2014 SC Suggestion Box

Written by Motts on August 15 2013

The rolling lockouts were a great new initiative in 2013. Have you got any other suggestions on how to make SC even better next year?

My suggestion would be: enable double subs when trading. So for example, you could trade out Buddy Franklin in your forward line, bring Stevie J down from your midfield to replace him (as you can do now), but make a second substitution by then swinging Goddard into your midfield from your backline and bringing in a new Defender. So through a double sub you’re swapping a Forward for a Back.

We’ve had a few suggestions made in the Coaches Box about which players should be a DPP next year – feel free to use this post to continue with them too.

 

0
0


Leave a comment / Scroll to bottom

65 thoughts on “2014 SC Suggestion Box”

  1. Need more variety (guns) in the Def and Fwd lines. This is the 2nd week in a row where my opponent has had the same back line as me, bar benches.

    0

    0
  2. Teams to be announced at 4pm on Thursdays (like they used to be before bloody Channel 7 got involved with their wallets) with late changes punishable by massive fines.

    0

    0
  3. My suggestion is similar to yours Motts, but mine would be to allow the same mechanism without trading. Where when you hit trade or swap (as I would propose) the player goes to the swap position (trade position currently). But from there you can do what ever you want with the rest of your team, provided they still meet the requirements of there positions.

    Eg. In my team I had Vlaustin DEF/MID in the backline, Staker DEF/FWD in the fwdline, and Monfries MID/FWD in the middle. I would like the ability to move around DPP into other positions with no trading via moving out of the 30. So Vlaustin moves to the change area, Staker moves to the backline, Monfries moves forward to fill that hole, then Vlaustin comes out of the swap position and into my midfield. That would allow me to take both Monfries and Staker off my bench, and put Vlaustin on my bench.

    There is no reason why this can’t be done. It would just provide a much greater insentive for getting DPP.

    0

    0
  4. Less trades….Game too easy….. everyones teams the same…26 is the right number I reckon
    I know trigger happy people will give me thumbs down but I think from the pure skill of the game its better

    0

    0
  5. some dpp i would like to see are

    Jarred McVeigh DEF/MID
    Daniel Wells DEF/MID
    Chris Judd FWD/MID
    Charlie Dixon RUCK/FWD
    Chad Wingard FWD/MID
    possibly Deledio back to DEF/MID,
    possibly bringing Dangerfield back to a FWD/MID,
    and Sidebottom back to a FWD/MID

    0

    0
  6. I think big issue number one that needs to be sorted before you can properly assess the validity of a number of these ideas is: will each team have two byes next season?

    It seems like the clubs and the AFL want it. If this happens (whether it be in two sets of MBR’s or with one set of MBR’s and then the second byes in dribs and drabs) then we are in for more carnage next year.

    If we do get two sets of MBR’s next year (as I think is possible, bordering on probable), I’d like to see the benches re-increased with three back, midfield and forward players on the pine. This allows for greater flexibility. Secondly, really have a high pool of DPP’s, to increase the flexibility further. Then, reduce the trades back to an average of one per round (so likely 24 next year). This will help reduce the ever pesky situation that you regularly encounter at this time of the year, when you come up against opponents and effectively have 5-on-5.

    0

    0
  7. In terms of DPP changes, I predict/think should happen:

    Dangerfield [Adel] (M/F) – This is highly unlikely, but I want to see VS really get a high level of DPP’s to increase the chances of people having different teams and maximum flexibility. His possession average has dropped 4/game from last season, while he has kicked 26.16 compared to 22.8 last year, from five less games. This equates to 2.5 shots at goal per game, up from 1.4 last year. Also has three bags of four goals and another of three showing his increased time in the forward half following the losses of Tippett and Walker this season. He may not play there as much going foward, but has played this year for Adelaide as Rockliff was often forced to for Brisbane last year: despite being gun midfielders, they are also often the best forward option as well.

    Hanley [Bris] (D/F) – Could argue for a D/M, but he is now being swung forward with decent regularity and has kicked ten goals in his past seven games, failed to kick at least one on just a single occasion.

    Walker [Carl] (D) – Is now playing the quarter back role. He does push up enough that you could argue a M/D DPP status, but he has been playing the quintessential half-back-flank, quarter-backing role that has evolved in the game.

    O’Brien [Coll] (D/M) – Pushes up playing as a wingman often enough now that he deserves DPP I think.

    Macaffer [Coll] (M/F) – His sporadic midfield tagging role should earn him DPP

    Goddard & Heppell [Ess] (M) – Neither are defenders, at least not in this current Essendon structure

    Carlisle [Ess] (D/F) – One of the top couple of key position swing men in the league.

    Bellchambers [Ess] (R/F) – Is now selected as the backup ruckman to Patty Ryder and plays forward more than in the ruck now. Could well change if he is in different colours next season.

    Kommer [Ess] (F) – May have been a midfielder in the VFL, but isn’t in the AFL.

    Sandilands [Frem] (R/F) – I know that many will say that his decreased ruck and increased forward time is due to his return from injury, but my gut says Ross is looking to make 211 one of the hardest to stop forwards next year in an attempt to a) help Pavlich and Mayne and b) keep him from falling apart running around the ground so much. Clarke is a perfectly good ruckman and playing Sandilands forward more than ruck benefits Fremantle next year I think.

    Bartel [Geel] (D/M/F) – OK, so he won’t get all three, but he could. My tip is D/F next year. He has started back basically every week, has 13 goals, with three games of multiples and six games with at least 25 disposals, so what status he gets is anybodies call but could just as easily be D/M as D/F.

