I still believe on the honor system. If there is a trade that is ridiculous then we can all vote on it. But i think we need to trust each other.. Its not like someone is going to trade Dane Swan for Jake King.. I personally think it will get messy if we put restrictions on it.
<blockquote>Its not like someone is going to trade Dane Swan for Jake King..</blockquote> Speak for yourself SKT
I think Hornsy's suggestion of maintaining a squad size of 22 should probably stick, but apart from that fair game?
Well 2 people have to agree to the deal don't they? So (theoretically) its not like someone is going to be happy getting a dud player to Relton up their side. That said, collusion isn't necessarily going to be limited to just 2 people so we just have to hope that people are honourable...
As for general trading, I think if we are going to have preseason trading then is should happen in a one/two week timeframe and be something similar to Lucas +/- 15pts thing. Personally I'm not too big a fan of it. I'd like to have a mid-season draft and trade period though. Something where we can delist up to a certain amount of players (say 5) which then allows coaches to nominate for the draft to pick up other players (incl those delisted from other clubs). Then have a trade period after that.
My thoughts: Must maintain team lists of 22. Have everyone become 'friends' - use the PM to organise a trade - if agreed to in principle by the 2 parties, then put trade onto an official trade forum whereby other coaches have 24 hrs to approve/decline trade. Possibly set up a Free Agency list of players not taken in the initial draft, and then have a pick-up system similar to the NFL fantasy leagues (teams in order on the waiver wire). This would enable you to drop players without trading them. Not that I want to burden Hornsy too much.....
I'm cool with mid-season delistings, but am pro players only being picked up through trades or the mid-season draft. Otherwise it just gets messy (I am not a programmer so I can't code an elaborate system). @BB Like totally man.
On trades, I'm thinking they need to be level on both sides. To prevent collusion though, I'm thinking trades by default are fine, however, maybe allow for a veto period before they become official, based on 8 or 10 votes to veto rule.
Nice work. Hornsy like. If 10 veto, it doesn't go through. Encourages participation and the burden of proof, if you will, is on the accuser.
Lets see what date is when we get to 22, i reckon 30 would be better. If you get hit by injuries your pretty stuffed with only 7 reserves.
Agree with SKT, injuries could cut your on field team to a dozen if you're unlucky - and we all know this certainly happens every season
Time will tell I guess. The benefits of having more players are that you are more likely to field a full team every week and you get to HAVE more players. The benefits of keeping it at 22 means that we have to be more astute with drafting (hothousing players for 2014 may not be a viable option if they're not going to play this year) and we have the opportunity to GET more players.
Yeah and low numbers will be fine anyway because we will have a mid-season draft wont we? What's the max amount of players we can delist then, 2, 3 - 5? It will take a lot of Freo-style badluck to run through 7 emergencies imo