|
|
Post by TrailDucker on Oct 7, 2013 10:41:40 GMT -5
Ok, now that we have had a good discussion on it, I think we need a resolution. So being my diplomatic self I'll put it up for league vote. The voting will end Sunday the 13th and I will implement the schedule, draft the players and start sending out the league invites. Check out our initial discussion on this hereSo vote for one of the options you think is best. Option A:18 week regular season schedule that ends March 10th. Each team plays 16 games, and has 2 bye weeks. The first week of the season only two teams in each conference (1 match up) will play. You will play each of the 14 teams in your conference and 2 teams twice. Playoffs will be one week long with a 17 day finals match up. Option B:15 week regular season schedule that ends February 10th. Each team plays 14 games and has 1 bye week. You will play each team in your conference once, nobody twice until the playoffs. The NBA trade deadline will be during the second round of our playoffs. Teams who don't make the playoffs will play in a losers bracket where the winner will get $5 Mill in extra cap space for the next season (2 per conference) Playoffs will be 2 weeks long with a 17 day finals match up. |
|
|
|
Post by TrailDucker on Oct 7, 2013 21:12:55 GMT -5
Wow, day one and the league is completely split.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 7, 2013 22:04:43 GMT -5
My vote can be bought...
I just want to go on record with that.
|
|
|
|
Post by dunky69 on Oct 10, 2013 21:15:19 GMT -5
The poll doesnt pop up on my phone so I'll just post my vote here.
B.
more playoffs are always better in everything. I also like that the schedules can be more balanced to counteract the shorter schedule . I've flip flopped on this a few times but I really do think b is the best option.
Consolation tournement would be fine with me.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 12, 2013 11:35:25 GMT -5
Poll doesn't show on my phone but I gotta go A. I don't like the trade deadline being during our playoffs, could really alter things for some teams if a big trade goes down.
|
|
|
|
Post by Walker (Newark GM) on Oct 12, 2013 14:15:57 GMT -5
It doesn't show on my phone either but I vote A.
It's weird having playoffs start right after All-Star break
|
|
|
|
Post by TrailDucker on Oct 14, 2013 13:02:37 GMT -5
Tight race! Option A won at 12 votes to 11.
Thank You all for voting, both options had their pros and cons, so all of your input was greatly appreciated! Projects are ramping up a bit at work and I have a roommate moving into my extra room in my apartment next month, so after living alone for a year I have to do some serious consolidation of my shit to make room. It will be a busy week for me but you should all get invites sometime within it for the ESPN network.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 14, 2013 17:57:00 GMT -5
With a vote that close, could let everyone win. Put all As into 1 conference, put all Bs in the other and let them have the way they voted. Anyone who didn't vote is put in randomly.
|
|
|
|
Post by Oakland Oaks on Oct 15, 2013 0:10:20 GMT -5
Yeah! Then when your done with CHI's suggestion go ahead and make the govment start working again, prevent the BART strike in the bay area from going down, and put coal in that bitch who laughed at me yesterday's christmas stocking.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 15, 2013 13:27:35 GMT -5
With a vote that close, could let everyone win. Put all As into 1 conference, put all Bs in the other and let them have the way they voted. Anyone who didn't vote is put in randomly.  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 17, 2013 10:57:51 GMT -5
i dont think different schedules are a good idea as its a weird mixture but then again, this league has that now anyway. cant wait until the next veto vote that gets explained because its not fair and hurts COMPETITIVE BALANCE because the league as a whole just voted in a way that says competitive balance wasnt worth some teams ending a season sooner. can we at least be consistent and dump the stupid veto system? if going to pass up the chance for balanced schedules fair to everyone for a couple games and longer season for those who are going to be out of the playoffs, let people trade and make mistakes (in your opinion since you cant read the future any more than teams in the trade) as they see fit in trading? i dont see how you can hang a banner for competitive balance as the reason anymore since you let a huge competitive balance move get tossed to the side. seriously not a good reason now for the veto system. cant tout competitive balance because if that was the case, seems like a no brainer to have a balanced competitive schedule. since that's not happening, competitive balance as a reason is really weak since not good enough of a reason to make sure the teams that make the playoffs did so on an equal field. axe the veto system, it has no place. competitive balance? please, obviously that isnt the biggest priority here. if want people to have more fun with having more games then let them have more fun with letting them trade for guys even if you think that trade is stupid. certainly no worse for competitive balance than letting some teams play a second game against a crappy team and another playing one against a great team. So that I can understand your logic of removing the checks and balances of the league, you would like to completely remove the voting system on trades? And you are evaluating the voting for the league schedule to that of trade voting with an argument of competitive balance? OK. Don't you see the danger here, Dallas? You are suggesting a complete removal of league regulation. If you think that playing a longer season vs. a shorter season compromises a "competitive balance," then please elaborate, because I fail to see this reasoning. A shorter season is a disadvantage to teams that are on the cusp and could benefit from more games. It could squash runs from teams like Cleveland this past season. It hampers the little guy trying to compete for an entire season. And for the teams in the consolation bracket, sure a $5M kick is nice, but it would be more fun to play a couple more games for those middle of the road teams and try to make the playoffs. Furthermore, how does this even relate to a trade veto? There are additional metrics for voting on a trade and a variety of