Ultimate Footy - Norm Smith League

[JACKATTACK 17]

More thought than you care to think about has been put into the league RR. And a lot of effort on my part to administer the league. Not only that but the keeper concept was brought up last year, then several times this year per and post draft. At the time i tested the water with everyone and the idea was generally well received.

If you're doing poorly this year, and you couldn't be in as dire a situation as JLH, then like JLH trade yourself into a good keeper position for next year. Smart trading and the said priority picks will put you in a strong position.

This is the second or third time someone has threatened to leave and that's a bit sad. If you don't like how I'm running the comp then leave(I'd rather you didn't). Threatening to leave will just brings it down for everyone else.

I really rate the keeper concept, for lots of reasons already discussed, let's focus on those positives.

[Range Rover 1,935]

More thought than you care to think about has been put into the league RR. And a lot of effort on my part to administer the league. Not only that but the keeper concept was brought up last year, then several times this year per and post draft. At the time i tested the water with everyone and the idea was generally well received.

If you're doing poorly this year, and you couldn't be in as dire a situation as JLH, then like JLH trade yourself into a good keeper position for next year. Smart trading and the said priority picks will put you in a strong position.

This is the second or third time someone has threatened to leave and that's a bit sad. If you don't like how I'm running the comp then leave(I'd rather you didn't). Threatening to leave will just brings it down for everyone else.

I really rate the keeper concept, for lots of reasons already discussed, let's focus on those positives.

Not questioning your effort JA. Very appreciative of it in fact.

But fair is fair and the 'keeper's concept is not in my view.

If this is your hardline stance then fine I'm out.

[JACKATTACK 17]

I don't think your team is as bad as you think.

Leuenberger, Goddard, Griffin & shulz are absolute keepers and give you good balance across all positions.

Your next tier of players packaged with one of the above would upgrade that players to a very good player.

On top of that, there will be some quality players available in the priority picks and first round. You'll likely have 2 picks before the top half of the ladder have 1.

Take up the challenge RR, don't leave just because it isn't going your way.

[Range Rover 1,935]

I don't think your team is as bad as you think.

Leuenberger, Goddard, Griffin & shulz are absolute keepers and give you good balance across all positions.

Your next tier of players packaged with one of the above would upgrade that players to a very good player.

On top of that, there will be some quality players available in the priority picks and first round. You'll likely have 2 picks before the top half of the ladder have 1.

Take up the challenge RR, don't leave just because it isn't going your way.

Absolute keepers? Leuenberger's achilles is shot. Goddard's numbers are on the decline and Schulz? Surely you're kidding. Even Griffen isn't ranked top 50 in the comp.

What you're suggesting (for bottom sides) is by the halfway mark of the year they should basically throw in the towel to try and get a couple of decent players in for next year. Where's the fun in that? And even if you do, no-one at the top is going to give up their premo silverware.

And priority picks after the best 72 players have already been locked away? Can't see that working either.

'Keepers' is a flawed concept in the interests of a fair competition. It's as simple as that really.

[Old Man Rivers 326]

C'mon Wooders - Hang Tough

Just like The Demons, thing's are never as bad as they can seem.

Your a self confessed Fantasy Football tragic, you love this Comp.

JA has always been an open book, listens to everyones input, & always runs with majority rules.

I am sure like many of us experiance on the work front it is impossible to get 100% buy in on every idea or change.

All that said there is always a review system & if thing's are generally not working, I'm sure we can tweek again

You have been a valuable part of this UF Footy Comp from day one, wouldn't be the same without you man.

As JA said, Take up the challenge, don't leave.

[jayceebee31 671]

Absolute keepers? Leuenberger's achilles is shot. Goddard's numbers are on the decline and Schulz? Surely you're kidding. Even Griffen isn't ranked top 50 in the comp.

What you're suggesting (for bottom sides) is by the halfway mark of the year they should basically throw in the towel to try and get a couple of decent players in for next year. Where's the fun in that? And even if you do, no-one at the top is going to give up their premo silverware.

And priority picks after the best 72 players have already been locked away? Can't see that working either.

