Ideas for next season

If you have an idea for a change, please put it on here, with a heading saying what aspect of the game it relates to, and then in detail what the idea is.

I think it's working really well despite the usual complaining.

TEAMSHEETS & TACTICS

I'd like to see punishments of some sort for missing deadlines, team sheets etc. Possibly financial?

I'd agree with enforcing deadlines but feel maybe an in match points punishment instead if no reason for the delay. Feel the effort out into tactics at times can be wasted.

Injured players and suspensions should have an actual impact on the match result I think as well as league position. 

Home tactics to be in before away tactics. Home advantage such a big part of the game. Unsure how this could work though without it being overly complicated.

Not sure about the tactics thing Steve. I never look at opposition tactics tbh, you wouldn't know this in real life end of the day.

Tactics are often filled with points rebutting opposition tactics.

IE I might say I was going to kick behind your winger and put big runners in your 10/12 channel and in your tactics you'd say your wingers would stay deep and you'd have both your flankers defending 10/12.

It does happen and can frustrate me at times but I admit I'm not sure how it could be enforced.

I get you, yea that's a bit off.

PM'img tactics would be the only way forward I guess but that starts to get silly.

You could just pm team sheets and tactics in one go I suppose without seeing teams etc

That's an interesting idea but then with teams so tightly balanced the skill of the game is becoming finding and exploiting weaknesses in tactics. 

pm tactics could solve it but that's a lot of work for the person running the thread, especially if they don't have access to a laptop.

It's only a very minor point. Generally I think the game is running well. 

Though I think top 4/6 should only have a certain number of foreigns this summer. 5 for example.

Think one of the biggest factors is EQ players

Looking at CJs side, his EQ players are probably what is holding him back the most. There aren't many out there to sign, and no one is going to trade him any! Not sure what the solution is, but difficult to bridge the gap

EQ has always been a bit lopsided Bam, it's hard to fix.

Only solution I can think of is more EQ the higher up the table you finished.

EQ could be fixed:

* Stop the teams who finish high up in the league getting EQ academy players from the teams who finish say in bottom 4
* Don't put a limit on number of domestics you can sign, so encourage more EQ players to come into the game, espc from Championship
* If players are 'hoarding' EQ players and not playing them, then maybe look at a way of getting them out on loan instead so others can use them e.g. if I haven't used an EQ player in 'x' number of games then he should be available to others.
* Don't count EQ players playing abroad as foreign
* Could look at putting a minimum number of EQ players in an academy setup, to stop overloading with foreign players and ensuring that people get the chance to find a good EQ player.

There are loads of good EQ out there, just about making sure people in the game sign them. Look at Steve's team as a good example, he's gone out and got guys like Kruis, Nowell and not released people like Clifford so has a good EQ base and no reason others couldn't do the same.

Steven_Sharks wrote:It's only a very minor point. Generally I think the game is running well. 

Though I think top 4/6 should only have a certain number of foreigns this summer. 5 for example.

Could we just open up the transfer window earlier for teams closer to the bottom, so they can go in and make 'x' number of signings - maybe not even let them bid, just go out and get 2-3 players on a draft so they don't have to go into bidding wars, or lose out on top signings as top teams usually have the most cash as well. Really allow them to strengthen their teams and get everything that much closer.

(might be a bit sad but I enjoy the transfer window, trying to find players that could make it as internationals etc so like being able to spend the money on as many players as I can find)

I've been against the multiple signings since it was brought in. It hinders the lower teams having the chance to sign somebody who's broke through as they can picked up as a promising youngster and stuck in someone's academy.

I'd much prefer 2/3 signings in the summer.

How about the bottom 4 get a pick of one of the top 4's players

I think a limit to foreigns is needed for clubs higher up. I know it's a good part of the game but I know I have and others have just used a scatter gun approach and 1 in 3 will turn out good.

prop_lyd wrote:I'd agree with enforcing deadlines but feel maybe an in match points punishment instead if no reason for the delay. Feel the effort out into tactics at times can be wasted.

Last one! Agree with Prop on match points being deducted for missing deadlines and imagine it makes it difficult for those who are doing the match threads to post everything on time as well. Maybe extend tactics deadline until Friday noon, as seems like a lot of people will put tactics in on a Friday morning.

But at the same time, it isn't always possible to get everything in on time due to work/other commitments. Maybe a bit more discretion with citings/international call ups, e.g. if a manager you are playing against says it is ok to swap a player if there is a call up then let them, or if there are issues with no team submissions/tactics but they come in later it should be up to the other manager to say ok to that - by and large it is in best interests of the game to make sure there are 23 players, plus full tactics.

