Call me crazy (aka additional leagues brainstorming)

[Garfield]

Alright, seems we're converging to something quite cool:

• Name: The Rainbow Cup
• National teams! (different from current league, yay)
• Snake draft! (different from current league, yay)
• Strictly single year deals! (different from current league, yay)
• Same scoring and calendar! (no added maintenance, yay)
• Cost of each rider is his higher CQ score of 2014 or 2015.
• Total peloton size... say around 100 riders? (With total budget = 70000-80000 maybe? Top 100 scored 91652 in 2015.)

Please vote/argue below:

• Add an extra constraint of balanced teams, with pre-set pools of X GT contenders, X sprinters, X time trialists, X geezers etc.?

(Gimme your thoughts. Don't expect democracy though.)


PS
My nerdy brain briefly salivated over that prime idea, but in the end 1-year contracts make it both easy and different from what we already have.

Ladies?

Sorry, I think I know more about women's footy...
I mean, go wild, but don't count on me.

[Ace]

How does a snake draft work with National teams?

I suppose we could have:

2 round draft to select nations.

Option to select Spain 2 etc.

Then pick 5 riders from each of your nations (Spain 2 would have to wait for Spain 1 to pick 5).

Total budget of 5,000 per team.

I think it's simpler (and better) to have a 10 round snake draft with a budget of 6,000 and you can only pick one rider from each country.

Country Roads was also a better name 

[Garfield]

How does a snake draft work with National teams?

If we're drafting, the nations become mere labels indeed. Just corrected my question above.

[joecool37]

Everything sounds interesting. (The woman league would be the only one where I would pass).

But my vote would go to a easy league. 30 round snake draft, only 1 year contracts. So we just have to rate the riders for their 1 year value. Everyone has the same chance.

In year two the snake draft will start in reverse order of the 2016 final standings. So the worst team has the first pick in the 2017 draft. And so on.


Itīs easy and simple, but a lot of fun.



Not really sure how we will do it with nationals, but that could end pretty unbalanced at the end unless we find a good solution here.

[Ghedebrav]

So essentially it would be our current game but with a different method for rider selection and different team names - no significance to the choice of nation?

If not, I'll bagsy Colombia.

[BluesBrothers]

I will take Monaco, dont like to pay taxes

[Ace]

I'm in favour of a shorter draft (10 rounds).

Don't like specifying by rider type (or anything else that's subjective and/or requires work).

Having a budget adds some strategy.

One rider per country and/or real life trade team (or something similar) brings a twist.

[Garfield]

If we're drafting, the nations become mere labels indeed.

I mean, not immediately (when there is a cost assigned to each rider), but the more I think about it, the less chance I see for implementing nations as anything more than a mere label in any format:

• if nation means reserving some riders, we're just making the actual game less interesting
• if drafting with a cost, the two guys before me draft Majka & Kwiato - now I wish I would have selected Uganda and a least left my budget intact
• if auctioning, it could quickly turn into a surreal bidding of "how much can we milk the guy who is supposed to win this auction after all"

One rider per country and/or real life trade team (or something similar) brings a twist.

IMO if our teams remain small, this would hardly matter and thus becomes just a weird little detail more than anything.



Summing up:

League 1 - totally gonna happen
Basically Ace's original idea and what I posted above. I like the cost assigned to a rider, meaning draft order hardly matters:

• Snake draft
• Strictly single year deals
• Same scoring and calendar
• Cost of each rider is his higher CQ score of 2014 or 2015

League 2 - would be equally easy to run
For those who don't like the historical cost attached to each rider, and those who prefer balanced teams over those with only sprinters/climbers. I like the fact that this boils down to what fans get excited about: "is Cav better than Kittel", "is Landa better than Porte", not "is Greipel better than Pinot". Again, draft order barely matters, as each person gets one 1st pick, one 2nd pick etc.

• X participants
• Pre-set pools of X GT contenders, X sprinters, X time trialists etc.
• X separate 1-round drafts
• Strictly single year deals
• Same scoring and calendar

League 3 - is there interest for more crazy auctions?
Many people enjoy those auctions more than the season itself. Is there interest in more bidding wars? We would still need to come up with a fresh set of rules, so that we don't just repeat what we already have. Options that spring to mind:

• National/regional teams and/or trade teams with slight (10%?) discounts for either/both riders from the same region/team both (as I analyzed above, I'm scared a huge discount would tie your hands)
• Either single year deals or e.g. the ability to sign for any number of years, but doubling the salary each year
• Different calendar, e.g. WT only?
• Extra constraint of balanced teams, e.g. your guy slotted (your choice after you win the auction) into "GT contender" could not score outside GT? (This adds a degree of freedom: do I slot Valverde into GT, hilly classics, or 1-week races? And how does it influence his value?)

[glomser]

For League 1 and 2 I'm in. I think 2 more leagues for now is OK. Maybe in the future we can look at other posibilities.

[Teton]

I'm all in for whatever is decided. Although League 1 and 2 seem best. I would be glad to help if needed.