'Keepers' is a flawed concept in the interests of a fair competition. It's as simple as that really.

I tend to agree, unless convinced otherwise do the same as this year.

[Range Rover 1,935]

C'mon Wooders - Hang Tough

Just like The Demons, thing's are never as bad as they can seem.

Your a self confessed Fantasy Football tragic, you love this Comp.

JA has always been an open book, listens to everyones input, & always runs with majority rules.

I am sure like many of us experiance on the work front it is impossible to get 100% buy in on every idea or change.

All that said there is always a review system & if thing's are generally not working, I'm sure we can tweek again

You have been a valuable part of this UF Footy Comp from day one, wouldn't be the same without you man.

As JA said, Take up the challenge, don't leave.

Got no issue taking up the challenge OMR ... this year. Love to 'hang tough' and try and get back up the ladder.

Only the system in place (keeper players) doesn't encourage me to as I'm forced, as of the halfway mark of the season, to chuck it in and try and trade up for next year in the vain hope I might be able to land a big fish.

Is this in the spirit of a fun and fair competition? That certain lucky players get Swan, Ablett and Buddy for life? Or that the season's premiers and finalists enter season 2013 with 3 or 4 bona-fide UF stars on their list?

It's illogical and it's unfair. Not for all, clearly. But for some - like me - it is ... and that's a shame because I was enjoying it.

[JACKATTACK 17]

If there wasn't keepers would you be interested in playing out the season anyway?

If we didn't have a keeper league I doubt I would even log in again, and the same could be said for most who have dropped out of contention. Meaning as the season moves on the only people trading are those who think they're a chance. It creates interest.

At least now you can, like me, participate in the game of it. And you can potentially get some value from your players if they have a good back end to the season.

In my view the keeper league is not unfair at all, we all started from the same spot. It's just a slightly longer term view of the same game.

If you're still not convinced, ask yourself this: if you had a good keeper position would you still be claiming if is unfair and threatening to leave? If you can honestly say yes then I'm okay with that. I'm sure we can find another who would jump at the chance to take over your list for next year.

[robbo24 66]

In the view of fairness, could we do a handicapped keeper system that might seem fairer to those down the ladder?

For example.

Position 14-18 (Can choose up to 4 keepers. At least two must already be on their list at seasons end plus the option to pick up 2 players off the waivers if wanted. If multiple players select the same player off the waivers then the lower placed side receives the player)

Position 9-13 (Can choose up to 4 keepers. At least three must already be on their list at seasons end plus the option to pick up 1 player off the waivers if wanted. If multiple players select the same player off the waivers then the lower placed side receives the player)

Position 5-8 after finals (Can choose up to 3 keepers. All three must already be on their list at seasons end)

Position 1-4 after finals (Can choose up to 2 keepers. Both must already be on their list at seasons end)

Draft to take place in the same fashion with player selecting their picks etc.

Personally, I'm for the original system but I do see where Range Rover is coming from. Also having Ablett on my team made me feel a little guilty about the whole keeper concept. But I figure, if I can't make finals with Ablett then I'm probably not going to have 3 other keepers on my list!

Range Rover I hope you do stay, its great to build up a rivalry with the same players each year.

JackAttack, loving the work you do. If people do happen to drop off, please don't abandon this sensational ship that you have created!

[jayceebee31 671]

What is a keeper's league, does it mean we keep our existing players?

Please advise? Don't we even get some picks. JA ,please advise what is proposed.

Many thanks.

JCB

[rpfc 27,611]

I think robbo is on to something - I am a midle of the road team but the building blocks of Danger Mouse, Selwood, Bartel, and Grimes are pretty good...

If you finish in the top 8 you keep 3, if you make the GF you keep 2.

Or give those that missed the finals a PP?

Or force the final 8 teams to trade away a keeper to a bottom 8 team as per the GWS U/17 draft.

[Mad_Melbourne 872]

All I want to know is whether the keeper league means there will be trading done over the summer period, it somewhat ruins the thinking of the situation, and drafting all up! But it seems fun, having said that I'm happy because I have Watson, Kennedy, Franklin, Deledio, broughton, crameri, swallow, all arguably keeper players, but none are injured so why would. Want to trade them off?