I can't see the issue with posting a team & tactics by Thursday, you have all week!

If you think you may miss something, put everything up on Monday or Tuesday. It's not that hard really.

As I do team sheets now and again, Friday 1200 does not work for me. I update the page around 9am on Friday and generally don't get back on to update.

I agree with that point Steve.

Not everyone sticks to it though Pooly.

I've got a quiet day today, but then will be working stupid hours until Friday morning, so not always the easiest to get everything done, see citings etc so you miss things and be good to get a little flexibility there, especially as predos go on until Sunday, sometimes Mondays.

Why not stick your team and tactics in now?

If a player is banned, you can change up till Thursday night.

I think we should move away from PM'd scores.

Also agree with until Monday for Predos and Friday for tactics. I am mentally busy Monday to
Thursday yet have loads of time Friday morning:

Any ideas on how ridiculous outliers on predos can be dealt with?

I've lost a couple this year where one predo has been by 5 or 6 points more than any of the others, and has had next to no write up to back it up. I understand that people don't always have time to write out full predictions, but to then give massive margins just distorts the final result massively

anonmattyt wrote:I think we should move away from PM'd scores.

Also agree with until Monday for Predos and Friday for tactics. I am mentally busy Monday to
Thursday yet have loads of time Friday morning:

The problem with this is by the time predo'd are calculated it can be late Monday or even Tuesday. The new sheet is then fully out by late Tuesday or even Wednesday.

It's pretty easy to bang a team sheet in but takes at least an hour to do a predo sheet and can take 1 or 2 hours to do scores and wrap up.

The timings have always been the same as it gives you the weekend to do predictions. I can't see why they should change because one or two individuals struggle with the 10mins to put a team in.

If we changed to those days I wouldn't be able to do game threads anymore.

BamBam wrote:Any ideas on how ridiculous outliers on predos can be dealt with?

I've lost a couple this year where one predo has been by 5 or 6 points more than any of the others, and has had next to no write up to back it up. I understand that people don't always have time to write out full predictions, but to then give massive margins just distorts the final result massively

My idea to stop this last year was to remove the 2 most extreme outliers.

They used to to this in a few sports That are decided by judges:

anonmattyt wrote:

BamBam wrote:Any ideas on how ridiculous outliers on predos can be dealt with?

I've lost a couple this year where one predo has been by 5 or 6 points more than any of the others, and has had next to no write up to back it up. I understand that people don't always have time to write out full predictions, but to then give massive margins just distorts the final result massively

My idea to stop this last year was to remove the 2 most extreme outliers.

They used to to this in a few sports That are decided by judges:

Sorry to counter again but you see things doing threads.

Some weeks certain games only get 5/6 predictions. This would go down to 3/4 after this theory which isn't a good spread at all.

But if you fined people for not Predos may get full deck!

The other issue is that as scores can only be by one point then a full predo by 3 point margin is worth more than 2 score wins. Not sure what the answer is. It's a conundrum

There's always people missing. If you have 2 on holiday for example that's 6 predications for certain games straight away, then the 2 off just becomes a bit daft.

I honestly haven't seen many discrepancies with predictions, they're working well on the whole. The pm thing seems to have given some people freedom to give wider margin scores which is more realistic than constant 1 or 2 point wins I guess.

I'm not sure what you mean by the other point??

Are you saying 24-21 is worth more than 21-22 & 21-22?

A Suggestion for Predictions;

Predictions with a 'decent' explanation in before Sunday 12pm £3m
Predictions with a 'Brief' explenation in before Sunday 11pm £1.5m
Scores on doors before Monday 12pm £1m

Scores on doors results out be Monday Night then detail in predictions out via Tuesday/Wednesday.

How about sliding scale of academy/national league/releases

Currently 5 a piece.

How about 10 for bottom 4 teams 7 for middle 4 teams and 5 top 4 teams

We've got to do something about these large points differences with no explanation.

Maybe put a minimum requirement of wording for a score over a certain amount? A 9 point away win with a sentence of explanation isn't right and not really fair to anyone in the game.

Could each side have a choice of one or two things they can do really well which are attached to them all season. 

