 2013 then would be 2 keepers for every coach,

The onus is to get that right when making your descision, who to keep and who goes back in the draft, just like a real coach,you have to decide who to cut from your list.

The bottom teams get an extra keeper, or 2 priority picks, but forfeit a 2nd round pick.

That looks to be cut and dried, there is plenty left in the draft for everyone,its then up to the coach to get his draft picks correct

It makes JAs job as Admin easlier, there wont be any debate on who is having birthdays etc etc Projection ratings vary, we dont need to worry on that either.

So bacisally the differernce from last yrs draft to 2013 everyone gets to select 2 keepers, the bottom teams. whether it be the last 2 teams or up to the last 6 teams, have an extra keeper or an extra prioity pick at the draft. And JA uses the same formula, or thereabouts as he did to sort out draft picks for the lower teams. He doesnt need to re-invent the wheel.

That just leaves deciding the cut off point for the bottom teams, is it the last 2 teams or the last 6 teams?.

From there its resume as normal.

Edited June 6, 2012 by Deevoted

[DeeVoted 583]

We are very lucky to have someone like JA as our Admin, I am sure he gets kick out of doing what he is doing,or he wouldnt be doing it. In time if we overload him with too much to do, the job will become tedious for him.

He also needs time to enjoy UF as we do.

[Arrow 1,257]

We are very lucky to have someone like JA as our Admin, I am sure he gets kick out of doing what he is doing,or he wouldnt be doing it. In time if we overload him with too much to do, the job will become tedious for him.

He also needs time to enjoy UF as we do.

.

Exactly right! JA I cannot speak volumes enough for how much your effort is appreciated and how everything you've bought to the game has been a positive. Glad to hear you're reconsidering RR it wouldn't be the same without you.

[Range Rover 1,935]

Some interesting discussions

Having slept on this and again gave it some more thought this morning

Here is what I have

1: we want a workable fair and uncomplicated method for keepers

2: it also needs to cut and dried so there isnt any confusion

3: when a new coach comes into UF, he doesnt needs to have a degree in law to understand the rules of keepers

4: the Admin of the league, doesnt have to spent their entire free time working on a workable draft method

So this what I am proposing

The formula that JA came up with ,, even though it come from left field, was a beauty, it worked, he is familar with it

there wasnt any disputes and it added some intrigue to how we selected our picks in the draft. - Keep

The variation for 2013 then would be 2 keepers for every coach,

The onus is to get that right when making your descision, who to keep and who goes back in the draft, just like a real coach,you have to decide who to cut from your list.

The bottom teams get an extra keeper, or 2 priority picks, but forfeit a 2nd round pick.

That looks to be cut and dried, there is plenty left in the draft for everyone,its then up to the coach to get his draft picks correct

It makes JAs job as Admin easlier, there wont be any debate on who is having birthdays etc etc Projection ratings vary, we dont need to worry on that either.

So bacisally the differernce from last yrs draft to 2013 everyone gets to select 2 keepers, the bottom teams. whether it be the last 2 teams or up to the last 6 teams, have an extra keeper or an extra prioity pick at the draft. And JA uses the same formula, or thereabouts as he did to sort out draft picks for the lower teams. He doesnt need to re-invent the wheel.

That just leaves deciding the cut off point for the bottom teams, is it the last 2 teams or the last 6 teams?.

From there its resume as normal.

Good proposal Deevoted. I'd be happy with that.

Simple, effective, retains the spirit of 'keepers' and works to even up the comp.

Edited June 6, 2012 by Range Rover

[JACKATTACK 17]

I feel a poll coming on.

[scarlett 247]

i think the polls will be the best option, but still doesnt solve the problem of people trading out. i think if you trade out, then no extra round pick. penalise it.

[Old Man Rivers 326]

Very Good Point Scarlett - No Priority Pick for Tanking / Trading Out

This point is a MUST.

2 Keepers (No restrictions) - 1 Keeper outside the top 100 - One Player 21 or Under.

This is becoming a revolving door - After continueing the thought process, the above is my current preference

Probably change again by tonight.

Bring On The Poll

[JACKATTACK 17]

i think the polls will be the best option, but still doesnt solve the problem of people trading out. i think if you trade out, then no extra round pick. penalise it.

I don't want to kill off a good idea with the bureaucracy of more onerous trading rules. Let's just be positive about it, get excited about the trading scenarios it introduces and not get bogged down in the heavy detail of it.

Ultimately if you believe a proposed trade is a bit iffy then veto it and if enough people agree with you it will be cancelled. Democracy at work. Personally I won't vote down what I believe to be a mutually beneficial trade, even if that means one team appears to be 'raising the white flag'. But I guess I could understand if you do.

Now tanking for priority picks is a separate issue, hard to police, but i'll engineer a system that won't reward last while balanacing the perceived need to give clubs a leg up if required.

I'll throw up the poll tonight re keeper format.

[DeeVoted 583]

Good proposal Deevoted. I'd be happy with that.

Simple, effective, retains the spirit of 'keepers' and works to even up the comp.

The cheque is in the mail j/k Good to see you stayed, its like you didnt leave at all

I should add, that proposal I put forward, is just the basics of a foundation to build from.

As Scarlett etc pointed out there are other loose -ends that need to be worked through.

But its a solid base I think, and can be modified. In case anyone forgot, The prioirty pick is offest by the team(s) invloved missing out drafting in the 2nd round.

