KRFL - a football simulation league
Forums
KRFL :: Forums :: KRFL Forums :: General League Discussions
ANTI-DUMPING PROPOSED AMENDMENT << Previous thread | Next thread >>
Moderators: noodles, MarkB
Author Post
Steelers
Wed Jan 29 2020, 04:46p.m.
Registered Member #100
Joined: Sat Jan 25 2020, 07:43p.m.

Posts: 26
When I first started this league, the biggest problem was non-playoff teams tanking and trading valuable assets in exchange for future high draft picks with utter disregard for remaining competitive during the regular season. I looked around for anti-dumping rules in other leagues and believe a rule that followed the following line of thought would help avoid this problem.

In our league, the top 6 teams in each conference qualify for the playoffs.
I propose the 12 teams which do not make the playoffs also will enter a separate tournament with the league awarding the winner of the non-playoff team tournament the #1 draft picks in the free agent and rookie drafts in the following year, the second place team in the tournament get the #2 picks, etc. The mechanics of the losers tournament would be the same as the playoff teams use, just reverse the winning %, etc. Teams which lost in the loser tournament would be ranked on their success in the tournament. Teams which lost in the same round of the loser tournament would be ranked by which team had the highest point differential during the season.

I would leave the actual wording to the league commissioner but I think the rule would benefit the league by forcing teams to remain as competitive as possible while still allowing them to rebuild their teams.

I hope you will give the proposal your serious consideration.
Back to top
MarkB
Wed Jan 29 2020, 05:23p.m.
Mark Blume

Registered Member #81
Joined: Mon Oct 14 2013, 08:54a.m.

Posts: 1085
Please also see the discussion at http://www.aaroncraneinstitute.com/football/e107_plugins/forum/forum_viewtopic.php?12750
Back to top
MarkB
Wed Jan 29 2020, 05:46p.m.
Mark Blume

Registered Member #81
Joined: Mon Oct 14 2013, 08:54a.m.

Posts: 1085
Also, I see no problem starting/continuing the discussion now, but our Official proposal and comment period is March 21-April 3 with voting on proposals April 5-April 11.
Back to top
mark
Wed Jan 29 2020, 10:33p.m.
Registered Member #45
Joined: Wed May 05 2010, 11:29p.m.

Posts: 612
I’m for trying this. Or anything different. I don’t think it matters if trading stops 4th or 8th week.... we can see that rookie picks are not as valuable in our league as they are i the nfl. Because performance is based on raw statistics. Not projection.
Back to top
Inverness
Wed Jan 29 2020, 10:50p.m.
Registered Member #80
Joined: Fri Apr 26 2013, 10:03p.m.

Posts: 184
My concern with this idea: Someone with a genuine suckee team , without dumping players, could go into the supplemental tournament and still lose. By doing so, they would lose a chance at an early draft choice/position and make it difficult to rebuild.
Back to top
Salem
Wed Jan 29 2020, 11:47p.m.
Registered Member #25
Joined: Sun Sep 07 2008, 10:07p.m.

Posts: 577
I really like this idea. Now people have a choice. You can trade off that good player you have, but if you do you may have a crappy team and end up with a worse pick. This year, Rolling Green went all in and came up short. They would have a much better draft pick because of it.

I would also like to point out that having a higher pick does not mean you will get a better player. Here are the top 15 rookies in the NFL last year (according to this article: http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000001093812/article/top-25-nfl-rookies-of-2019-49ers-raiders-dominate-rankings ) and where they were taken in the KRFL:

1. Nick Bosa (Round 1, pick 2)
2. Josh Jacobs (Round 1, pick 18)
3. AJ Brown (Round 2, pick 9)
4. Kyler Murray (Round 1, pick 1)
5. Josh Allen (Round 1, pick 5)
6. Maxx Crosby (Round 4, pick 12)
7. Daniel Jones (Round 2, pick 3)
8. Deebo Samuel (round 3, pick 5)
9. Brian Burns (round 1, pick 14)
10. Devin Bush (round 1, pick 7)
11. Devin White (round 1, pick 6)
12. DK Metcalf (round 2, pick 17)
13. Terry McLaurin (round 3, pick 18)
14. Gardner Minshew (undrafted)
15. Montez Sweat (round 1, pick 20)

Having a high draft pick, helps, but in no means determines who gets good players.
Back to top
noodles
Thu Jan 30 2020, 01:57a.m.
Webmaster

Registered Member #1
Joined: Mon Feb 18 2008, 02:12a.m.

