Discussion in 'ORFFF' started by TheTassieHawk, Nov 27, 2012.
Yep its a no from me too re: the UFA suggestion
With 13 votes counted, it looks like 6 delistments is the go.......
On another note......Bear will you please unlock the laptop from your wrist and allow Nicky (Mrs Bear) 5 minutes on the said laptop, to name her team. What the hell must you be like with the TV remote?..........
I'm trying to set up a speadsheet with all teams and players (after the PSD) and I'm missing her team name, although Gunyah Beach sounds pretty good to me......
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sharks (if Nicky needs some inspiration for a team nickname)
With all the SA based teams going on its getting very lonely by myself over here in NSW
to be continued as there is a 10,000 character limit
continued from above
given that everyone gets bored between picks we should be able to knock the ORFFF rules over by this time next week, it was suggested that we adopt the ORFFU rules except where changes were agreed by a majority of coaches
please don't try to re-read through previous posts as the first 9 pages of posts are all out of order
so far changes we have decided to make to the above are 30 man squad size and lists of 24 prior to the PSD
please suggest any other changes or simplifications you think are required
please feel free to mention anything else here you think needs to get sorted out (for example a trade period following the inaugural draft) so we don't clog up the banter thread
I agree with a pre-season trade period if we have enough time after the PSD, to allow us to trade our way out of some of the mistakes that we probably will make in the PSD.
for what its worth im an advocate for trading 24/7 (i.e. no trade 'period', just whenever you want) and also the ability to trade future picks
even with a 24/7 trade period WE (edited for clarity) would have a trade deadline (say round 13 or 14) as in MLB and I am guessing other US sports
we would need organisers with a lot of time on their hands to make this workable, only my opinion but perhaps an idea to revisit after season 1
On first read, and per the responses given when they were posted, the FU rules seem to have a number of rules that have a "nanny state" feel, for example, I may not want to reply to someone... If they are the basis I'd prefer they were trimmed a bit
ummmm no I wouldnt have a trade deadline... you cant argue with my opinion or preference. lol. You can state you dont agree with it or dislike it, but not sure its possible for you to tell me what i do or dont advocate. unless you have special powers... do you?
I would be happy to trim the whole of item 7 (including because I want to get it under 10,000 characters), item 8 becomes item 7
IIRC item 7 was inserted by the ORFFU and wasn't in either the ORFFL or ORFFA rules
if anything from there is necessary then slot it elsewhere in the rules
not intended literally, now edited
A toned down 7d and 7i would be about the only things I'd keep from that section. More like guidlines than set in stone rules too.
I am certainly an advocate of trading future picks, but any trading certainly needs the option to veto as set out in the rules.
I am in favour of a trade deadline, maybe the end of the bye rounds?
7i definitely agree
does vetoing have to be done soley on the basis that the basis that the trade isn't balanced - ie "VETO - this is an unbalanced trade - Side X loses because ...." ?
can I veto because I don't like the trade because it makes one team better than mine?
is there any onus on the vetoer to make a "better" offer to the party getting the worst end of the stick (ie turn it into an auction) so that they can then choose the best deal?
I come predominantly from a fantasy basketball background, where the veto idea is based around 'lopsided or unfair' trades taking being stopped. (i.e. someone trading their best three players to a contender for one draft pick) Usually it takes a majority vote rather than the 5 we have at the moment just because it isn't unheard of for teams to group together and veto on the basis that another team is getting better than them and usually it's not a problem as not that many trades actually eventuate anyway.
Ultimately it comes down to each GMs own values or we get an impartial trade commissioner to judge each trade on it's merits. I would be happy to keep the veto system as written and then re-assess if necessary end of season.
Personally I'm not in favour of any "in season" trading, imo there are other "games" for that, SC etc.
As someone who keeps a buttload of league stats I can honestly say I'd have no idea just how complex managing squads changing at any or every point would be from a statistical pov, but I would feel horribly sorry for the person landed with the job and it wouldn't be me
Again, my opinion only, PSD and MSD should each have a trade period attached, don't care/mind how long, but trading through the actual playing part of the ORFF season just feels wrong on every level bar anarchy.
You know it's not mandatory right?
I'm a bit with Len here. Whilst I see what insider is saying about it being 24/7, keeping records of each and every trade, which would entail future trade picks as well, throughout the entire season, would be a statistical nightmare for whoever has the job......
Separate names with a comma.