They would be coaching based and not player/personnel based. (so you couldn't suddenly have a brilliant scrum despite having a average scrum or your goal kicker wouldn't suddenly nail everything)

For example some coach-able characteristics could be

Really strong attacking/defensive rolling maul - (Sides have to counter this tactically)

Excellent Blitz defence/Drift defence - (sides have to tactically plan and state how to undo this)

Excellent discipline - (Sides need to have a plan to score tries or have a plan to build phases to be successful)

Really strong first phase attack moves - (so the opposition would need to tactically say how they would negate this)

Not having the Blitz defence attribute wouldn't mean your side can't Blitz but it would simply mean that the side who had chosen that attribute would excel at that and would be 'known for it' as Wasps used to be. Their would be a skill element to ensuring you chose and attribute that suited your side and you had the players to adapt it (ie you might not choose the drift defence if your centres lacked pace)

They're some ideas but I feel the game needs to be developed further as it is coming down to nothing else but 1 - 15 on the teamsheet with 16-23 having a slight influence if 1-15 can't be seperated.

Maybe add restrictions to players such a 4 uncapped players or under 23 players could help smaller sides

That sounds like a good idea Steve - see what you mean about the 1-15 as well as don't see much said about the impact from the benches.

Could see that rule helping out a lot with uncapped players too - one issue could be that the bigger clubs can still buy the most number of academy players as quite a few have full internationals in their academy, I think I have 4-5 at the moment. Wonder if capping the number of foreign players in an academy would help as that way people have to get more EQ in their academies and could increase chance of getting a good youngster as opposed to people waiting to see who is named in u20 side.

Maybe it would help if we took it in turns to take the scores in as well so it doesnt always just go to one or two people and make it easier to run overall?

Haven't read everything but will give my thoughts on it all soon. Have to say that is a great idea though Steve and would be something I'd love to see flushed out a bit as would put real emphasis on tactics again on a weekly basis

Steve I can see your thinking and it does seem a good idea.

My question would be how you would decide what attributes fit which teams? And then how would those be affected by transfers and team selection

For example, if my team attribute was "strong first phase attack" and I lined up with Andy Goode and Mike Phillips at halfback ..

Bam if you had Phillips and Goode at halfback you wouldn't need that "strong first phase attack" attribute as we'd all know that you'd have the greatest attacking combination of all time right there.

I think it would be up to you to look at your full squad Bam and pick the attributes that suit the full 40 odd players. The attribute to me is a main emphasis point for your tactics through the season so obviously your game plan would take a hit that week! 

Agree with Steve the game is more and more about starting 15s. Most tactics read as the complete game plan i.e. we will kick but we will run as well, we will blitz but we will drift as well etc. Something like this would bring a bit of variety back into tactics

Maybe that could be an offseason thing like it happens then but I think things like blitz defence etc should come in with consistency in tactics?

Teamsheets and Tactics

- There is a punishment for missing team sheet deadlines. Your opponent gets 3 extra points. If both are late neither get anything to prevent people from potentially colluding for tbps. Has had an impact on a few results this season.

- Is bringing in a cut off for tactics an option? E.g. if not in by 12pm Fri then not accepted

- Pming tactics is a straight out no for me. Setting up threads etc is already enough work and shouldn't be added to

- Deadlines can be rejigged to suit the majority of the league. e.g. tactics due Friday lunch time, predictions monday evening etc. These should be stuck to though as those running threads are putting in a fair bit of their own time

- I think the rules re citings/call ups are fine. Leaving it up to peoples discretion only leads to arguments and bitterness down the road.

- Am a big fan of Steves idea and would like to see some focus in tactics. Most read as 'we can and will do everything' these weeks. A bit of variety on tactics should help close the gap for lower sides particularly if they are putting in the effort CJ has been on tactics.


Match threads and Results

- Pm'ed scores has taken a way the tactical element that was definitely there last season. There has been less pettiness in the reasonings also so I'm happy for them to stay.

- Some have privately commented to me on the predictions not being truly anonymous if more then one person is doing results. To fix this they will not be shared around.

- Match threads take up a fair bit of work each week and I haven't the time anymore to do them every week. Pooly & Fluxys help has been greatly appreciated. If there are more volunteers it would be greatly appreciated.  

- I'm against removing outliers as it restricts the no of predictions. On average your looking at 8-10 predictions so result will be on 6-8 so not really a true picture. I am for a minimum limit on prediction though. Perharps 1 point margin for scores, 3 points for anything less then two lines (on a computer screen) and then unrestricted after that.

- There is a fine for not predicting of 1m but has lapsed as this season went on as I was struggling to get on and see everyones comments re absences etc. I think you should have to post on the match thread when away or else take the fine. 


Injuries and suspensions

- Real life circumstances are taken into account in peoples predictions so are already having an impact. Not sure what else can or should even be added to this? 


