reo19uk
Joined: Dec 01, 2005
|
 Posted:
Jan 29, 2007 - 19:47 |
 
|
There will be no changes to pubbowl this season but due to some things being brought up i feel changes are needed.
First thing i am going to do is change it to 3 divisions again. I have had a few people disagree with the seting up of the 4th division after the start of the season. This will probably mean making the divisions bigger.
Secondly is the format of the group. I will set it up so that there are no fixed opponents any will be able to play any1 else in their league. This will obviously then change the deadline procedure and there will just be a season start and end date.
I will also change the procedure of replacing people who have not been around for a while. If people are not around then they will be left in the group and have all their matches forfeited and be replaced at the end of the season.
Please everyone in the group reply to this post saying how they feel about the changes and any alternative changes. |
|
|
tattie5
Joined: Dec 08, 2005
|
| Posted:
Jan 29, 2007 - 19:51 |
|
yeh sounds fine with me. i think its better beeing able to play any1 you want rather than having a deadline to play someone.
Cheers keep up the good work |
|
|
Habeli
Joined: Mar 04, 2004
|
| Posted:
Jan 29, 2007 - 19:51 |
|
|
tattie5
Joined: Dec 08, 2005
|
| Posted:
Jan 29, 2007 - 19:52 |
|
does this mean the changes take place now??
or start of next season? |
|
|
Russo
Joined: Apr 11, 2006
|
| Posted:
Jan 29, 2007 - 19:53 |
|
Well when I rejoin the group, this will be fine by me. It makes sense, as it allows coaches to play when they have the time, and make up games if they have been away etc.
Also it reduces the need for you to chase up everyone all the time. |
_________________
BAAA means NO!
[21:35] <@Purp|away> why is it whenever I come to check the PC, Russo is lowering the tone?! 
================================
[22:59] <princevaliant> NBL has gotten to be such a dirty channel
[22:59] <princevaliant> ty Russo 
BiggieB is my idol |
|
Kaiowas
Joined: Apr 15, 2006
|
| Posted:
Jan 29, 2007 - 20:00 |
|
i find that this format makes people lazy though and since most people don't frequent #pubbowl you never know who is up for a game |
|
|
Astereth
Joined: Sep 05, 2006
|
| Posted:
Jan 29, 2007 - 20:08 |
|
I suppose this should make it easier to get games done. |
|
|
Smeat
Joined: Nov 19, 2006
|
| Posted:
Jan 29, 2007 - 20:19 |
|
Neither option is perfect- the "whoever, whenever" method can lead to cherry picking early on, avoiding the BBEG, or other options. And a scramble late on as all the procrastinators try to make up their matches. (OTOH, drawing that BBEG first off in a structured schedule can kill (or at least Serious Injure) an entire season!)
Now, let's combine that with the "advance/relegate" system, which seems to work well on paper. But with only 3 divisions, that means that there's a good chance that a fairly well-developed team will drop down into a lower division (esp if it's the "beginner") and just kick ass. Who gets to play them first? Without a schedule, who will they find to play? (Me, with a beginning team, I'd just forfeit that one game, write it off as a guaranteed Loss, and keep my 7 alive and healthy! Maybe play him last IF it matters for the season.)
Me, I'd prefer a schedule, esp since then everyone knows who's flaking, and who's not. Maybe some slop in it, plan for some sliding (esp around holidaze), but a little structure rather than "everyone find a game".
Q- Clarification- If a coach drops out, will all matches that season, future and past, be forfeit (the past ones retroactively)? That should be made clear, either way. Neither are fair across the board, one gives previous "losers" a free Win retroactively (as well as the SPP and Cash!), the other gives all those who haven't yet played an automatic Win regardless - all depends on how you see "fair".) |
_________________
Let's go A.P.E.!
(...and what exactly do you think they do with all those dead players?...) |
|
kemimutt
Joined: Apr 21, 2004
|
| Posted:
Jan 29, 2007 - 20:39 |
|
I think as is is a league where you have to qualify to advance to next division (compared to be set in a division due to your tr), the scedule should be fixed, just as it is now. As smeat said it is more unfair to force the coach of the good team to not find games due to having a strong team in a low division and thus making him not be able to win just because he cant find his opponents.The only problem with the current system is in the lowest division where experienced and trained teams will play against rookie team.
Why do people have a problem with starting a 4th division after the others have started? As long as they finish at the same time there should be no problem. The more the merrier. |
|
|
HunterX
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Jan 29, 2007 - 21:04 |
|
| kemimutt wrote: | I think as is is a league where you have to qualify to advance to next division (compared to be set in a division due to your tr), the scedule should be fixed, just as it is now. As smeat said it is more unfair to force the coach of the good team to not find games due to having a strong team in a low division and thus making him not be able to win just because he cant find his opponents.The only problem with the current system is in the lowest division where experienced and trained teams will play against rookie team.
Why do people have a problem with starting a 4th division after the others have started? As long as they finish at the same time there should be no problem. The more the merrier. |
What he said is like to my mind as well. Perhaps a poll is needed for the division question. |
_________________
[url=http://www.sloganizer.net/en/image,NBL,green,black.png] [/url]
[url=http://www.factorizer.co.uk/HunterX,0,ffffff,000000,0.png][/url] |
|
BlackNWhiteDog
Joined: Feb 05, 2006
|
| Posted:
Jan 29, 2007 - 21:08 |
|
|
Walks_in_the_Sun
Joined: Apr 16, 2006
|
| Posted:
Jan 29, 2007 - 21:28 |
|
I like it as is.
If I changed anything, I would just make it so there were 4 divisions: The 2 top-tier divisions, one big division (maybe with open schedule) for all the teams that aren't new but aren't in the top tiers, and one division for brand new teams, all of whom will advance to the 3rd division after the season. |
|
|
Egoon
Joined: Apr 03, 2005
|
| Posted:
Jan 29, 2007 - 22:01 |
|
I don't like the free for all system. It will probably lead to cherry picking as someone said before. Division sizes are ok for me either way (Though with a slight preference for smaller divisions (6 or 8 teams).
And maybe change the scoring system a bit, give more points for a lost game than a forfeited one. Give people something for showing up (A carrot seems in order =) ). |
|
|
Erod
Joined: Jun 08, 2005
|
| Posted:
Jan 29, 2007 - 22:51 |
|
IMO, fixed opponents and fixed deadlines are a lot better than a "free-for-all" system. |
|
|
sKink
Joined: Apr 27, 2005
|
| Posted:
Jan 29, 2007 - 23:39 |
|
sounds good |
_________________
"That looks like a machine gun! Don't grab it Shawn!" -WWE in Afganistan |
|
|
|
Finishing the 60 Gam...
Search
