* UCI WorldTour


Author Topic: 2017 rules  (Read 4482 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online Canto

  • All-Star
  • ***
  • Join Date: Feb 2016
  • Posts: 1933
  • Bonus inPoints: 0
    • :Blank:
    • :Blank:
    • :Blank:
    • :USC:
    • :MUD:
    • View Profile
2017 rules
« on: September 08, 2016, 08:30:04 AM »
As this 2016 season nearly over, I would like to suggest an open topic about next year rules.
It is my first year (ok half-year), but I already have one remark about the contract rule.
I found a bit annoying to have some good guys we bet on at the start or during the season, for which we did not invest a lot (so they had only a one year contract), and we can't keep them in our team.
I would suggest to be able to give them a contract extension (limited number of extension per team, only one extension possible per rider, increase of the yearly salary by 150% for example). So I put the idea on the table to see your thoughts about. Thanks

Offline davy duck

  • All-Star
  • ***
  • Join Date: Oct 2015
  • Posts: 1591
  • Bonus inPoints: 0
    • :Blank:
    • :Blank:
    • :Blank:
    • :Blank:
    • :AND:
    • View Profile
Re: 2017 rules
« Reply #1 on: September 08, 2016, 09:14:46 AM »
I like somewhere your idea.
Butt:
- I think it's difficult to accept that the owners of gaviria, ewan and benoot, extend their contract at 150%. Meaning that they pay next year 50k for them. Perhaps make exceptions for the free youth picks ...
- The whole thing is based on demand vs. supply. But it's indeed regrettable that when you "discover" a rider early in his career and cheap, you don't get the big win the year after when he really breaks through. And in real life, when a rider is out of contract, he will move to the team that pays him the most. We could stay loyal to that idea. So it feels not okay to "force" a rider to stay in your team, while he could make more money elsewhere.

hobbling on the 2 ideas.

Offline Garfield

  • League Moderator
  • Legend
  • ****
  • Join Date: Dec 2011
  • Posts: 13918
  • Bonus inPoints: 0
    • :Blank:
    • :PHX:
    • :Blank:
    • :Blank:
    • :ARS:
    • View Profile
Re: 2017 rules
« Reply #2 on: September 08, 2016, 09:45:04 AM »
I've been thinking about it (and discussing with a bunch of you) for some years now, and these have usually been the conclusions:



Idea 1: Keeping riders as a fixed rate (say: 1y, 100% increase with a minimum of 200k)

Pro: pride since you discovered him
Con: less active league (fewer auctions), or even a broken one if another Baby-Sagan comes through the ranks in a year or two?



Idea 2: Loyalty discount (i.e. you bid normally, but after you win your own guy, 10%/20% discount kicks in)

Pro: money savings if you discovered him
Con: extra manual work for the mods, and possibly a bad taste in your mouth if somebody overbids clearly just to annoy you



Idea 3: implement both/either of the above in a brand new league instead, maybe even with more emphasis on talent discovery? (Would you play both?)



Some more general remarks: we rarely "discover" huge talents based on our brilliance alone. I stumbled across Benoot merely because I happened to notice he was riding strongly as Vervaeke's mule in his last u23 year. And let's face it, his ascension to instant stardom was so sudden it even shocked his own team. And Ewan/Gaviria always were clear superstars in the making, so there was also very little genius involved. And none of them will owe their current teams any favours when chasing their first fat contract soon IRL. Also, most of us has almost zero knowledge/interest in u23 races. Also, these are easier to follow in the media if you're Belgian than if you're Russian. Possibly, frustration could kick in if you've been tanking for that next Sicard and then he becomes... well, the next Sicard :P Interestingly, this issue gets discussed a lot in other sports too: should the NBA fantasy owners follow college ball religiously? No clear answers. Just brainstorming here :)



PS
Since the discussion started already: what's our calendar next year? The WorldTour grew A LOT, so it would be very transparent to limit ourselves to just those races without any subjective manual tweaks. I'm tempted. Sorry, Paris-Tours?



PPS
I'd like to design every single league's winner jersey icons which the champions will boast right next to their username for the next 12 months. Please help me design them!