Posts: 1155
Yep. I traded away a crap load of rookie draft picks for a defensive stud and promptly lost seven straight games. I still would have made the playoffs if Sebastian Janikowski hadn't pushed a 50 yd FG wide right with time expiring in the last game of the season. Stupid kickers.

Much has already been said about this issue in the thread the Commissioner linked above so I think everyone should read or re-read that discussion before adding their additional cents. This is a good time to reopen this topic since we have a few different proposals on the table but should try to reach a consensus on the best idea before the rules amendment period. I think a compelling case was made in that thread why change is needed (although there were dissenting opinions). After some more commentary, I'll gather together the suggestions so we can distill them down to the one most effective in addressing the matter and most likely to pass the league vote.
Back to top
Cliff
Thu Jan 30 2020, 02:23a.m.
Registered Member #23
Joined: Fri Sep 05 2008, 07:23p.m.

Posts: 429
Steve is right on this suggestion makes no sense. So since we keep talking about teams tanking look at the other end of the spectrum. one team can make the playoff as the last wildcard and probably lose first or second round of the playoffs but by not now not making the playoffs they can win the losers playoff and pick first overall. Well that sounds a lot better to most and open up another can of worms. I have yet to play against anyone in this league that loses on purpose. Everyone has the right to rebuild their team when they can't win and try to get better next year as the same as everyone has the right to go all in for the current year. I play in over 10 leagues a year between all sports and this is the only league that constantly grips about people's choices to make their team better this year or next. Everything is a crap shot and there are no guarantees whichever way you choose but to constantly try to limit chooses sucks the fun out the league for many people. When you find someone who coaches to lose kick them out. When you don't stop making everyone a robot to not be able to make choices for their teams. Every league functions the same way. There are always the have and have nots. Lately a lot of pro league operate the same way. This is supposed to be fun and we will never come close to 24 teams finishing 8-8 the same way the real leagues don't. Lets get over it and stop trying to find way to penalize the teams on a down year from not being able to rebound the next year and let everyone have a strategy for their team and see if it works.

Whether you have pick 1,5 or 10 guarantees nothing for your team for the next 5 plus years. Especially when we pick rookies before their first NFL game you may not even get the best rated player next year. We all may think we are the best GM but the guys that get paid to make picks and have much more information that we do make mistakes all the time so to think we won't is foolish when this is a hobby and not a full tie job. Whatever happened to playing to have fun and build the team the way you want and not everything being under a microscope that is wrong more often than not. Trading is fun in any of these leagues. I honestly have to question the group who constantly tries to take that away in this league. No one I have seen in playing games for 30 years makes good trades all the time so the more you make the more chances of error you have so why limit anyone to what they want to do to enjoy this league? It is time to stop accusing people of tanking (which really is short the way people talk about in in this league is for cheating to lose on purpose) rather than strategically trying to get better next year. No one coaches like an idiot who wants to lose on purpose so trading pieces that can't help you next year for players who can to me is a very smart decision and not a person trying to lose on purpose but trying to trade in expiring assets for future ones that can help get them into the playoffs. Every league operates the same way but for some reason this one can't accept it and wants to control every owner. lets come to grips that no league simulation or professional has all teams with a few games record wise and just play and have fun and stop arguing over nonsense because the more you limit owners eventually you will have a hard time filling the league because other leagues become more fun because there aren't as many limitations to what you can and can't do.
Back to top
Steelers
Thu Jan 30 2020, 03:49p.m.
Registered Member #100
Joined: Sat Jan 25 2020, 07:43p.m.

Posts: 26
I think the objections in this thread are addressed in the comprehensive anti dumping/monopoly proposal in the other thread. Specifically, the rules are designed to make it easier for teams at the bottom to rebuild their teams by cutting 2 players on each team who have bad contracts. Additionally, there are expanded opportunities to make trades for longer periods of time. This gives all teams more incentives to win, more control over their own teams and gives bottom 4 teams the opportunity to get out of bad contracts. When you look at the proposal as a whole package, it definitely improves the league rulebook.
Back to top
mark
Thu Jan 30 2020, 04:05p.m.
Registered Member #45
Joined: Wed May 05 2010, 11:29p.m.

Posts: 612
👍🏻
Back to top
 

Jump:     Back to top

Syndicate this thread: rss 0.92 Syndicate this thread: rss 2.0 Syndicate this thread: RDF
Powered by e107 Forum System