That would only be the case this year wouldn't it @JPK? Do we need an addition to say that the number decided on would be plus 2 for this season only?
That's what the other poll is for. The poll here is for how many spaces have to be open in each team for the future PSD's. If its only 2 spaces (as many people have voted for) and we add two players to each team (which we've already agreed on) then we're not gaining anything except for cycling around the current FA list. If we give coaches larger lists, but tell them that they have to drop a group of players (however they drop them), then we have more list turnover, and more opportunity for the lower ranked teams to pick up someone more worth having, and giving them a chance of success. Basically, as things are currently panning out now: Prior to the 2017 PSD we will trade and draft as we have done in the past, until all teams have 26 players. Note that the Essendon suspension will be over, so all effected players will be back where they "were". We then have a 2-round mini-draft, where each team picks up another two players, bringing all lists to 28 players. 2017 MS T&D will occur as it currently does. Prior to 2018 PSD we will trade, and then all delistments will have to be in such that each team has *the minimum number of valid draft selections* which we're currently voting on. If this number is 2, then all we're doing is reducing back down to 26 at worst, and then selecting two new players. If this number is six, then we're all reducing down until each team has no more than 22 players, and we all draft 6 players each. We'll then have the 2018 PSD as per normal drafting, until each team has 28 players. 2018 MS T&D will occur as it currently does. All subsequent years will follow the 2018 format. Hopefully that helps to clear up any confusion, and helps to outline why I'm personally keen on 6 mandatory draft picks - simply to create more turnover, more opportunity for lower-ranked teams, and more drafting fun!
Adding 2, delisting 4....around in circles we go. So if I've got this right we will be adding an extra 2 players that avg75 to our list or around that mark as Chop pointed out a while ago, and then come seasons end we are delisting 4 useless players that are probably averaging around the same. Every coach will always delist come seasons end no matter what because we all want to improve. Adding 2 players to the list is all we should be doing for now and seeing how that plays out. I would guess that with the extra 2 players on our lists then we will all delist at least 3 to 4 players anyway, coaches delist a couple as we are with 26 on our list. Also the bottom teams will always be the bottom teams because some one has to finish down there. It seems fairly even on total points this year so no idea why we are all so worried Any way maybe I'm a bit slow but thought I'd throw my thoughts out so they could be shot down. Thanks for your time
dd, I'm not in the habit of shooting anyone down, but i'm finding it a bit difficult to understand a few of your points. I can delist 4 players that haven't even played this year, let alone average 75. And if I can get extra players av 75, because higher ranked teams are compelled to de-list them, as we all will be, then hopefully that will help my team get higher on the ladder. No.....every coach won't always delist come seasons end....some coaches prefer to hoard players, as is their right under the current rules. That's what we're trying to avoid..... I'll follow all that up by saying that a squad of 28 is ok with me and I voted for 6 delistments.
Which coach hoards players? At best at least 1 would be delisted with a squad of 26 each year, the only exception may be tylo and his almighty King island lineup but all others have and will continue to delist because it's silly not to. If you can give me some examples I'll apologise for being dumb but I thought we all have delisted each year. Maybe not though...... With a list of 28 of course there will be delisting, would be silly not to. We are not all SuperCoach genius that have crystal balls. Delisting will happen whether mandatory or not. My point was 28 less 4 doesn't give the bottom teams much more of a go at the free agent pool, not sure there is much value left. Adding 4 players that avg 75 won't help anyone move up the ladder. These players won't even get a start in most teams unless injuries occur. So having coverage is good with the extra 2 players. But if you think your going to fly up the ladder with these new players then good luck. If we don't draft the right players then we won't move anywhere on the ladder. It's all about who you draft not how many! As I said the bottom teams will always be the bottom teams because someone has to win and someone has to lose. The overall points scores from the teams this year is close yeah? Other then AA and KI and maybe CB all others are within an arms length of each other. I'd say it's a fairly close well fought league. I think we should just add the 2 players to our list and let next season play out. The extra 2 players on lists will cover injuries and even up total scores a little more yeah? And as I said you'd be silly not to delist
Realistically, I'll always be at the bottom simply cause I'm terrible, but I wish you all the best in your future climbs chop
Have to say I find this result extremely disappointing. I don't think the 6 delistments will benefit me as if I can get my 1st 15 on the park I think I'll be very competitive but for some of the other teams it would make a big difference. We're in year 3 of the comp and I'd hate to think some teams might have to wait 5 yrs to climb the ladder. Just shattered; not having a go at anyone but it would be great to have a league where more than 3 or 4 teams have a real shot.
I'm all for mandatory delisting as a way to help keep the comp relatively even and always have been. I'm also willing to consider other options that could help. That said, I think it's good to keep things in perspective and not get too extreme about the situation. We're only in our 3rd season and so far we've had 2 different Premiers, 4 different Grand Finalists (none of whom were Minor Premiers), and I'd say there's 7 teams in genuine contention this year (1 of which finished bottom 2 only 2 years ago). So all in all the comp is looking fairly healthy. I think the reason some teams are regularly struggling has to do with their strategies. I've said it before but with a list of 26 and only needing to field 15, a well-managed team would have to be extremely unlucky to be scoring donuts. If coaches want to recruit mostly 18-19 y/o players then surely they do so expecting success to be a long way off.