I've not looked but I'd think it's as rare that the 9th team wins the ZDC as it is the 1st team wins the Flag tbh.
Get it mate, but the concept that a team that misses the top 8 gets rewarded with an extra pick confuses me TBH... do we feel there is less involvement in the ZDC than the big dance? I presonally didn't notice it was any better or worse
It's an idea, and flagged well in advance for it to be fleshed out or flushed out. As you know I am invested in assisting struggling teams
It will make a difference. I’ve been known to not put my best team on the park in the Zac Dawson cup, but I definitely would if a pick was up for grabs. I like the idea
I would rather can the ZD, leave it as is or bring in a nominal end of Round 3 pick (55) if there really is a need to reward the winning team. For sure if the Zac worked in reverse and the lower scoring team progressed to the next round instead of the higher scoring one, and was won by a truly struggling team then maybe an end of first rounder would make sense as an equalisation measure.
Haha, just for a bit of fun. I’ve never really thought of it as a serious event. I’ve finished 9th or near to it a few times and always been disappointed to miss the finals so I didn’t care too much for trying to win the consolation prize. Some years I’ve played all my younger players to give my older players an early off-season. I remember some games I tried picking my worst 15 players of those actually selected that week in the AFL. Other times I’ve made up silly make believe stories about players lives which meant they couldn’t play or whatever. I remember also playing players out of position to try them in a different role to see if they improve. I’ve also played players in consideration of being delisted to give them all a chance to win a spot on the list for the next season. I’ve certainly had a bit of fun with it, but I’ve played in it too many times for my liking lol, I’d much rather be competing in the big dance
Humorous diversion and insight into how people think. But back to the issue. I might be able to see an argument for the teams that finish the H&A series in 18th and 17th place. But the team that wins the ZDC? I don't get that they are the most deserving of a handout..
Re: the Zac... I personally don't see much in it anyway. Just like the real deal, if you miss the finals maybe the teams should just finish the season early, have their Mad Monday, and watch the other teams progress through the finals series. I understand it is about giving people something to participate in... maybe we could set up some grudge matches in those weeks?
The following are the views of a soon to be former ORFFA coach and as such can be ignored or debated as the current coaches and powers that be see fit. When one considers the above quoted post in the context discussion on page 2 of this thread as well as the year by year performances summarised in the ORFFA honour roll thread it appears clear that the ORFFA need to take a strategic view on its short to medium term fixture. Perhaps consider that with a licence now vacant that the opportunity exists to reduce the number of ORFFA clubs to 17, with the intent of keeping a permanent bye commencing 2022 until natural attrition takes the number of teams to 16 or 14 sides at some stage in the future which enables a deeper Free Agent pool which assists replenishment of struggling teams, larger squad sizes and greater ability to handle rolling team announcements without a huge spike in donuts. If that is not a favoured option then i would definitely urge coaches to consider a vacant team being taken over as similar to an expansion franchise. In my opinion unless a new coach is taking on board a top 8 side there should be significant draft incentives provided for at least 1-2 years to accelerate their teams ability to compete in a dynasty league where the proven and emerging talent is already locked away. Picking 4-6 players at the end of each draft does not add quality but provides a continual cycle of duds for a struggling team to deal with. Several 1st and 2nd round picks should be considered even if a team is in the 6-7 win per season range, and a mid table bid older side needs to be assessed differently to a younger mid table list. With respect to longer-term coaches a 3-4 season stint in the cellar (regardless of why) is generally seeing those teams as uncompetitive throughout except when playing 2 or 3 other sides which must be rather boring for the other sides playing them to be almost certainly assured of victory. I would hate to be in 9th spot with a round to play knowing 8th is playing a bottom 2 side and the finals race is effectively over. Private requests for draft assistance have been turned down following both (2 win) 2019 and (4 win) 2020 seasons. Puzzling when the franchise was clearly lagging the other 17 teams through the competitions history due to poor initial drafting and subsequent drafting and trading pre-dating the trading out of a small number of competent players aged 28 plus for comparatively little return. If there is a general reluctance to reward a single team for a single poor year then reward the bottom 3 or 4 ever year or modify it to those which have had multiple consecutive bottom 6 finishes. If coaches wish for no draft assistance to be provided in my view it is essential that mandatory end of season delists for all teams (or for finals teams only) to be increased to 6 or 7 to improve the preseason draft pool albeit that means a longer draft unless the draft order has “double picks”’ assigned in later rounds. Again, equalisation measures being suggested will make very little difference at the top end while making a massive difference at the bottom, and eventually have some effect in the middle. In my view it will lead to a healthier comp without the need for a nuclear option such as a full redraft or one off reduction to 6-8 keepers to rebalance talent across the league. Over to you lot, and to be crystal clear the vacating of the Nuffers licence at midseason is in no way driven by competiveness considerations as it was only ever intended to be 6-18 months stint. However it highlights first hand experience of the need to consider what set of conditions and possible incentives a handover is associated with and the advantages of not passively allowing any team to descend towards a rabble wherever possible as they are more likely to be the teams handed over in the medium term. Cheers TTH
I didn’t realise you were finishing up TTH. Is this the first we’re hearing of it, or had you advised this previously? If so, I must’ve missed it. Would be a shame to see you leave the Nuffas!