UCI - :UCI:
CR - maybe :GreenJersey:?
RC - :WCRJ:
Cobbles - maybe :WhiteJersey:?
Ardennes - maybe :PolkaJersey:?
Giro - pink
Tour - :YellowJersey:
Vuelta - red
Invitational - ???
« Last Edit: September 08, 2016, 11:07:30 AM by Garfield »
Skype: stefek-burczymucha
Leagues I run: Advanced NBA, Cycling, All-Europe Football

Online Canto

  • All-Star
  • ***
  • Join Date: Feb 2016
  • Posts: 1933
  • Bonus inPoints: 0
    • :Blank:
    • :Blank:
    • :Blank:
    • :USC:
    • :MUD:
    • View Profile
Re: 2017 rules
« Reply #3 on: September 08, 2016, 12:00:42 PM »
I like the idea of having a World Tour Events, for which you redraft teams each year (maybe with less riders ?), and having a "more guided one" toward talent scouting and "dynasty / contract" style. This one could go deeper into the ranking and events (HC and why not level 1). I am ready to be more active in this type of league.

Offline glomser

  • All-Star
  • ***
  • Join Date: Nov 2014
  • Posts: 1993
  • Bonus inPoints: 0
    • :Blank:
    • :Blank:
    • :Blank:
    • :Blank:
    • :FEY:
    • View Profile
Re: 2017 rules
« Reply #4 on: September 08, 2016, 02:30:11 PM »
I think it's OK to keep a rider, but I would suggest that you only can give 1 rider an extention of his contract (like we do with letting only one rider go with an extended contract)

I also suggest that this rider only can get an 1 year contract and that this contract cannot been extended again. (otherwise the better riders never come into the auction anymore)

About the salary I think that will be doubled, (As we're talking about riders with a contract of 1 year that will be getting max 300 then) I'm not sure if there should be a minimum cap for salary.

For the season I would suggest this:

http://sport.infonu.nl/overige-sport/169463-wielerkalender-2017-wedstrijden-en-teams.html#wielerkalender-2017

Maybe without the national championschip 17 - 25 juni

And the WC will be RR and ITT.

About the contractlenght that Canto suggest I think the current style is OK, and maybe one with only 1 year contracts. I would then suggest to limit the team to 15 riders and a reduced amount of money to spent... 
Winner Quick Fix Giro 2017

Offline Teton

  • Legend
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jan 2010
  • Posts: 11139
  • Bonus inPoints: 0
    • :CHI:
    • :POR:
    • :Blank:
    • :OregonState:
    • :CHC:
    • View Profile
Re: 2017 rules
« Reply #5 on: September 08, 2016, 02:54:01 PM »
Thoughts on World Tour.

Keep current rules, including team size, budget, NeoPro draft, number of riders, and teams.

Current 1 drop is fine.

Add 1 contract extension, 1 year max, with a minimum salary of 210k (which is what you would have sided them for if you would of had them on a two year contract).
Only cyclist which are 200k or under are eligible. This makes tracking easy as the since the minimum salary make them ineligible for the an extension in the following year.
By keeping the available cyclist eligible for the extension limited to cyclist currently under contracts of less then 200k, it will not allow the hoarding of the very top cyclist.

Firm deadline in advance of drafts for (1) drop and (1) extension.

Replace Colorado on the schedule.
Quick Ardennes 2019  - 1st
Cyclopaths 2018 1st
Quick Vuelta 2018  1st
Quick Tour 2018  1st
Quick Giro 2018 - 2nd
Quick Ardennes 2018  - 1st
Rainbow Cup 2017 - 2nd
Quick Cobbles 2016 - 1st
Rainbow Cup 2016 - 1st

Offline Garfield

  • League Moderator
  • Legend
  • ****
  • Join Date: Dec 2011
  • Posts: 13918
  • Bonus inPoints: 0
    • :Blank:
    • :PHX:
    • :Blank:
    • :Blank:
    • :ARS:
    • View Profile
Re: 2017 rules
« Reply #6 on: September 08, 2016, 04:01:50 PM »
Add 1 contract extension, 1 year max, with a minimum salary of 210k (which is what you would have sided them for if you would of had them on a two year contract).
Only cyclist which are 200k or under are eligible. This makes tracking easy as the since the minimum salary make them ineligible for the an extension in the following year.
By keeping the available cyclist eligible for the extension limited to cyclist currently under contracts of less then 200k, it will not allow the hoarding of the very top cyclist.

Ingenious and simple, I wish I thought about it myself!
In short: fixed 1y, 210k extension for any one cyclist who earned less than that before.
Let's see what others think.
Skype: stefek-burczymucha
Leagues I run: Advanced NBA, Cycling, All-Europe Football

Offline Joelsim

  • All-Star
  • ***
  • Join Date: Oct 2014
  • Posts: 2109
  • Bonus inPoints: 0
    • :Blank:
    • :Blank:
    • :Blank:
    • :Blank:
    • :BOL:
    • :Blank:
    • View Profile
Re: 2017 rules
« Reply #7 on: September 09, 2016, 05:12:13 AM »
I'm not sure on this keeping a rider scenario. Those who had the early picks on the neo pros have already had a stunning rider at 30k for two years. Those who had 15th pick for instance have absolutely no chance. Seems a bit unfair. Maybe we can do it but would have to exclude at least the first round of neo draft picks. I can definitely see the fairness if someone had bid 30k and won the auction for a rider who came good and being able to keep that rider for an extra year seems like a nice and fair bonus, or indeed if it had been a second round draft pick.

