cdwat
Joined: Oct 29, 2013
|
 Posted:
Jun 07, 2015 - 06:50 |
 
|
| ramchop wrote: | | Dazedmw wrote: | | I think my preferred system would be to promote the Conference winners and relegate the bottom three coaches from Prem. Then have the three Conference second place teams play off against Spots 3 to 5 in Prem. Gives the chance of turnover if its required but doesn't mean you could end up with a weaker Prem than Conference level (extreme case but possible). |
I like this idea. |
Yeah, that sounds like a fun idea.
I'd be interested how it fits/doesn't fit with the objectives of the new system.
Not that I really have a problem with the new system anyway. |
_________________
Proud member of the SWL HEROES
Bio template here. |
|
Barre
Joined: Aug 09, 2003
|
| Posted:
Jun 07, 2015 - 09:00 |
|
| Dazedmw wrote: | I think it's a shame that we now have a system where potentially you are better off holding in Conferences and timing your run to peak in Prem. As Tomay has said in the past, its extremely hard to win the gong in your first season in Prem and as such most newly promoted teams will be looking at going straight back down.
Looking at my team if I promote from Conferences this coming season I'll be underdone for Prem and would likely be relegated. So my options are an easier season and then a harder one and being back in Conferences or taking two seasons to build, not get promoted early and then having a better shot at a title. I don't think a system that encourages that sort of thinking is the best one.
Another thing that occurs to me is that the two that stay up from this season may have a big advantage in subsequent seasons. Say Beefy and Barre stay up after finishing top two again, whoever comes up is unlikely to match the power of Faulcon and Erickan's circa 2200TV teams and therefore Prem will be weaker overall.
I think my preferred system would be to promote the Conference winners and relegate the bottom three coaches from Prem. Then have the three Conference second place teams play off against Spots 3 to 5 in Prem. Gives the chance of turnover if its required but doesn't mean you could end up with a weaker Prem than Conference level (extreme case but possible).
Anyway, I don't think anything will change for LX. Just my thoughts for the future. |
Your premise here is that somehow being in Prem makes your team stronger? How does this figure, you are more likely to be facing tough opposition every game.
We have always avoided playoffs where possible, that's why the tie breakers are so extensive. Whether it's beneficial to your team or not, playing extra games introduces disparity to the rest of the competition and should be avoided. |
_________________
SWL: Southern Wastes League - Become A Legend! |
|
Toonie
Joined: Jun 03, 2004
|
| Posted:
Jun 07, 2015 - 09:04 |
|
| polemarch wrote: | Well I am sure that the RocketVamps will never make Prem so this is all a mute point from my teams perspective.
Just remember that SWL is the largest it has ever been with the most coaches and diversity of teams and experience. SWL has undergone some changes in the past around how you get into and out of Prem. So lets see how this season goes. |
Actually it has been bigger in the past, at one stage we had 3 regionals, 3 conferences and premier, as well as a development pool for coaches waiting in the wings. |
_________________
 |
|
Dazedmw
Joined: Sep 01, 2011
|
| Posted:
Jun 07, 2015 - 09:39 |
|
| Barre wrote: | | Your premise here is that somehow being in Prem makes your team stronger? How does this figure, you are more likely to be facing tough opposition every game. |
Hmmm, no I don't think so. I can't have been clear. My premise here is you want a system that encourages people to try to win games and promote (i.e. promotion is desirable, it doesn't make your team stronger), and not have coaches being given an incentive to try to game the system by staying in lower divisions.
The new system tilts the balance towards the later because the risk of obtaining promotion to a higher division remains but the rewards (chance to stay in said division and eventually win a title) are lessened.
| Barre wrote: | | We have always avoided playoffs where possible, that's why the tie breakers are so extensive. Whether it's beneficial to your team or not, playing extra games introduces disparity to the rest of the competition and should be avoided. |
Fair enough although I note since I have been here there has been a promotion play off most seasons. If avoiding a play off is of the most importance then why is "play off" the third tiebreaker of 8 when it comes to that criteria?
Also, I'm not convinced that a single game "disparity" is really of importance in a league where teams commonly have 100+ games more experience than their opponents.
If the current system is considered a good one by most people then that is fine, but don't defend what may be an inferior system (in my eyes at least) based on a parity that doesn't exist. |
|
|
Samaranthae
Joined: Aug 30, 2006
|
| Posted:
Jun 07, 2015 - 10:32 |
|
I am fairly new here so i really don't know the history. To me the goal seems to be to have the best teams in prem. So on one side you don't want to make it too hard to get out of conference and into prem and on the other hand you dont want teams dropping down to be replaced by teams that are nowhere near as good.
This to my mind is why a playoff is a good compromise.
Benefits-
1- Even if the matchup kinda means that the "best" team doesn't end up in prem. I think people missing out or going down will feel like they had a "fair" chance to stay in/get in prem. While it may be unfortunate and someone might feel they would have beaten the other team rather than the one they played. The maths is clear, win this game and go up/stay in prem.