An innovation I would like debated is the ability to de-list a player(s) a draft. Frequently I see a player I would like to draft but I've run out of picks. The ability to draft would be good. I feel. Maybe we agree a number of picks that have to be taken beofre the new draft pick becomes active? Anyways worth some thought? @TheTassieHawk, would it be possible for you to hang in until the end of the home and away series? It might be a bind but I think it would be helpful. I still hold the same view as you quoted from me from mid-2019. The exact way we do it needs / deserves strong debate. It would also give the opportunity for any other coach(s) who are thinking of moving on the opportunity to flag that and enable us to make a decision around the number of teams in full possession of the facts. Please give it some thought.
It has been great having you involved in the ORFFA as a coach for the past three years @TheTassieHawk and it will be sad to see you leave. TTH, Thanks for providing an update and your suggestions regarding draft assistance. I don’t agree with the bottom three or four ORFFA teams each season automatically receiving assistance. It has not been uncommon for clubs in the ORRFA to go from bottom four to top four within two years being: Gundagai 18th in 2015 to 4th in 2017 Marble Bar 17th in 2016 to 3rd in 2017 Mount Beauty 18th in 2018 to 4th in 2020 There is a lag in players being recruited by rebuilding clubs and seeing improvement with the win/loss record and points scored by these clubs due to young players generally improving in their first four AFL seasons rather than having an immediate impact. It has been common for rebuilding clubs that have drafted well and have a group of players in their first four seasons to make little progress for a season or two and then have a spike in performance in season 3 or 4 of the rebuild. If ORRFA clubs decide to bottom out and go down the rebuild path it is likely that they will be spend multiple seasons in the bottom third of the ladder, but in most cases will then start to rise up the ladder as their young draftees gain experience. In the first decade of the ORFFA from 2012 to 2021 the Nuffers will only have one finish above 13th. If an ORFFA club spends a prolonged period rebuilding and is consistently finishing in the bottom four such as the Nuffers have been I think an exception should be made and appropriate draft assistance should be discussed. What assistance is provided would probably need to be determined on a case by case basis after considering the ORFFA club’s record and its list and this type of assistance should be the exception rather than the rule.
I appreciate the request @graeme but it is a firm no for me. I am on board until the completion of Round 11. I am cutting back on my AFL fantasy football commitments and wanting to avoid any midseason trade period overlap with the ORFFF in the coming 4-8 weeks. Post MSD I am hoping to be set and forget within 15 minutes on a Friday night each week with my lineups and that isn’t possible with 2 teams in different comps. My understanding is that one or more coaches may be in the wings or as a last resort I would hope that a fellow ORFFA coach may be able to step in until mid August.
I am a fan of an 18 team comp. The change I would advocate for and did indeed attempt to get through a couple of years ago when we expanded the list sizes is to have a minimum of 6 picks in the PSD and have the MSD be purely optional.
I think what @dmandrews says makes a lot of sense. However, in the case of the Nuffers an examination will show that they have a couple of non-playing stars on their list. That then makes the decision harder on whether to grant pick assistance. Exception rather than rule sounds fine, but we need rules to achieve equality. Perhaps one option is to follow the AFL (sort of) and give a priority pick to any new coach who takes up a team. If that team is currently in the top 8, it would be a late second rounder, if not, then a end of first rounder. But for the longer haul, at the very least I think we should give @Len suggestion a run on a trial basis in 2022. That gives us a chance to examine cause and effect. Rebuild is a many headed monster. Apart from the rare total rebuild it is more common to find a team rebuilding a particular area (forward line, etc.). Just a cautionary note. ORFFA was the second league on TIS. Rules, etc. were cherry picked from ORRFL. Are they experiencing the same problems as us? (for example, Hornsy has pretty much dominated every season). Since some FA coaches have teams in FL, we should be able to say internally here whether or not the problem is endemic. And, whether the playing field is level or not, some coaches are just damn good at this game.