On the calendar I think we should keep to HC and WT - all races of those ilks including the lesser ones. The more races the better or we will end up making many Conti riders not worth the bother (and we need them with so many managers). I also think we should include some races like Algarve/Andalucia which have good fields - we could probably add 10 or so realistically.

I'm also happy with the 30 squad rule, it forces people to look a bit further and discover riders - if we only had 15 then prices would shoot up for those 15 riders. I think it's fun getting a couple of bargains/unknowns and following their careers.

I don't think much is wrong with the main game at all.

« Last Edit: September 09, 2016, 05:39:07 AM by Joelsim »

Offline Joelsim

  • All-Star
  • ***
  • Join Date: Oct 2014
  • Posts: 2109
  • Bonus inPoints: 0
    • :Blank:
    • :Blank:
    • :Blank:
    • :Blank:
    • :BOL:
    • :Blank:
    • View Profile
Re: 2017 rules
« Reply #8 on: September 09, 2016, 05:42:48 AM »
On another note, I wonder if it is worth any teams that aren't renewed for 2017 (i.e. let's assume I didn't want to play next year (obviously I do though, but if I didn't), then all of the riders on the BMC team go back on to the market. Any noobs start with a clean sheet.

Offline Joelsim

  • All-Star
  • ***
  • Join Date: Oct 2014
  • Posts: 2109
  • Bonus inPoints: 0
    • :Blank:
    • :Blank:
    • :Blank:
    • :Blank:
    • :BOL:
    • :Blank:
    • View Profile
Re: 2017 rules
« Reply #9 on: September 09, 2016, 05:51:52 AM »
So, in summary.

Rider extension.

One rider from each team worth less than 200k can be extended at 210k for a season, except riders that were picked in the first round of neo-pros (i.e. excludes those who have already had 2 years on a team at 30k).


 

Forum Search


Quick Profile

 
 
