WXV Rules Discussion 2018

[PowerBug]

Why not just allow all trades to pass?  If a coach wants to do a bad trade then let them, they'll find a way to do it anyway.
  The Cap is in place to stop clubs becoming over powered.

Do that, and then for the team that comes last, that coach has to re-apply for the job (i.e. other applications are accepted for the position)

[RaisyDaisy]

Do that, and then for the team that comes last, that coach has to re-apply for the job (i.e. other applications are accepted for the position)

Yeah that's never going to happen

[PowerBug]

Do that, and then for the team that comes last, that coach has to re-apply for the job (i.e. other applications are accepted for the position)

Yeah that's never going to happen

Why not? You let coaches do the moves that THEY think will benefit their team. If they do badly, then the onus is on them. What's the punishment right now for coming last and not winning games? Pick 1 and a priority pick if you be bad consistently.

I'm not suggesting an automatic sacking, that would be stupid. But perhaps you could go something like this:
- If you come last, the other 17 coaches vote on the future, that future being either "they keep their job" (Might be because coaches see that that coach is building something and just needs another season, or they just got really unlucky that season with injuries) or "we allow other applicants to apply" (Current coach can obviously re-apply).
- You are exempt from this if it's your first season in charge. The new manager that takes over a bad team gets at least 2 years to turn it around.

It would mean you'd only need a max cap, no longer need a min cap. It speeds up trading processes. It will change the trading dynamic because it'll completely change what players are valued at (i.e. the older guys suddenly hold more value)




I think I thought of this at some point during the last voting process for the two new spots where a comment was made that only the "best" get into WXV. When in truth it's not necessarily the best, it's most definitely some of the loudest though.

[RaisyDaisy]

I said that's never going to happen, in reference to the bottom team coach getting sacked

I don't care if all trades just pass without a vote tbh, because 99% of them don't get negged anyway other than meow's rubbish trades haha

You've just come into the comp, but the idea of under-performing coaches being given the flick is something that I personally have suggested on more than one occasion (constant low performance and or lack of activity) but save your breath, because as long as Purps is Admin a coach is never going to get sacked for either of those reasons

You apply to enter this comp, and once you're in, the only way you generally ever leave is if you decide to yourself

I think I thought of this at some point during the last voting process for the two new spots where a comment was made that only the "best" get into WXV. When in truth it's not necessarily the best, it's most definitely some of the loudest though.

Your definition of "the best" could be different to mine, or anybody else

"The Best" isn't based on results. It's based on the people we have in this comp. You might think we're loud, and maybe some of us are, but I don't see people lining up to join any other XV so I guess they are good traits we have :)

[PowerBug]

You've just come into the comp, but the idea of under-performing coaches being given the flick is something that I personally have suggested on more than one occasion (constant low performance and or lack of activity) but save your breath, because as long as Purps is Admin a coach is never going to get sacked for either of those reasons

If that's the way it is then fair enough, was just an idea.

[Holz]

Do that, and then for the team that comes last, that coach has to re-apply for the job (i.e. other applications are accepted for the position)

Yeah that's never going to happen

lucky i wasn't kicked out for being an "incompetent" coach

[Ringo]

I should have been kicked out for bringing in Willem Drew,

[Purple 77]

Always welcome ideas :) thanks for the discussion PB.

But yeah at the end of the day, I have four standards:
- submit your team on time
- vote on time
- if a co coach, have SOME input into your team
- don't d!ck me around

There isn't another way for me to sack you.

[GoLions]

Always welcome ideas :) thanks for the discussion PB.

But yeah at the end of the day, I have four standards:
- submit your team on time
- vote on time
- if a co coach, have SOME input into your team
- don't d!ck me around

There isn't another way for me to sack you.

fek

[Purple 77]

Teams left to vote:

Buenos Aires Armadillos
Cairo Sands
Dublin Destroyers
Mexico City Suns
Moscow Spetsnaz
New Delhi Tigers
Tokyo Samurai

[Purple 77]

Votes are in!

A) Democracy - keep as is - where all coaches have a vote
B) Partial democracy - where I lead a panel of coaches whom decide the outcome of each trade
C) Partial dictatorship - I decide which trades I want the community to vote on (which will be most of them - designed to avoid obviously (and I mean obviously) fair trades from clogging the system).
D) Dictatorship - I decide every trade outcome.

A) 10
B) 0
C) 6
D) 2

So keeping as is!



Now, discuss the neg levels...

[RaisyDaisy]

Now, discuss the neg levels...

If it ain't broke...

[Holz]

Its not democracy though.

The majority of coaches can vote to pass and it fails.

[Purple 77]

Its not democracy though.

The majority of coaches can vote to pass and it fails.

The current system was voted upon by the coaches. They voted for a 6 neg rejection level, as they want a higher degree of accountability for trades.

This is now your opportunity to discuss why a 9 vote neg level is more appropriate.

[upthemaidens]

How often do we get 9+ negs on a trade?   If 4 or 5 coaches have an issue with a trade, then surely the trade needs looking at.