2- On the whole i think this maintains the integrity of the elite status of Prem. While it wont be every team. It will probrably keep the higher TV, less injured and better coached teams in the prem.
3- A playoff is the last game before the next season. Maybe your was competetive but has just lost 2 vital players. Maybe its better off that don't go up to prem. The opposite can be true. Maybe your team was struggling but you kept yourself in 5th position in prem but now its all come together and your team is READY for a run at the title. This 1 game is the game that matters and it will be a good way to display form.
So now we weigh the benefits against the cost or cons.
1- It's another game. By this i mean you get an extra game to develop. At this point i think we're talking about teams that have a minimum of 16 games under their belt. But more likely these are teams with 20+ for 2 seasons or 30+ on average games. I don't think the 1 extra game would matter very much. If it does help the teams that arent top 2 in prem then that may actually be a good thing. But theres everychance they kill the teams best player in turn 1 (too soon Cdwat?). If this was from reggies going into conference i would agree. Also this is a MUST WIN GAME. When i must win i find i farm SPP's nowhere near as well as when i don't actually need to win. Also... chavo... just saying... chavo
2- It's another round. I don't know how long is actually between the rounds and how much people look forward to their rest. This is something that i think a lot of people should weigh in on. I kinda feel that if you want to be in prem that i would be willing to play an extra game. This proposal only includes an extra 3 games and tbh i think it gives us bored spectators something to look forward to in the off season.
I look forward to hearing people opinions about the benefit vs the cost on this. It might be that a lot of people REALLY wouldn't want to play the extra game, or feel that the extra game isn't fair on the conferences. I can never tell what people who arent me are going to think. But i for one like dazed's proposal. |
|
|
cdwat
Joined: Oct 29, 2013
|
| Posted:
Jun 07, 2015 - 14:41 |
|
| Grumpsh wrote: | | ... theres everychance they kill the teams best player in turn 1 (too soon Cdwat?) |
Nope, I'm fine. Honest I am. 
I wonder, has there ever been a more violent elf in SWL than Felaern? 52 Cas from 48 games.
If so, I'm guessing it's a Dark Elf. |
_________________
Proud member of the SWL HEROES
Bio template here. |
|
Foad
Joined: Sep 02, 2007
|
| Posted:
Jun 07, 2015 - 15:48 |
|
|
cdwat
Joined: Oct 29, 2013
|
| Posted:
Jun 07, 2015 - 15:52 |
|
|
Foad
Joined: Sep 02, 2007
|
| Posted:
Jun 07, 2015 - 16:00 |
|
| Barre wrote: | | We have always avoided playoffs where possible, that's why the tie breakers are so extensive. |
Any reason why? Seems kinds arbitrary, and the last few seasons of moving away from the "same old same" have seen us go from 4 divisions, to now pushing 7. Playoffs are exciting for the spectators and they provide equity.
| Barre wrote: | | Whether it's beneficial to your team or not, playing extra games introduces disparity to the rest of the competition and should be avoided. |
No more than "The Ashes"... At least it would serve a league purpose.
Don't get me wrong here, I think we should wait and see how the season goes, but I do feel bad for Beefy... With a different result he would have won. Now he's relegated.
I just feel that this is a good option.
That said, if we go to a 7th division next season, a 1:4:2 configuration could make it all a moot point. |
_________________
They see me Trollin', they hatin'...
 |
|
Tomay
Joined: Apr 26, 2008
|
| Posted:
Jun 07, 2015 - 16:19 |
|
Relegations will be applied from the end of this season not the last where the top 4 will remain. Playoffs are not good for elves as it means they have to string 8 solid games together rather than 7. A bit of a shake up in prem is a good thing and this is a trial. There's a lot of competitive teams in swl at the moment and with 3 conferences we feel that coming 2nd in a Conference is better than 3rd or 4th in Prem which certainly wasn't the case last year. It's
Something I have been pushing for a trial of in the past and we feel the time is right. Wil have 2 stay up out of 10 in premier and that works so let's see if it creates a bit more interest with relegation and promotion at the end of the season. |
_________________
Join now and "Create a Legend" |
|
Semitence
Joined: May 18, 2013
|
| Posted:
Jun 07, 2015 - 16:31 |
|
I normally love to rail against the admins as much or more than anyone, but I think this change is a good one. Nothing wrong with lots of movement up at the top. You make or break in prem. I like it.
The sceptic in me says that it would, of course, come into effect in the same season Tomay has just made it into the conferences with the Cockslove Pickers... |
|
|
Foad
Joined: Sep 02, 2007
|
| Posted:
Jun 07, 2015 - 17:43 |
|
| Tomay wrote: | | Wil have 2 stay up out of 10 in premier and that works so let's see if it creates a bit more interest with relegation and promotion at the end of the season. |
WIL have 6 stay up out of 10, with 4 relegated.
The 3 conference winners promote.
The 3 runners-i[ and the best 3rd place are then place in a 4-man playoff for the last spot.