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

* Chat Room

Refresh History
  • Brent: I didn't watch it.  When I woke up the score was 21-0.  A team win goes in the W column for QBs. That's just how it is.
    October 14, 2019, 01:37:13 AM
  • Brent: The 49ers are on another level.
    October 14, 2019, 01:37:32 AM
  • Yeagg: The Steelers QB did his job. He played well enough to not lose them the game. The rest of the team played perfect
    October 14, 2019, 01:38:47 AM
  • indiansnation: to many eird losses today
    October 14, 2019, 01:43:37 AM
  • indiansnation: shure hell didnt think dallas was going to loose to jets
    October 14, 2019, 01:43:57 AM
  • Brent: Lots of individuals on Dallas.  If they pay Dak the $40M/yr that he wants,that will be the end of them.
    October 14, 2019, 01:45:58 AM
  • Yeagg: Dak has been playing well
    October 14, 2019, 01:49:03 AM
  • indiansnation: i agree with brent he is good but not worth that kind of money
    October 14, 2019, 01:53:50 AM
  • Brent: He's not $40M/yr good.  they they will have 20% of their cap tied up in one position.
    October 14, 2019, 01:54:56 AM
  • Yeagg: Honestly idk BooYah! about football. I just play fantasy football for fun
    October 14, 2019, 01:56:44 AM
  • Yeagg: I'm still trying to figure out how I have Dak Prescott, LeVeon Bell, Austin Ekeler, Phillip Lindsay, DeAndre Hopkins, Michael Thomas, Mike Williams, AJ Green, Darren Waller, Nick Bosa, Josh Allen, Khalil Mack, and Blake Martinez on one of my fantasy teams and I am 3-3
    October 14, 2019, 01:59:13 AM
  • indiansnation: yeagg wait till aj green comes back he will help your team so much
    October 14, 2019, 02:01:04 AM
  • indiansnation: u got a very good team yeagg
    October 14, 2019, 02:01:28 AM
  • Brent: Same concept especially if you consider NFLC.  The NFL salary cap is the same as our $188.2M year.  The difference is RL football you have to pay offensive lineman and most teams carry 6-8 with left tackle being about the highest paid non QB position.  That was until recently, but they still get paid.  So if you pay your QB $40M/yr, your LT $15M/yr and the rest of your line a total of about $25-35M year, that could be $90M on 6-7 players.  You still have to field all of your skill positions and defense for the other $100M.
    October 14, 2019, 02:01:46 AM
  • Yeagg: I should be better than a .500 team
    October 14, 2019, 02:02:00 AM
  • Brent: Yeah, I have a couple redraft leagues where I should be better than I am.
    October 14, 2019, 02:02:36 AM
  • Yeagg: Isn't that where drafting comes in handy
    October 14, 2019, 02:02:49 AM
  • Brent: Exactly
    October 14, 2019, 02:03:34 AM
  • Yeagg: I was referring to the cap space comment in case you didn't know
    October 14, 2019, 02:04:38 AM
  • indiansnation: i think its harder guessing what yound guys will produce in nfl than baseball
    October 14, 2019, 02:05:31 AM
  • Brent: The Cowboys got lucky with La'ell Colllins.  He was 1st round talent, but fell out of the draft to UDFA due to false allegations that he was cleared of. So they got one of if not the best OT from that draft for peanuts.  Eventually he will need to be paid.
    October 14, 2019, 02:06:28 AM
  • Brent: Yeah, the draft is huge and also hitting on UDFAs.  Teams have to develop and then keep their own talent or they'll go broke and end up in salary cap hell.
    October 14, 2019, 02:07:09 AM
  • Yeagg: So basically just like baseball
    October 14, 2019, 02:17:10 AM
  • indiansnation: yep nfl u gotta watch how much u pay look at browns they are going to have that problem in 2021 they have alot of good tallent thats going to need to get paid.
    October 14, 2019, 02:17:13 AM
  • Yeagg: And no way Brian. Baseball has 40 rounds and still most of those guys never even sniff the MLB
    October 14, 2019, 02:17:33 AM
  • Yeagg: More 1st round picks are bust than even play a full season
    October 14, 2019, 02:18:02 AM
  • Brent: They also have between now and then to figure out who will be resigned and who will be replaced and don't they still have quite a few 1st round picks between now and then?
    October 14, 2019, 02:24:21 AM
  • indiansnation: Hey if u have a top notch gm with a great scouting staff u can make any player u draft be great. Look at Boston their minors sick why is that because they suck at drafting. Know look at Tampa and indians and miami they have pretty dang good minors especially I diane look at who they had pitching this year bauer got traded, and they lost 2 of their sp most. Of the yr
    October 14, 2019, 03:45:28 PM
  • Thecliff: :agent: Buckets Of Dimes (BOD) webpage on the Internet [link] ENJOY  :toth:
    October 14, 2019, 10:30:44 PM
  • Brent: Brian, I was talking football.  I think you were talking baseball.
    October 14, 2019, 10:35:26 PM
  • Thecliff: :judge: Remember THE LEAGUE? well, that league is doing great at fantrax and has many members here are still GM of teams [link]
    Yesterday at 03:58:12 AM
  • Geezer66: What’s up Fellas! Any football teams with openings?
    Yesterday at 09:15:38 AM
  • Brent: Yes, NFLC has quite a few openings.  I'll PM you.
    Yesterday at 09:18:29 AM
  • Brent: NFL Countdown
    Yesterday at 09:19:08 AM
  • blkhwkfn: Might be a couple in The Gridiron and Title town (4 sport league)
    Yesterday at 09:19:56 AM
  • Brent: blkhwkfn, it's Saints vs Bears this week.
    Yesterday at 09:22:54 AM
  • Geezer66: Ok thanks! Let me know for the Gridiron also
    Yesterday at 09:58:58 AM
  • Brent: Geezer, I sent you a PM.
    Yesterday at 10:04:19 AM
  • indiansnation: Morning guys
    Yesterday at 10:13:30 AM
  • indiansnation: Welcome to site geezer
    Yesterday at 10:13:49 AM
  • Vik: Welcome Geezer
    Yesterday at 10:52:17 AM
  • indiansnation: Vik whats up
    Yesterday at 01:41:20 PM
  • indiansnation: Geezer pm
    Yesterday at 01:41:29 PM
  • indiansnation: Flashg
    Yesterday at 01:44:14 PM
  • indiansnation: Flash pm
    Yesterday at 01:44:22 PM
  • Vik: Not much Brian, just griding at work
    Yesterday at 01:48:53 PM
  • Daddy: Today was a good day. Hopefully more good then bad are on the horizon.
    Yesterday at 10:23:34 PM
  • Daddy: @Brian our teams made a trade together like it was you and I trading.
    Yesterday at 10:25:27 PM
  • indiansnation: Browns didnt want him on team so atleast we got a pick for him. We were talking about cutting him
    Today at 12:30:39 AM
  • Thecliff: :judge: 1stG completed wepage updates to present date [link]
    Today at 02:29:18 AM