For the keeper system it is basically designed for players like Marc Murphy, who this season may not be much good but next year will be good!

It does mean though that players down the lower end of the table will have a bit of a struggle to find keepers because why would coaches let go of their better players who will win them matches?

[Arrow 1,257]

I'm getting flogged every week this year, not the slightest bit happy with my team I selected yet I'm still very much sticking around. I think the keepers concept is a good one.

My only qualm with it, is that with 4 players off each team arguably removes the 72 best players off the comp right off the bat. The draft is than alot of mid range players and the excitement of the draft goes. My thoughts and I stress this is just a theory is that you select 2 'keepers' who are ranked below 100, and than 2 who are ranked > than 100. That way we keep some good players in the draft so that lower teams can move up the ladder etc etc but often teams have connections with higher ranked players (150-200) due to DPP or adding to a facet of scoring they need yet ranking doesn't match it. I don't think this would be too unfair on anyone as no-one has really traded in 4 guns yet... but would be interested in hearing people's thoughts and happy to be thrown down for a ridiculous idea!!

[robbo24 66]

All I want to know is whether the keeper league means there will be trading done over the summer period, it somewhat ruins the thinking of the situation, and drafting all up! But it seems fun, having said that I'm happy because I have Watson, Kennedy, Franklin, Deledio, broughton, crameri, swallow, all arguably keeper players, but none are injured so why would. Want to trade them off?

For the keeper system it is basically designed for players like Marc Murphy, who this season may not be much good but next year will be good!

It does mean though that players down the lower end of the table will have a bit of a struggle to find keepers because why would coaches let go of their better players who will win them matches?

Just looking at your current side. I am all for you delisting 3 players to give others a chance! You are very well placed!

[DeeVoted 582]

1st thing off the bat:

JA You have done a great job thus far firstly to setup the league and explain to the masses how to play etc etc.

You have given a lot of your time to improve UF, listened and taken on board suggestions.

Now that I have 'buttered' you up.. here is my final pitch on this matter.

I have a foot in both camps now, I fully understand where RR is coming from, Perhaps 4 keepers in reflection does seem too many. I had the same reservations as RR,with the keeper system, I didnt know 4 keepers was set in stone, and WONT be changed. I thought everything was up for discussion and could be changed if need be.

That is 72 players off the table,come draft time, makes for a very hollow draft. I thought the draft was biggest thing that sets UF apart from DT SC.

But if whats left is only rookies, has-beens, LTI players with no hope of snagging an A-Grader,by the time most have had their pick in the draft,there isnt a lot left,so why bother. But If some topline players are in the draft, it does lend some hope,and luck to make the draft interesting.

2 Keepers should be enough, puts more pressure on the coach to narrow down his list and keep their best two players.

If you like.... look at it as your Capt and VC in your team that stay, Also adds more debate during the year,adds 'fun' remember when this was fun???

ie I was going to keep player X,now coach Y has him, damn I should have had him as a keeper,he was ,but chnaged my mind decided to let him go over player Z.

The other advantage with just the 2 keepers, the draft has more quality and therefore should even up the league for some hope of trading quality players. If you aint got the cattle, the only hope to snag a buddy or a gabblett,is they have a LTI.otherwise like RR pointed out, the same teams remain strong,the also runs give up mid season. The lower teams totally throw in the towel.

I am surprised you stated if it wasnt for a 'keepers' concept,you wouldnt bother logging in at all this yr. Well.. HELLO .. I spent all of last year on the bottom.no keepers, no chance of getting a decent trade, being hit from all angles, from other coaches, to exchange their bit players for the only handful of decent players I had that were keeping me going. Did I give up? no way. I fought it out to the last min of the last game of the season.