Mergerized for you @TerryinBangkok Was just trying to bring into peoples attention, but you rightly pointed out, it might get confusing... Bandit said: Hello everyone, happy Friday Now that the majority of the coaches have voiced an opinion that says the competition could be improved, I want to have a fairly short and sharp debate around what 'improved' actually means. A lot of the feedback I have been reading in threads, as well as discussing in conversations with a lot of you is that fielding a full team is proving hard, and therefore we should potentially look at changing to make it easier. Some other feedback I am hearing is that it is hard for sides at the bottom to course correct to improve. This thread is to discuss these, and any other suggestions for change to the structure of ORFFA. The ruck issue (or the number of available rucks etc), compensation picks etc are separate issues that I will open the discussion on after we get through this conversation, as what we decide here will impact that. There have been a number of options floated to me around changing the structure including: Increase the number of mandatory delists at PSD This is fairly self explanatory, if we increase the number of mandatory delists to more than the current four, then there will be more players available to select from at the start of the season Introduce a number of mandatory delists at MSD Again, fairly straight forward, introducing mandatory delists at MSD means that there are more players available in the mid season draft pool Reduce squad sizes Reducing squad sizes would again put more players back into the available players Reduce the number of ORFFA teams Reducing the number of teams means that there will be 28 more players injected into the available players pool, and some of them would be higher end for the first draft. It also means fixtures would need to be reviewed, an odd number of teams would create a bye etc Introduce divisions with relegation and promotion between divisions (think English Football) In this option ORFFA would split into two leagues... let's say First and Second Division. The bottom n number of clubs (to be determined) in the First division at the end of the home and away would be relegated to the Second division for the following season, and the same number of clubs that finish at the top of the Second division would be promoted to the First Division. This introduces a whole raft of considerations, the first of which would be, do the two divisions share players, or do they have separate play pools, and if the latter, what happens when a promoted club has the same player as a club already in the league? These options at a minimum will be going to a vote, but before I create that vote thread, are there any other options people would like to throw on the table? @graeme said : Would like to see an ability to de-list a player(s) during a draft if a prospect is still on the FA list. I see this as different from trading a player for a draft pick, the only other way to draft a player you want but did not de-list enough players pre-draft.* Say one of your best 15 is injured either in pre-season or during the byes. An opportunity arises to draft someone who could fill that gap but who has been ignored by the other 17 coaches. A lot of "ïfs" for sure, but why not avail ourselves of the opportunity. * I agree with the move to de-list at least 6 before a PSD. De-listing needs to be painful for the lower teams to acquire quality players. @snoz said : A weekly waiver wire (instead of the MSD) would effectively fix nearly all problems within teams almost immediately. Most other sites use them too, but we would have to ‘manualize’ it initially.....not sure that’s even a word ! Waivers are tough - you have to decide to drop a certain prospect if you have glaring needs elsewhere, but therein lies the strategy. Not to mention lesser/lower/shittier teams get access to talent immediately. Just a snoz thought !! @Len said I don't disagree with the concept mate, but manual needs to be avoided like the plague. I've had a tough time staying on top of the much smaller one in the Addicts.
OK folks, looking at timing of fixture, round 12 is the start of the bye rounds, which also means state of origin, and more importantly for this thread... the MSD. This means we will need to get some decisions on the go forward structure made with some pace... that being said, the number of teams vote is the only one that can impact the MSD this season, as everything else to be voted on will need to apply from seasons end, so as not to impact some strategies that may be in mid flight. We will need to lock in a way forward for the number of teams if we are to have a new coach for the Nuffers in time for the MSD. So please cast your eye to the conversation above and throw your opinion penny into the fountain if you have something to say Just tagging everyone to hopefully get their attention that there is a vote coming soon Birdsville Battlers @JC Cradle Mountain Devils @dmandrews Foul Bay Chickens @ChiefRussell Gariwerd Cockatoos @anthak Gundagai Grasshoppers @snoz Iron Knob Codpieces @jimbowan Larrikin Lagoon Lefties @That KI Guy Lovely Banks Lilacs @Jen Marble Bar Misfits @Len Mt Beauty Uglies @bama Nowhere Else Wanderers @DaveH Venus Bay Vultures @Fitzy Wagga Wagga Wombats @Lenny120 Waikikamoocow Incorrigibles @graeme Whitsunday Warriors @TerryinBangkok Wineglass Bay Packers @Tracey