Every year we choose or can choose 2 different keepers if need be.

I can and have thought through a various amount of variations for the concept on keepers as I proposed , but wanted to outline a basic plan to work on to begin with. A working model so to speak.

PS: JA .... Arocca wanted to know if your position was up for grabs, he is currently unemployed, he was just enquiring

nothing more, I had to tell him I doubt he would get voted in , and secondly I had to tastefully tell him he wouldnt be up for it

Edited June 6, 2012 by Deevoted

[JACKATTACK 17]

PS: JA .... Arocca wanted to know if your position was up for grabs, he is currently unemployed, he was just enquiring

nothing more, I had to tell him I doubt he would get voted in , and secondly I had to tastefully tell him he wouldnt be up for it

Eugene couldn't handle the pressure. It's a very serious business.

[JACKATTACK 17]

!!!!ATTENTION!!!!

I have created a poll on the ultimate footy league page. There are 6 options: they are.

4 keepers, as it was at the start of the year.

Demonland 7's solution: 2 keepers + 2 keepers ranked outside the top 100. The ranking would be defined leading into next season's draft.

Jackattack solution: 2 keepers + 2 young keepers, Young keepers probably 22 or younger. But I'm open to tweaking the age.

Deevoted solution: 2 open keepers + the option of 2 more for some clubs based on ladder position. I can't explain it better than Deevoted so just read his post.

2 open keepers only

No keepers

Once I have a better feel of everyone's opinion I'll make a final decision but I retain the right to make the final choice, but in all likelihood that will be the most popular one.

Let's get this sorted and settle the issue now. If you're not sure what we're talking about take the week off and read the last 500 or so posts on the issue, I think if nothing else we have covered all possible issues on the matter.

One thing I will say is that once done it's done for the year, no further changes.

Happy voting.

[scarlett 247]

Just one thing JA, can we have this first poll, then take the two most popular and revote on those two

[Range Rover 1,935]

Just one thing JA, can we have this first poll, then take the two most popular and revote on those two

Agree. This would be best way to do it as you'll narrow it down to the most popular two, then get the most popular of those two. This would be the most democratic way I would've thought?

[JACKATTACK 17]

Okey doke, after the primaries we'll re-assess, clear up the details for the two favored ones and then vote again to finalize it.

[Dappa Dan 2,188]

At the very least I hope my speaking up will have resulted in the Norm Smith League making some changes that will make it fairer for all competitors. Even if I am not in it.

The post doesn't let me quote where you quoted me. And again you're wrong. I have a great keeper position, but I have a horrible one in a different comp I'm in. Even worse than yours. And I still love it. Get your facts straight... It has nothing to do with how well or badly I'm going. And my comments were about you SEEMING to throw a tanty. While I realise your comments are usually well considered, I thought it was worth letting you know that even having the image of sooking is something you should absolutely avoid... And my reason? If every coach who's coming second last gets on and threatens to leave and ruin the comp by delisting his players, and gets what he wants, it sets a bad example... JA has to stand firm here in his democratic principle, and that's all there is too it. If you're losing you get one vote, if you're winning, you get the same. If you want everyone to change their minds, then put your case forward on the threads, try to make them realise your position is different, but don't ruin it for everyone else. Make sense?

Another problem JA is that a 'keeper' from one year can get a season-ending or even a career-ending injury or simply edge towards retirement.

That's the WHOLE POINT. Sam Mitchell and Hayes are gun players, but will you keep them? Won't you? YOu have to roll the dice if you think they have a future. This has been as aspect all year in trades... people are trading older players, and not trading the Shueys and Fyfes...

Yet another anomaly.

No. Yet another case of looking on something negatively that everyone else has embraced positively. It's part of the fun of it! No different from drafting Hayes this year coming off a really bad year of injury... you don't know what you're going to get? What rank pick do you spend on him? Who takes him? etc etc...

So many points have been made here, perfectly reasonably, yet you won't give ground on one of them. It's fun for everyone else... it's not for you... fine... but surely you can at least appreciate that not everyone thinks of keepers like you.

The poll is a good idea... But here's how this sort of thing should go...

I traded for Kreuzer this year in a trade that probably advantaged me more for next year than this, as Kreuzer's not doing much. He's a definite keeper. Now because of your protest (and while some coaches may agree, they're not kicking up a fuss), I'm going to have to let him go this year DESPITE having traded for him safe in the knowledge the keepers were going to be 4 and THAT'S IT. It was agreed upon...

So what do I do? Threaten to leave? No. I don't like it, because I have been operating under one set of rules that were put to the league and agreed upon, regardless of what you might think... But I will go along with whatever decision is made. Under a simple protest. When we start a season with one set of rules, if we get a coach suffering from poor drafting or trading, that has a legitimate gripe, they should be able to run a poll FOR THE FOLLOWING season.

That's how this should have gone all along.

[Dappa Dan 2,188]

Yeah this is [censored].

You can't go changing the rules just cos one coach has had a bad run. And not even the worst run of all the coaches. The league was set up earlier this year in this way. If you missed the news that it's a keeper league, then that's a separate issue, but as it stands one coach has had a bad run, threatened to compromise the league, then somehow we end up with a "vote" to change rules that 17 other coaches have played by.

If anything, the keeper league should be scrapped for this year and everyone get told for next year. And those people that don't read posts on here, and can't get their [censored] together with the rules? Bad luck.

And just in case people think I'm taking sides, I'm in opposition with JA on this.