Well, I take it a fair few of us a looking forward to 2012 in Super Coach. Just want to talk about some of the changes. And I've got aome questions too if anyone knows the answeres. Well, Next Year >>No Byes >>An extra 40-50 players from GWS And some questions <<Same amount of trades? <<Still 10 million? <<Still 33 players? Anything else people know about next year?
i hope they keep the 33 man squad, 3 reserves on each line and 2 in the ruck works well. would like one more emergency next year so that cover in the ruck can be chosen, because if you have a full squad to choose from you still have to leave a line uncovered, usually the rucks. Will require some thought but i like the idea of some form of an injury sub in SC next year. Take the mundy example if thats a GF and hes your captain its the whole year gone then and there basically which is not really fair. maybe your emergency can be subbed in if the guy in the 22 gets subbed out through injury before half time? if its the captain then vice comes into play. probably a few ideas they could look at but i hope they do something. what do u think?
I'd like to see them come up with something to maintain the differences between the teams and keep it difficult to do really well. This year the Bye and the Sub have been an absolute pain, but has added complexity that means the best coaches who can plan for those eventualities are generally performing well. Also these things have added diversity to the teams. By finals last year everyone had a core of 15 or so players identical, but with the bye more players approach it a different way. Make it hard so research and preparation pays off.
I agree with trying to mix it up a bit and keep some strategy to it, so that everyone doesn't end up with the same team at the end of the year. Maybe limit the amount of players per team that you can have??? This way you can't load up on say Freo players (Freo are the only team with 5 players averaging more than 100 each - ironically!) I've always thought that the VC should be more than just an "on-field emergency", so allow him to score 150% points, to make it interesting. Decrease the amount of trades, to make people (myself included) think more about their trades. Allow one week of the year, selected by the coach, to trade up to 4 players, rather than the normal two. Or, even better, don't restrict how many trades you can use in a week - but keep the season maximum, and watch all the people burn their trades early, and then fall away due to injuries! Allow MPP emergencies to cover all players that they can be subbed with, not just on the line they're named.
@JPK I love the 4th one Hate the 3rd one, because I like trades, but it was only last year when we had 20, and it worked pretty well, probably cause people didn't know what 24 was like. I like 24 though. Can't think of any rule changes from the top of my head. I think the "limit from each team" wouldn't work. Because surely there's people out there that don't take it seriously like we do, and have a team full of say hawthorn players (hawk supporter) or brisbane players (brisbane supporter)
Fair call on the limit per team - I actually did that one year in DT - the team sucked!!! From an overall perspective, I think the byes make things very interesting - I don't know how they can include something like this next year without byes!?!? From a leagues perspective, I'm wondering how many teams will be in each league (16 or 18), and how they'll arrange finals - especially since the AFL has decided to stick with 8 teams (much better idea than 9 or 10!). Probably easiest to just stick to 16 teams per league. Only time will tell...
I like your ideas JPK. I agree that the VC should score 150% points because how often does he come into play anyway? Rarely. Having a 4th emergency would be great as well. With 18 teams for 2012 i think they should keep the trades the same and the bench the same but just allow a 4th E so you can cover all your lines if need be. Or using one of your (E) with the sub rule also.
What happens though if the captain or vice are a late withdrawal? Do we get a deputy? Where does it end?
I dont think they should over complicate it too much. Simple usually works better. Thats why many are losing interest thing year - byes and sub making it complicated and taking the attractive simplicity of the game out. However something to counter act the subs would be nice. Like if your selected emergency scored more than your subbed player he should be able to come on for him.
I think having your Vice score more is a good idea. Makes choosing the capt & vice more interesting. Lets face it well work hard on selecting the right capt and then slap the VC on the next best guy. It would be good to be able to use a sub - esp with the Mundy injury. But that starts to really complicate the whole thing and I think it just needs to be kept simple. The whole scoring part is hard enuff to follow!
<blockquote>Quote from bfish on June 14, 2011, 10:55 What happens though if the captain or vice are a late withdrawal? Do we get a deputy? Where does it end?</blockquote> This!
I like the idea that the vice capt would score more. Maybe 1.5 times normal. Also. think if the sub rule stays in then they have to come up with a way to combat this for SC.
No way should vice get any more than being a backup to the captain. I tend to recall vice only got brought in because people moaned about their captain late withdrawal. Again, I ask "where will it end"? I would think next season should be back to two interchange per line, three emergency selections, a captain and vc and 20 trades over 22 rounds, no byes apart from first three rounds for everyone. I'm hoping for more requirements from a personnel perspective to make it harder for everyone to end up with the same team, or to at least ensure variety. Thing is, we all tend to think the same or very similarly when tuning our teams, that's why you end up with very close matches. Late withdrawals and injuries during matches are big point swingers.
Agree completely Lucas. I might be wrong, but one of the things that seems to have happened this year is the price of all the premium players has dropped dramatically. As a result, it has been way too easy to bring in premiums later in the year. Some of this can be explained by form, but it also seems to me that they stuffed up the pricing at the start, or the formula they have use to price during the year. It's got to be hard to get all the top performers if you are going to have a real competition. Coaches should be able to afford say 2 of the top 6 or 7 at start of season, and then if all things are equal get another 2 or 3. This year it seems really easy to get the same players - wild fluctuations of prices and in the end everyone coming in the $400k to $520k bucket for at least a few weeks of the year.
If you cop a Mundy or a Goddard in the first quarter thats life. Just wear it I reckon, it's part of the game. How many of us got a leauge win one day because our opponent got a premium with an injury. I have and I'll take that thanks(been on the receiving as well and that sucks). Like the idea about a super trade weekend where you can trade 4 instead of 2. Would like to see more rookies with DPP so not everyone chooses the same DPP players.
<blockquote>Quote from KissKiss on June 14, 2011, 15:37 Ive really enjoyed the extra difficulty of the byes this year</blockquote> This. A million times this. I have absolutely adored the byes this year. I love the fact that through some careful planing, you can get a sizable advantage over the majority of folk who haven't- really allowing the cream to rise.
I'm actually starting to enjoy the byes, and kind of sad to see it go next season as we are all starting to get an idea of what we should have considered coming into the season. Oh well...that knowledge may not necessarily go to waste if a struggling team folds
not that i can c this happenin but i wouldnt mind having byes next yr - 9 rnds (mid yr) with 2 teams havin a bye... i didnt like byes 2 start with but they make things more interesting .. sc - no changes except maybe eliminator
I've enjoyed the complexity that the byes have brought to the game and think that this has probably been the most interesting year of SC I have played in. The next rounds of multi byes will sort out those who have planned well from those who have been a bit lucky, I think. Whilst luck will always play a part in SC it would be nice to see the game reward coaches that plan well with a couple of hurdles like the byes this year. Its going to be a bit humdrum next year when we all go back to fielding pretty much the same teams with only a couple of POD's between teams by half way through the season. Alternative competition anyone?