The byes havebeen good adding the extra bit of difficulty to it. I think if the magic number 6-7% higher and had 22 trades instead the season would've been a lot better. I think SuperCoach would benefit a lot if it was made more difficult instead of easier, although the uncommitted SuperCoaches won't go as well which will benefit the season greatly.
A very radical idea with the aim of rewarding positive trading as opposed to superb initial team selection: 1) Increase magic number/reduce salary cap by at lest 20% (probably 30% given below proposals). This makes initial team selection more difficult, making it harder to have a high number of starting premiums. 2) Retain 3/3/2/3 emergencies on the lines. More flexibility allows a "Super" coach to reap benefits of good rookie selection and cash cow culling. 3) Allow 2 trades per round, with unused trades carried over for a single week (ie no more than 4 trades available in a round). Everyone loves trading 4) More DPP - have a target that 40% of players are DPP with rookies & MPP taking up a lot of these positions. Next best player is generally used in real life, why not SC. 5) Ability to move players lines as part of a trade (ie if you are trading a Def, and have a DM in your mids, trade options should include all Def & Mids). As above, trying to mirror real life.
This is a pretty stupid idea but how about in leagues have firsts and seconds competition? I don't think it would work but it is an idea
@pbas The problem with that is that the magic number will be at about 6500 so your mid priced player (avg 70) will cost about $450,000, so your team will be stacked with rookies who will dramatically increase in price, and with 44 trades teams will almost all be indentical. Also a big part of SuperCoach is getting a brilliant team to start with, which requires research and preparation and not just doing a lot of lucky trades.
I also agree that the fun of SC is smewhat diminished when by years end most of the better performing teams are quite similar. I believe a good idea to combat this is to provide people with more OPTIONS (ie. have more MP players to chose from) with their squads- particularly when setting up their initial squad. It is all too common each year to have only a few R/F combinations where if you have one then you 'must' have a certain other person. Also too many of the elite forwards also have 'C/F' MPP status, and what's wrong with leaving Hodge as 'B/C' status whereby you would have to CHOOSE between say a Gibbs, Hodge, Goddard and/or Newman?? Simply by adding more MPP's to players i think would make squads much more interesting.
They should add a sub to the bench IMO, if one of your on-field players gets the vest then the sub gets 75% of their own score as an extra emergency. Real teams have to put up with one player not getting as much TOG so why not us?
What about the average percentage game time per player on the sub's team, take the subs game time percentage and then multiply that by the emergency's score.
Personaly i found this years competion the best so far as a little bit of thought, having to deal with byes,subs,mpp,s. I like the idea of a week were you have the option of making more than the usual 2 trades say everybody can use this option once through the season be it 3_4 trades a one of to be used at your own choice, the more difficult the better.
Personaly i found this years competion the best so far as a little bit of thought, having to deal with byes,subs,mpp,s. I like the idea of a week were you have the option of making more than the usual 2 trades say everybody can use this option once through the season be it 3_4 trades a one of to be used at your own choice, the more difficult the better.
So with the multi-byes back in place does that change the magic number and mean the 33 man squad and 24 trades will stay?
I don't think the multibyes will mean that the magic number, 33 man squad and 24 trades remain. regardless of how many players or trades you have you are bound to score a few zeros.