The outlook now, seems to be, fark this, my team is crap, up goes the white flag,gee i could have offloaded any of my decent players to any of the top teams last year, It wasnt if I needed any of them, the top four could have got stronger, if I choose to do a deal with them,and increasing someones chances of winning the GF by doing so. If I prefered coach x to win over coach y, what stopped me?? morals,and the fact if I go down I'm going down fighting. Well certain events in this league,this year,has changed my outlook, when a certain few, well before the middle of the seaon decide to just roll over. If thats the std, well i dont wont to be involved either. I play for the whole year, NOT until it all starts to look too bleak.

Why is 4 keepers set in stone? whats wrong with starting off next year with two? and see how that plays out, certaintly adds more value to the draft and gives more scope to grab a A grader you have never had the pleasure of being in your team.

Thats all I have to say, I dont see any point debating my point any further,You call the shots, I hope you make the right deciscion.

OH, seeing most everyone has given up, that hasnt got any chance, I dont have much chance eitther, so I am putting the following on the table.

Simpson Dal Santo Cross Bolton Didak OKeefe and the leagues No1 ruck Cox, he isnt much good to me as I cant and have no hope of getting a decent backup for him when he gets double teamed, If you not currently not in the top 3 on the league table, dont bother with offers.

They are on top for a reason,I need 4 decent keepers, not NQRs wont be considered.

When in Rome......

Edited June 5, 2012 by Deevoted

[Dappa Dan 2,188]

Again, no-one has really adequately explained why the need for 'keeper' players accept for this strange idea about having "longevity with players".

Actually I did. There's a number of reasons why, all stated earlier. In short, it heightens interest over the off season, offers continuity from year to year, and also adds spice to trading as the season gets longer as peoples' trading needs change. We've seen already it has caused trades to occur where a player would just be delisted... players like Murphy and Kennedy would have zero value without it. That seems pretty simple to me.

I can't get my head around this. Who cares??

Most of us. In your position, without many players that can compare with the Abletts and Selwoods, I can understand your position, but you're also not looking at it from others'. All you have to do is decide to go for those top liners, and trade away your middle tier and suddenly you have something to get excited about.

but why should I then be penalized by not having a crack at the cream of the crop at the draft for next year? Seems absurd.

I see that point for sure, which is why the idea of trading for those top liners NOW comes into it.

I think this merits further discussion because if 'fairness measures' (ie. equalization) are not implemented players will lose interest.

This is the point I think you've glossed over. Every season the players ALREADY DO lose interest, in a non-keeper league. It sucks that players like JLH, in a year like he's having, won't even log in after about round 12, which makes all the games his opposition plays against him essentially byes. There's nothing more frustrating than coming into a week hoping for a contest, and seeing 4 big red x marks on your opposition... you like it for the easy win, but it's boring.

Indeed the opposite is occurring here - the year's best coaches are being handed a leg up for 2013.

And all you need to do to get that leg off them is trade aggressively. Ablett, Pendles and Murphy all went in trades... had you gone aggressively you could have had 1 or 2 of those. I have gotten a couple of offers that would be tantamount to me tanking... I'm 6th on the ladder, and I was tempted to go for them and end up with 4 superstar keepers for next season.

It's well and good to say "well it's too late now because that's what was decided" but the fact is the 'keepers' idea was not thought through properly and is causing problems.

As JA said, it was. It was discussed at length, the proposal was made and agreed upon. What's more, all the predictions of the effects of the change that were "thought through" have come true. It seems only really a couple of guys are annoyed at the concept, which doesn't make it wrong. I'm not in a great position for keepers myself... And I love it.

I like this game but will be re-considering my involvement if something is not done about this.

That'd be a shame.

Absolute keepers? Leuenberger's achilles is shot. Goddard's numbers are on the decline and Schulz? Surely you're kidding. Even Griffen isn't ranked top 50 in the comp.

I'd kill for Leuie and Goddard. Trade?

What you're suggesting (for bottom sides) is by the halfway mark of the year they should basically throw in the towel to try and get a couple of decent players in for next year. Where's the fun in that?

Where? It's awesome! It's more fun than watching your mediocre list get knocked back for win-win trades, and slowly limping to 14th on the ladder. I don't know where you're getting this "fight your way back/play out the season" thing from. It just doesn't happen. You get to a point where you know you can't go with the top 4, and interest wanes.