They have a 9 round premier, and 7 rounds for everything else, which allows for 2 rounds of playoffs.
That would make it tight to complete 5 cycles a year...
But yeah, let's wait and see... |
_________________
They see me Trollin', they hatin'...
|
|
Barre
Joined: Aug 09, 2003
|
| Posted:
Jun 07, 2015 - 18:00 |
|
| Dazedmw wrote: | Hmmm, no I don't think so. I can't have been clear. My premise here is you want a system that encourages people to try to win games and promote (i.e. promotion is desirable, it doesn't make your team stronger), and not have coaches being given an incentive to try to game the system by staying in lower divisions.
The new system tilts the balance towards the later because the risk of obtaining promotion to a higher division remains but the rewards (chance to stay in said division and eventually win a title) are lessened. |
If a coach wants to game the system they will find a way to game the system, it doesn't matter what you put in place. Fact is coaches can find ways to make results the see them not promote. By adding 2 teams from each division it make is harder to avoid promotion if you have a strong enough side.
If you are found to be deliberately gaming to not promote and act against the best interests of the league then you won't be around for long.
| Dazedmw wrote: | | Another thing that occurs to me is that the two that stay up from this season may have a big advantage in subsequent seasons. Say Beefy and Barre stay up after finishing top two again, whoever comes up is unlikely to match the power of Faulcon and Erickan's circa 2200TV teams and therefore Prem will be weaker overall. |
This is what I was referring to in my previous 'premise' statement, teams are more likely to be in better shape at the end of a conf season then they are a prem season, just because Faulc and Erickan are in decent shape this season doesn't mean this will always be the case. Sometimes strong teams will go down, if they are good enough they'll e back next season.
| Dazedmw wrote: | Fair enough although I note since I have been here there has been a promotion play off most seasons. If avoiding a play off is of the most importance then why is "play off" the third tiebreaker of 8 when it comes to that criteria?
Also, I'm not convinced that a single game "disparity" is really of importance in a league where teams commonly have 100+ games more experience than their opponents.
If the current system is considered a good one by most people then that is fine, but don't defend what may be an inferior system (in my eyes at least) based on a parity that doesn't exist. |
There has been a large number of playoffs recently but historically it has been low. Playoff's ONLY occur in ONE scenario, when tie breaking across divisions cannot be resolved using points, other rankings have less meaning across divisions so they are dropped. In recent seasons we've have 3 divisions to fill 4 spots, normally points resolve this, but recently it hasn't.
Just because disparity exists, it doesn't mean we need to piss all over it and introduce more and more. It's a minor thing most of the time, but on occasion it can change the fortunes of a team dramatically. I'm not a huge fan of the Ashes games, it's a great idea but unfortunately there is no system to play non progression games at the moment (if it did it may help both scenarios)
I think the new system will work well so let's give it some time to play out, obviously if there are holes in the system we'll adjust to make it work. |
_________________
SWL: Southern Wastes League - Become A Legend! |
|
Samaranthae
Joined: Aug 30, 2006
|
| Posted:
Jun 08, 2015 - 05:42 |
|
| Tomay wrote: | | Playoffs are not good for elves as it means they have to string 8 solid games together rather than 7. the season. |
I don't really get it. Injury maintainance wise you have to string every game together. If MNG's were scrubbed over the end of the season it would make sense but i dont get it.
What this may mean is that to win a premiership you have to finish top 2 for a minimum of 2 seasons in a row. This means you have to string 14 solid games in a row. I don't want to go over my last post too much.
I did want to say that i think the move to get more conference teams into Prem is a good one. I but i do think that if this had been implemented last season our prem would have lost some very good teams and only gained some ok ones. |
|
|
Daudy
Joined: Aug 28, 2008
|
| Posted:
Jun 08, 2015 - 05:57 |
|
Woah, big change there. Will change the landscape for sure. I can see some people knuckling down and timing a sprint to the top now (maybe more people will play agility because?). It'll be very tough to sustainably keep in Prem (and I say that as someone who won my first two seasons there by Round 6), so anybody that does has my respect.
It'll be interesting though, I see some very good teams see-sawing in between Prem/Conf that otherwise wouldn't previously, and it could make rebuilding in conference for other teams an even tougher task.
I'm also going to guess we're going to get a much bigger range of winning coaches as a result due to evergreen incumbents being less likely to stay up due to the lack of spots (think if the Whalekillers were still here, + Colliders + Skinks = most of the recent titles, but you lose at least a 3rd of that Prem credential gauntlet guaranteed). As others have pointed out, it's also very unusual for teams to win in their first season being re-promoted (or freshly promoted). That's going to happen a lot more frequently now just because of the nature of the format. So I wonder if people might feel that not having to go through as many teams that have established consistency at the top + more winners from first time promoters (previously rare), might open up winning more to flash in the pans rather than consistent performers.
It will also make URN selection a true nightmare (good luck to the admins). |
|
|
|
|
| |
Secret League Americ...
Search