Foreigns

- I've enjoyed the open windows as you can get some great success with a bit of scouting work but was against them originally on the grounds its taking too many numbers out of the foreign base. When you look through the real life competitions a lot of the breakout players or next to be breakout stars are already gone which prevents some sides from improvements over the short to even medium term. Would be keen for limited bids for all. 

- Looking at the league there is currently a top 3, it's then fairly even down to 10th possibly 11th (Chiefs having a poor year but there is plenty of quality in their squad). Good internal dealings or foreign pick ups could see any of these sides step up similar to how me and Steve have gone about in recent years. Wasps have done some good deals recently but haven't the quality throughout the squad like others and I'm leaning towards 2/3 free draft picks this summer for them.


EQ

- I'm against unlimited domestic signings. If foreigns are limited, teams will just stack up their academies with EQ players straight away as happened in the past and would only advantage those with the biggest budgets. I do think those who are putting the time in and are predicting regularly should be rewarded. That should be through power in foreign bids though and not at the expense of EQ.

- Think EQ abroad should be available any time as domestic bids similar to any EQ league converts.

- I'm for the current open academy situation. Locking academies only benefit those with the best in real life. If people pay some attention to their academies the spread of EQ players should sort it self out naturally over a few seasons. Not much help to those struggling now particularly CJ though who could maybe benefit from a lower match day limit.

Looks good Johnny.

Only concern is putting the predictions to Monday evening and the knock on effect with team sheets.

Some people are struggling with the 4 1/2 days, is cutting it to 3 1/2 days going to be realistic?

We need to stick with deadlines etc if so imo, I can see people getting upset! lol

CJB wrote:Maybe that could be an offseason thing like it happens then but I think things like blitz defence etc should come in with consistency in tactics?

Definately something for next year mate.

We all use the blitz to some extent. I think though under a specialty system someone who has a focus on it (and has the right players) should smoother out the opposition attack unless there is some specific game plan to counteract it. And I don't mean it should just be a generic kick, kick kick in behind as the side may have a decent sweeper or a strong back three aerially.

If you use a blitz but have no focus on it and come against a side with a focus on powerful phase play I'd expect you to lose the contact battle

Sgt_Pooly wrote:Looks good Johnny.

Only concern is putting the predictions to Monday evening and the knock on effect with team sheets.

Some people are struggling with the 4 1/2 days, is cutting it to 3 1/2 days going to be realistic?

We need to stick with deadlines etc if so imo, I can see people getting upset! lol

I don't mind what the deadlines are as long as there is a majority agreement

I'd personally stick with 9am Friday for all tactics in....late tactics not accepted.

9am Monday for predictions?

9am friday works for me

anonmattyt wrote:9am friday works for me

Makes it easier for me doing team sheets.

To be honest, if I'm not doing scores the predo's can be anytime for me.

I just think the attributes will add something different. Whilst I'm thoroughly enjoying the league I worry before long it will get to predictable. 

I'd see it working like this. My first choice centres (Henshaw and Joseph) wouldn't particularly be suited to a full blitz defence as they are too lightweight to be knocking the modern centre back for 80 mins so if I chose that as a attribute for the season then it wouldnt really work for me.

Whereas if I chose the driving maul with a Du Toit, Kruis and Chouly in my line out every week I should get a fair amount of good line out ball to get a maul going so that would work for my side.

It could possibly see player movements as i couldn't choose to rip sides to threads with set moves each week with Myler at 10 for example for squads would need to be moulded.  

It would take a collective effort to list the possible attributes which aren't linked to player quality but to coaching and the set up of a team.

BTW, I'd also favour a random element to scoring (eg random number of points added to either side following the tallying up) or possibly within 3 points for LBP as so many games end up 4-1 score line points wise and that might be getting stale. 

I'd also be looking at the idea of an ineligible player means a game is lost. I remember losing to Pete a few years back where he had 3 injured players in his side. He just lost 2 points in the league. I think that should come in.

Possible 'Attributes'

Excellent Blitz Defence

Excellent Drift Defence

Excellent Attacking Maul

Excellent Maul Defence 

Excellent Choke Tackle

Excellent Discipline

Excellent Backs Moves

Plus any others I can't think of

I'd add:

Excellent kick chase
Excellent phase attack
Excellent ruck work

and possibly have excellent backs moves as excellent first phase attack.

If others were fans of a random element it could be discussed and possibly brought in but personally I like the scoring system as it is.

I remember that game Steve. I do think ineligible = loss is a bit harsh but more emphasis should be placed on it. Sometimes you wouldn't know a team was a man down reading some predictions

I think there should be an impact on the specific game then if not a loss. 3 points less on scores for the side who play the guy.

The attributes might not work at all. Could be worth a go though.