And even if you do, no-one at the top is going to give up their premo silverware.

I just got an offer on Ablett that I'll be taking... assuming it doesn't get vetoed. Murphy and Pendlebury just got shifted in trades... That's three of the big 6.

'Keepers' is a flawed concept in the interests of a fair competition. It's as simple as that really.

Nope. Disagree completely. And it's anything but simple. I'd say the competition is flawed to begin with, you only have to look at vetoes to see that. And the keeper concept makes it more interesting. What's more plenty of people have agreed.

My thoughts and I stress this is just a theory is that you select 2 'keepers' who are ranked below 100, and than 2 who are ranked > than 100.

I tell you what. That's not half bad...

[JACKATTACK 17]

Did I give up? no way. I fought it out to the last min of the last game of the season.

Fantasy footy needs more like you Deevoted. And I do always log in and try and keep my team up to date, but there are plenty who don't.

Love all the ideas, there is a lot of them and it has given me a lot to think about it. I had no idea there was so much passion out there, I guess that's a good thing.

I should clarify my position on rule changes. I'm not dead against it, my problem is that some people have been working to a strategy expecting certain set of rules and to change that would put them out in some way. But if there is significant enough support for a change then I won't stand in the way.

Keep the comments coming, more input from coaches the better. PM me if you would prefer it be private. There have been a few ideas I'll list them here for a snapshot of the discussions. If you like or don't like a certain idea then make yourself known.

• Have no keepers
  
• Reduce to 2 keepers
  
• Have 2 top level keepers and 2 >100 ranked players as keepers
  
• Have a staged keeper structure where you keep more keepers if your team is not as good.
  
• Have a waiver type system where remaining keepers can be selected and lower ranked teams get their picks ahead of higher ranked teams. (explained better above)
  
• Off season trading ( I need to think about this one, as it has a few techincal things I might need to consider ie. draft pick trading?)
  

Just so we're clear I won't guarantee I will make changes, 3-4 vocal demonlanders might seem like a lot of support, but there are 18 coahces and I have to consider everyone's point of view.

We're on to a good thing here, this can be a truly great long term thing if everyone buys into it. I know there will be attrition over the years, but I expect to be participating in this comp for years to come with pretty much the same group of demonlanders.

Edited June 5, 2012 by JACKATTACK

[Range Rover 1,935]

If there wasn't keepers would you be interested in playing out the season anyway?

If we didn't have a keeper league I doubt I would even log in again, and the same could be said for most who have dropped out of contention. Meaning as the season moves on the only people trading are those who think they're a chance. It creates interest.

At least now you can, like me, participate in the game of it. And you can potentially get some value from your players if they have a good back end to the season.

In my view the keeper league is not unfair at all, we all started from the same spot. It's just a slightly longer term view of the same game.

If you're still not convinced, ask yourself this: if you had a good keeper position would you still be claiming if is unfair and threatening to leave? If you can honestly say yes then I'm okay with that. I'm sure we can find another who would jump at the chance to take over your list for next year.

JA your question is moot because I I don't find myself in a good keeper position. I'm one of the unlucky ones who finds themselves in a weak one. If I was in a strong position (like Mad_Melbourne or one of the other strong sides), it would no doubt be some other coach complaining.

The point is ... why have a system where there are haves and have-nots at all? Why have a competition where the draft for 2012 serves as the draft for all time?

Can you answer those questions with any degree of rationality?

Look, I agree with Deevoted above .... if you're amenable to cutting it to two 'keepers' per team I'll stay. This will allow coaches to keep their Buddies and their Abletts yet still provide some interest at the draft with a pool of players that one can get excited about picking.

Robbo and Rpfc have come with interesting ideas but it just gets too complicated venturing into that territory.

So ... 2 keepers I think is a fair compromise but let us know as quickly as possible so we can put this matter to bed.

Cheers,

RR

[Range Rover 1,935]

@ Dappa

Thanks for all your replies but where I fundamentally disagree is with this system which encourages struggling sides to hoist the white flag by mid-season and starting playing a game of trades for next season.