reasons that a voting system (and veto process) is necessary and that starts with protecting the teams involved, preventing collusion, providing an aid so that a team cannot completely implode on itself, and attempts to preserve that competitive balance you speak of. We also vote to make sure that you are not trading LeBron James for Ryan Hollins. Would you pass that trade? Would you object me trading the #1 overall pick for the 50th pick in the draft? Yes, you would object to both. So if we get rid of regulations and a voting system, you essentially open up the doors for the possibility of illicit activity, collusion, teams crippling themselves with horrible contracts, and, theoretically, the league collapsing in on itself. It's an all or nothing topic. You can't make "exceptions" to when you will or will not vote on a trade. That's why every trade must be voted upon. You are comparing apples and oranges in your argument. I can appreciate a "fun" atmosphere, but there needs to be some type of regulation taking place. I don't know about anyone else, but I am having fun in this league. I can respect the rules and allow a democratic system to take place. |
|
|
|
Post by dunky69 on Oct 17, 2013 15:57:49 GMT -5
I get what Dallas is saying I think. I agree that it's more important to have a balanced schedule than for some teams to play really good teams multiple times while other teams in your conference won't play them once. It's frustrating. That does feel like you only half give a shit about competitive balance just so people can make a run and most likely that last run to the playoffs will probably be against shotty teams(ex. My bobbies last season). N if we had two week playoffs I don't think I make it back to the conference finals. I just feel like more playoffs will show us the best teams and the trade deadline during the playoffs would get hectic.
That being said I think getting rid of trade vetoes would be madness n probably end my time here with pickandroll (which would be awful cuz this shit is fun).
I can deal with more games n unbalanced schedule but I would like to bring this vote back next year and maybe everybody could think about adjustments to both sides.
|
|
|
|
Post by Oakland Oaks on Oct 17, 2013 18:23:38 GMT -5
So that I can understand your logic of removing the checks and balances of the league, you would like to completely remove the voting system on trades? And you are evaluating the voting for the league schedule to that of trade voting with an argument of competitive balance? OK. Don't you see the danger here, Dallas? You are suggesting a complete removal of league regulation. If you think that playing a longer season vs. a shorter season compromises a "competitive balance," then please elaborate, because I fail to see this reasoning. A shorter season is a disadvantage to teams that are on the cusp and could benefit from more games. It could squash runs from teams like Cleveland this past season. It hampers the little guy trying to compete for an entire season. And for the teams in the consolation bracket, sure a $5M kick is nice, but it would be more fun to play a couple more games for those middle of the road teams and try to make the playoffs. Furthermore, how does this even relate to a trade veto? There are additional metrics for voting on a trade and a variety of reasons that a voting system (and veto process) is necessary and that starts with protecting the teams involved, preventing collusion, providing an aid so that a team cannot completely implode on itself, and attempts to preserve that competitive balance you speak of. We also vote to make sure that you are not trading LeBron James for Ryan Hollins. Would you pass that trade? Would you object me trading the #1 overall pick for the 50th pick in the draft? Yes, you would object to both. So if we get rid of regulations and a voting system, you essentially open up the doors for the possibility of illicit activity, collusion, teams crippling themselves with horrible contracts, and, theoretically, the league collapsing in on itself. It's an all or nothing topic. You can't make "exceptions" to when you will or will not vote on a trade. That's why every trade must be voted upon. You are comparing apples and oranges in your argument. I can appreciate a "fun" atmosphere, but there needs to be some type of regulation taking place. I don't know about anyone else, but I am having fun in this league. I can respect the rules and allow a democratic system to take place. This is well said. I see no connection b/w the schedule and trade vetoes. I do see somebody looking for a soapbox to stand on and spout ideas from - in the middle of a produce market. As for the schedule - If every team plays every other team in each conference once, and then plays two additional games, this is but a blip on the unfairness radar. It's not significant enough to unlevel the competitive balance here. Now one team playing another 3 times per season and playing another team once or not at all would, but that's not what we're talking about here i hope. The "divisions" should simply be ignored and the win % (not W-L tally) should determine who makes the playoffs - irregardless of "divisions." Now if somebody wants to make a strength of schedule BCS style system for those 2 additional games, go right ahead. Seems like a waste to me. |
|
|
|
Post by TrailDucker on Oct 17, 2013 18:56:27 GMT -5
To clarify on the schedule. You will play all other 14 teams in your Conference once. There will be two different teams you will play twice to make it to 16. For most people those two teams will be two people from your own Division, which are all set up as one team from each "tier" schedule-wise last year. 4 teams will be playing one team from their division twice and one team form a different division twice because of the odd number. No team will play any other team in their Conference more then twice in the regular season. Now who plays what teams twice was set up randomly by me. Go ahead everyone and inspect your schedules as you accept the invite to the ESPN page. If anyone has anything about it to discuss with me, feel free to PM me.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 17, 2013 20:45:06 GMT -5
Pardon my french, but a lot of people need to just chill the fuck out. Like Oaks said, two extra games isn't going to completely unbalance the league.
Think things through before spouting off nonsense.
|
|
