28 man lists

Interested to know how our increased list size is working out for everyone.

Can everyone field a full team with no OOPs? I had a couple of weeks at the start of the season where I couldn't field a full team but since then and with the MSD I can field a full side with plenty of emergency candidates and everyone in their correct position.

For me the extra two list positions has given me the ability to carry a couple of project players and still have a deep enough squad. I've been planning for the 4 picks I am going to take in the draft but when I look at my list I can't see many I'd want to delist if I have to. I know realistically that I probably have 4+ players that most wouldn't want but you kind of get attached to your projects and don't want to give them up for the fear of losing them. I'm sure most lists would have a couple of players that are of little value to most but hold value to them. It's going to be interesting come draft time to see the list management decisions that are made.

I think it's cool that we'll see a bit of player movement and the draft will be less predictable. 4th round picks hold value now in trade discussions so that should help to increase trading over time.

I'm pretty happy with 28 -4 as it adds a new challenge that makes ORFFU more enjoyable if that's possible. Cheers guys!

 

I think the list size is perfect. It's the fringe players that will get turned over regularly. From my team its the Pearce's, Ballantyne's and Mayne's that are still scoring points but I would rather invest time in the Mountford's of the future. We are probably all carrying 2-3 players that are yet to get a game this year and they may have to be turned over to get through our mandatory picks. This will breed some good picking for those with early picks and nervous times for those coaches hoping to pick their own players back up!

4+ players delisted before the PSD starts, gonna be fun and tough at the same time!

 

I like it. Good topic for discussion. So far so good @eagle_eyed

Like @martyg said, the mandatory 4 delistings will obviously add a massive new element to list management. Looking forward to seeing the calibre of player who make their way back into the free agent pool. Will definitely make for some more interesting selections in the PSD next year.

Probably best to wait until after the PSD (as @JPK mentioned) but if all goes well, I'd happily look at extending our lists to 29 or even 30 players. This would allow us to take some more chances + make it easier to hang on to those project players we've drafted / traded in that we all have our soft spots for.

Bring on the 2nd half of the ORFFU season!

 

I'm probably in the minority but personally I'm not a fan. I liked the challenge of balancing up-and-coming players with having the depth to field a strong starting line-up.

I don't think it will have the effect on the PSD that some are expecting. Most coaches take at least 2 picks anyway so making it a mandatory 4 just means dropping the 2 extra players that we didn't have previously. So I'm expecting a pretty similar player pool to previous years, if anything it will be weaker as the handful of bolters that usually bob up in the second half of the year are now already on people's lists.

The side-effect we have just seen is the MSD is now almost irrelevant with the available number of decent players decimated.

 

I can see your thinking with the MSD and kind of agree, but in reality there has never been a lot of depth to that draft. I would also like to think that we all get better at identifying and retaining talent the more we participate in the FU which would then impact the draft pool. However I do feel that to try and keep the MSD relevant we need to continue completing the PSD prior to NAB Cup matches. By doing this there will be bolters that will be left in the pool as few of us would have had the opportunity to assess them. One change I do expect to see at the PSD is more coaches prepared to jettison 30+ year olds in order to retain their kids; these types of players will be attractive as injury cover etc. and will then cause some 18 year old draftees to slide down the order or maybe sit there until the MSD.

For me though the main attraction will be a 72 pick minimum PSD each season. The fun part of FU is not just the matches but also the drafts and with a much longer, deeper draft participation will rise and with it hopefully interaction and enjoyment.

 

I'm all for the mandatory 4 draft picks, it's the increased team lists that I think detracts from the effectiveness of it.

Had list sizes not been increased then we would have seen a much stronger player pool, meaning draft picks would have more value and lower teams would have more opportunity to improve. Instead I think we will see a weaker player pool and therefore less chance for lower teams to improve.

 

Was never a fan of increased list sizes to start, I liked the challenge as tylo pointed out of maintaining a decent playing squad, having said that I do like having a couple of extra players on the list, makes it easy that's for sure, having the extra players keeps it easy enough to field a full team each week, no real challenge to cover those injuries anymore.
I think it's super close on the ladder this year which could be because we can all field full teams easy enough each week, so I think that's a good thing. Competitive close action is what we all want.
Drafting before NAB was always what I thought we decided on. Massive fan of doing that.
Hahahah obviously we will have a few polls come seasons end. Hahahaha I love it
Best comp going with out a doubt.
Go team FU!

 

I think the increase squad sizes has helped a little and as a guess we've seen fewer OOP and teams with under 15 playing players.

I don't mind the mandatory delistments but I was always concerned about the impact on the MSD. I think what we've seen is that the depth of the player pool has been cut right back there but as a guess there might be an extra round of depth in the PSD.

I highlighted the above sentence because I disagree with this. I think the MSD did use to have some depth to the 2nd and even 3rd rounds. I grabbed Zak Jones in the 3rd round of the MSD in 2015 (was actually tossing up whether to pick him or Hunter who was also available) and managed to get Collins, OMcDonald and Marchbank in the 2nd round of the MSD last year.

 

I get what you mean as I've picked up Charlie Cameron, Jordan Roughead & James Harmes in the MSD and all have turned out to be valuable players. But at the same time I doubt any were averaging over 65 when I took them so they were speculative when I picked them as late as 43. There's still plenty of second, soon to be third, year players with potential to average in the 70's. Add those to the next draft crop plus 72 delisted players and there'll still be options in the next MSD that have potential; especially seeing as we'll likely only take 72 players back out of the pool in the PSD.

 

100% against mandatory 6 picks and MSD mandatory picks ....... would take out the fun of researching players

 

My two cents..........

For me it is very hard to distinguish between what is good for the competition and what is good for my team. I am very happy that we increased list sizes for those teams that have had a bad run with injuries but how many teams has this really affected? Personally I have had Rampe, Heeney and Birchall missing through injury but this stop me from winning games? no , was it list increase that helped me field a competitive team? no, as I had younger players getting games like howe, nelson and mclean, whom I did not recruit this year. Increase in list size has made me take a punt on a few rookies, that has gone against my philosophy and i will be sad to see them go due to mandatory delisting which I am no doubt very frustrated at, but on the other hand we now have a competition that is extremely close. Holding on to kids gives every coach a chance at getting deals done. I took the punt on some older players not only to help with scoring potential but to make mandatory delisting easier but i can see these types of players holding more currency for that fact. Trading is a huge part of our game and this will become even more important as we will want to trade out players for picks rather than delist and get nothing. Depending on your list is it young, old or at the right age to go for a flag will also determine on where you stand.
Might I just add i would have dropped Boyd if it wasn't for mandatory delisting.
If there was a vote to remove mandatory delisting that would be a yes from me.

 

I think 6 would be the death of us, but I like the idea of lowering our list size by one or two. This will put quite a few fringe/young players on the books for those in the bottom 6 of the ladder. Theory being, top teams will be loading up with older players having a crack at the flag whilst the lower teams move into the re-build/speculative stage of their ORFFU lifecycle.

When we started this thing I had my doubts how long we would last, considering it was new and TS already had a few running. I cannot see my interest wavering for the next 10+ years!! I love the prospect of trading and really look forward to the trade periods when they come along. I love trying to get a deal done and the negotiations that occur!