There's no fun in it.

But let's see what JA decides.

As I've said above, 2 keeper players should keep coaches happy and with a system of reverse finishing order for the draft (or a priority pick) we should be able to create a system that gives everyone a fair crack at the '013 flag.

[DeeVoted 582]

We are in discussion,so thats a good thing to find a soloution,might not to 100% to everyones liking,but its better than bottling it up all up,and spitting the dummy.

The way I understood it, just after the draft /start of this year was this. (see very early post this yr,its in there somewhere)

4 keepers and the bottom 2-4 teams (still to be confirmed) got 2 x 1st round picks, missed the 2nd round in the draft to offset them having 1 extra player. This seemed to be fair to all at the time.

In reflection, 4 keepers to be cut to 2. BTW all year I have been aiming at 4 keepers, but now I see the hole its going to make come draft time.

Dappa said it himself, that having last pick in the draft he wouldnt wish on anyone,That was with a full selection of players.

The draft MUST contain a good quality of players,or the concept is going to be flawed

Take 72 players out, theres not a lot to get excited about

The D7 concept is a good one, worth discussing. Personally keep it simple for now and see how it plays out.

I have listed all my A-Graders up for trading, But I need to know how many keepers etc in going to be in place for 2013,or I could be shooting my own foot here.

I really hate the fact that some throw in the towel,why bother joining if after 6 games,the white flag goes up???

I see this in DT and SC, some moron gets all excited come the start of the season, picks the team,gets in a league, then finds out,they are getting belted,then never to be heard or seen again.

Yes we have some here.

Whatever is finalised, the goal should be to make 99% interested enough to at least play out until at least the finals,

Maybe its just me, I HATE being beaten, but I can take losing but then it just makes me try harder.

[Mad_Melbourne 872]

JA your question is moot because I I don't find myself in a good keeper position. I'm one of the unlucky ones who finds themselves in a weak one. If I was in a strong position (like Mad_Melbourne or one of the other strong sides), it would no doubt be some other coach complaining.

The point is ... why have a system where there are haves and have-nots at all? Why have a competition where the draft for 2012 serves as the draft for all time?

Can you answer those questions with any degree of rationality?

Look, I agree with Deevoted above .... if you're amenable to cutting it to two 'keepers' per team I'll stay. This will allow coaches to keep their Buddies and their Abletts yet still provide some interest at the draft with a pool of players that one can get excited about picking.

Robbo and Rpfc have come with interesting ideas but it just gets too complicated venturing into that territory.

So ... 2 keepers I think is a fair compromise but let us know as quickly as possible so we can put this matter to bed.

Cheers,

RR

I agree, although I am in a strong keeper league position, my favorite part of the competition is draft day, I am always intrigued by what people take and how lists form after the first selection phase, with 4 keepers in each teams it basically makes it harder for teams to climb up the ladder next year aswell because the top teams usually have the top players.

I like the minute to chose players and I like the early confusion of which player to take, and trying to organize a drafting strategy and how players like From my list josh Kennedy at pick 102, crameri at 150.

That is the best fun of ultimate footy, I think aswell a team who does finish In 16th would not mind starting from scratch with draft picks of their choice!

Also though I like how the keeper league does keep people interested in trading, but it still means that people become less and less interested in their own results anyway like jlh and his trade for Murphy and Kennedy, who wont play in his team this year so he lost his best player and best stat getter in return for zero, meaning he doesn't need to check his team anymore if he has locked away his four keepers, which is why I think a relegation idea is good!

Splitting the league Into two leagues of 10 top half of the ladder, bottom half of the ladder, top 2 move up bottom two drop, could work to keep people interested aswell.

Edited June 5, 2012 by Mad_Melbourne

[JACKATTACK 17]

JA your question is moot because I I don't find myself in a good keeper position. I'm one of the unlucky ones who finds themselves in a weak one. If I was in a strong position (like Mad_Melbourne or one of the other strong sides), it would no doubt be some other coach complaining.

