Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)

[Canto]

1- no, prefer to keep 2 years
2- yes for the optionnel 2. Years
3- snake draft
4- no restriction for neo trade
5- ok for the definition with the age limit
Thanks

[Pricey]

1. Keep at 2 years
2. Optional 2nd year
3. Snake draft
4. No real opinion on this
5. Agree with this if it’s with an age limit.

[glomser]

2019 draft format - summary thus far:

1. 1-year contracts for 1st-rounders

Pro: Tom, Joel, myself
Con: Ace, Fleur, Daniel, Erkka, David, Steve, Bryan, Luis
Undecided: Jack (not fussed either way)
Probable outcome: no.

2. Optional 2-year contracts for 2nd-rounders

Pro: Tom, Martin, David, Fleur, Daniel, Steve, Bryan, Luis
Con: Davy, Joel, myself (luck-dependent)
Undecided: Ace (proposing a non-guaranteed variant instead)
Probable outcome: yes.

3. Snake draft order

Pro: Fleur, Joel, Steve, Daniel, Bryan (all citing fairness)
Con: Luis, myself (bad teams need all the help they can get)
Undecided: n/a
Probable outcome: yes.

4. Restriction on neo-pro trades
Players drafted less than 12 months ago are not eligible for trades.

Pro: Ace, Fleur, Steve (against the spirit)
Con: Luis, Tom, Joel, Bryan, myself (more strategic)
Undecided: n/a
Probable outcome:

5. A brand new definition of neo-pro
"Neo-pro is a rider who never spent an entire season with a WT/ProConti team IRL."

Pro: Daniel
Con: Luis
With an age limit: Fleur, Tom, Joel, Bryan
Undecided: myself
Probable outcome:


New game brainstorming moves here: http://www.profsl.com/smf/index.php?topic=313669.0

On 1: No, keep the 2 years
on 3: Maybe a draft where the weakest team starts every round, to make the weaker teams stronger
on 4: Not sure what would be the best option
on 5: Agree and with the age limit

[GTF]

1-4; these are non-issues for me so I suppose I'm against them all, but I'm not fussed either way.
5; I do agree with the new neo-pro definition (including age limit).

[scrooll7]

1. Keep at 2 years
2. Optional 2nd year
3. Con.I don't like this draft order
4. No restriction for neo-pro trade
5. Agree with this if it’s with an age limit

[Garfield]

Decision time:

1. 1-year contracts for 1st-rounders

Pro: Tom, Joel, myself
Con: Ace, Fleur, Daniel, Erkka, David, Steve, Bryan, Luis, Kristian, Martin, Chris, David
Undecided: Jack (not fussed either way)
Decision: no change.

2. Optional 2-year contracts for 2nd-rounders

Pro: Tom, Martin, David, Fleur, Daniel, Steve, Bryan, Luis, Kristian, Chris, David
Con: Davy, Joel, myself (luck-dependent)
Undecided: Jack, Ace (proposing a non-guaranteed variant instead)
Decision: yes. Rules updated.

3. Snake draft order

Pro: Fleur, Joel, Steve, Daniel, Bryan, David, Chris (all citing fairness)
Con: Martin, Luis, Kristian, myself (bad teams need all the help they can get)
Undecided: Jack
Decision: yes. Rules updated.

4. Restriction on neo-pro trades
Players drafted less than 12 months ago are not eligible for trades.

Pro: Ace, Fleur, Steve (against the spirit)
Con: Kristian, Luis, Tom, Joel, Bryan, David, myself (more strategic)
Undecided: Martin, Jack, Chris
Probable outcome: highly unlikely.

5. A brand new definition of neo-pro
"Neo-pro is a rider who never spent an entire season with a WT/ProConti team IRL."

Pro: Daniel
Con: Luis
With an age limit: Fleur, Tom, Joel, Bryan, Kristian, Jack, Martin, Chris, David
Undecided: myself
Decision: yes, u23. Rules updated.

[oliveira]

Let's not forget 500 auctions = 500 times a moderator has to move the thread & add the rider to the team sheet.
So to convince me, there would have to be more people willing to go all over again AND - like you mention - a couple of very cool new rules to separate it from the main game. I'm all ears

I thinked a bit about what could be a new concept and I came to this idea:

1) Auction for, say, 20-25 riders each team. Everybody must fill every spot on the team. Budget 5000;
2) You choose your team hierarchy. 5 leaders that will score 100% of their cq-world-tour-game-points, 5 free role riders rthat will score 80%, 10 gregarios that will score 50 or 60%.
3) at the end of the season the team that wins get an extra budget, the last teams loose some budget. BUT the game gets harder for the winner and easier for the last spots. The winner only gets 4 leaders for next season, and the last spots get 6 or 7 leaders from their 25 rider team that will score 100%.

What you think?

[Garfield]

You might want to talk to Ace or join the discussion over at LBB. He wanted to run another auction game, so maybe you guys want to join forces?

btw I don't understand point 3. Why make it both easier and tougher for the winner? people will get confused and pulling a bit in both directions won't have a huge effect. My instinct would be to either make it just tougher, or forget the extra rule altogether...

[oliveira]

I'm happy there's another auction game in the pipeline, and I think Ace's concept is good.
Anyway, I can help on that new game.