The point is not moot, you just have to accept that you drafted poorly and this has affected your list. It's up to you to make a judgement call as to whether you will enjoy next year and beyond, but I genuinely think you are underestimating your opportunity to regain ground. The Priority pick system will beaimed at evening the competition out as best I can. And if I can get my head around introducing a trading system that includes future draft picks then there is any measure of possible trade combinations that if cleverly implemented will benefit you the most.

The point is ... why have a system where there are haves and have-nots at all? Why have a competition where the draft for 2012 serves as the draft for all time?

Draft for all time? It's 4 players not 16. And there are not haves and have nots. Everyone had the same set of rules. Why shouldn't someone be rewarded for drafting themselves into a good long term position?

If you really think about it even in the non-keeper system, the second the draft is completed there are haves and have nots. Some people just have a better draft, and some have not so good. The only difference being that it is longer term.

...if you're amenable to cutting it to two 'keepers' per team I'll stay.

Your threat of leaving will not factor in my decision to change or not change the rules. Maybe it was just a poor choice of words, but I think this is a pretty weak statement.

Robbo and Rpfc have come with interesting ideas but it just gets too complicated venturing into that territory.

I tend to agree, not impossible though.

[JACKATTACK 17]

which is why I think a relegation idea is good!

Splitting the league Into two leagues of 10 top half of the ladder, bottom half of the ladder, top 2 move up bottom two drop, could work to keep people interested aswell.

I'm prepared to make all sorts of changes to the rules, but I will never be involved in a relegation system.

[Range Rover 1,935]

The point is not moot, you just have to accept that you drafted poorly and this has affected your list. It's up to you to make a judgement call as to whether you will enjoy next year and beyond, but I genuinely think you are underestimating your opportunity to regain ground. The Priority pick system will beaimed at evening the competition out as best I can. And if I can get my head around introducing a trading system that includes future draft picks then there is any measure of possible trade combinations that if cleverly implemented will benefit you the most.

Why should anyone's poor drafting for season 2012 affect their 2013 season (and 2014 and so on) ...? This is what a 'keeper' league does. It makes no sense to me.

Draft for all time? It's 4 players not 16. And there are not haves and have nots. Everyone had the same set of rules. Why shouldn't someone be rewarded for drafting themselves into a good long term position?

They ARE rewarded .. for season 2012!! But why should they be rewarded for every season thereafter?? Can you answer that question JA? I'm yet to hear a rational answer for it ... from anyone.

If you really think about it even in the non-keeper system, the second the draft is completed there are haves and have nots. Some people just have a better draft, and some have not so good. The only difference being that it is longer term.

I don't understand what you're trying to say here. In a non-keeper (ie. fair) league, players start on a level-playing field each season. Even more so if a reverse finishing order draft system is established.

Your threat of leaving will not factor in my decision to change or not change the rules. Maybe it was just a poor choice of words, but I think this is a pretty weak statement.

It's not a threat. It's just the reality. I won't take part on a competition which is 1) unfair and 2) encourages coaches to chuck in the towel mid-season.

Sorry to be blunt but that's what the keeper concept has done. The reasons for having it (sentimentality over certain players) just doesn't equate with the logic of running a fair comp.

Edited June 5, 2012 by Range Rover

[Arrow 1,257]

RR I just dont understand the enormous dilemma. For next year your best 2 players may not be as incredible as Mad Melbournes but if you take my proposed idea for example I think it gives you absolutely a huge hope. Your two picks under 100 i'd probably use a Back of Goddard (a rare commodity) and Mid of Griffin. Using than the actual rankings to find two players >100 you could than keep Rich and say Leunenberger who has been injury effected but as a ruckman is another handy pick up especially to get an a grader with your > 100 pick.

Mad Melbourne's two top picks would be Deledio and Watson for example granted better than yours but his middle range of say Kyle Horsley, Brad Sewell, Danny Stanley, Courtney Dempsey, IMO don't compare to yours! My list is as depleted as yours mate and it's the fun of trying to will yourself out of it through lucky pickups in the waivers and tactical trades. Embrace it!