    Taylor (D/F) [Geel] – Like Carlilse, has developed into a supremely good swingman.

    Stokes (M/F) [Geel] – He is averaging over 25 touches a game and only has three weeks where he has kicked multiple goals. If anything, he will be lucky to not just be classed as a pure mid in 2014.

    S Johnson (M) [Geel] – Scott told us he would be a midfielder this year and he wasn’t lying. SJ is averaging in excess of 29 touches a game. Has only kick 12 goals in 13 games and hasn’t kicked more than two in a single game so would be very lucky to keep DPP status (well, we would be the lucky ones really…)

    Vardy (R/F) [Geel] – I know it’s a small sample size, but in his five games he has played three as a majority forward.

    Swallow (D/M) [GC] – Has been sweeping across half back all year. Not the quarter-back per se (The Cannon has that distinction), but he is definitely playing out of defense the majority of the time.

    Dixon (R/F) [GC] – Been a dominating forward at times and, due to circumstances befalling Smith, has played more ruck time, having four 10+ hit out games in his ten appearances.

    Mitchell (D/M) [Haw] – Similar to a number on this list, has moved out of the guts to be a defensive quarter-back.

    Grimes (D/M) [Melb] – Has moved from a defender to a midfielder, albeit usually a tagging one.

    Wingard (M/F) [Port] – In just his second season, has become one of – if not the most – damaging small forwards in the game. May be lucky to keep midfield eligibility, but is still averaging 22 touches a contest. He only turned 20 a month ago and is in his second season of footy. Seriously, how good could this kid be?!

    Ellis (D/M) [Rich] – Plays off a wing enough now to justify a DPP status.

    Vickery (R/F) [Rich] – Is the number two ruckman at Tiger land, backing up the Big Mullet.

    McVeigh (D/M) [Syd] – One half of the most lethal half-back rebounding combination in the AFL. Should be rewarded as such.

    Bolton (F) [Syd] – Only hit possession twice this year (against GC and GWS). He is now effectively a small forward. Should lose his DPP, if he plays on at all.

    That’s all that I can think of at the moment…

    0

    0
  8. Love the idea of the double Sub.
    – Have a tagger option. Ie tag an opposition player and they will only get half their score
    – Each week u must have a unique captain: it is all too predictable with Ablett… although the vice captain loophole changes it slightly

    0

    0
  9. Having a history section of your supercoach page which shows your overall win/loss record, points scored, overall rank in each year, premierships etc.
    Good bragging rights for friends.

    0

    0
  10. What about 2 chances during the season to double your worst players score.

    It would add a bit of a wldcard. So if you think you have a cliff hanger game you play the wildcard and may get over the line with your most unproductive player.

    0

    0
  11. How about only counting the best 21 scores each round? That might alleviate some plain bad luck associated with injuries early in a game.

    0

    0
  12. I’ve got it!!

    Brand new position: Tagger!

    Get rid of 1 of the current 8 starting midfielders and turn him into a tagger. Add 1 reserve tagger (adjust the starting salary cap ect to accommodate).

    Just like all the other positions some players will be taggers in themselves, (e.g. Crowley, Taylor Hunt) others will be DPPs (e.g. McCaffer tag/fwd, levi greenwood tag/mid, Karmichael Hunt tag/def)

    Now that would shake things up!

    0

    0
  13. High amounts of trades keeps people interested. But for seasoned veterans its makes the game too easy.

    My solution:
    – Keep the number of trades as is (or even increase!)
    – Reduce the starting salary cap by a considerable amount. This mean you have to start with much more rookies and mid-pricers and forces you to work hard to get premiums into your team.

    I think this would make the game even more challenging and appease the trigger-happy masses!

    0

    0
  14. At the risk of sounding unpopular I want the partial lockout rule to go. It really disadvantages anyone who works, plays footy or just has a life outside SC and cannot be online all weekend updating their team. The casual player certainly doesn’t want to have to do this to be competitive. Other then a few dodgy loopholes what has it achieved, part of the game is having strong bench cover for any late withdrawals.

    0

    0
  15. 1. Rolling Lock out gone. This makes you lock in your Captain for the week.

    2. WIth the Lock out gone, if your player gets the green vest and you have an playing emergency on the bench he automatically takes his place.

    0

    0
  16. The sub is now part of AFL so I think they should incorporate it into fantasy footy. Therefore worst scoring player ie injured player, gets subbed off for highest bench player with the sub on them from any position.

    0

    0
  17. given we will probably see 2 lots of multi bye rounds and 24 games played each side across 26 rounds due to the shortened pre-season I suggest the following:

    – MBR do not count for leagues, nor does round 1 to maintain the 17 round league.
    – 2 trades only per week regardless of MBR
    – due to 26 rounds for the home and away season, supercoaches will have 32 trades for the home and away season. any unused trades at end of home and away will be lost
    – all players will be given 6 trades at the start of the finals campaign with max 2 a week…applicable to major and minor premierships
    – onfield structure to remain however the bench becomes a squad of 8 players where DPP could be emergency across multiple lines……(think draft league setup)….maximum 3 emergency…..

    just trying to remove league games from MBR x2 (probably) but still provide relevance by end of year….people will run out of trades early over a 26 round season…..

    just some thoughts

    0

    0
  18. Don’t fix what aint broke!!!

    I’ve played many a fantasy game, across many sports, this is my first effort at supercoach and it’s probably the best fantasy game out there, really well thought out.

    On another note, the other half just got back to Manchester from Oz, and brought me a Crows shirt. Get in! You won’t see many of them over here.

    0

    0
  19. It’s been the same each year, but NOT ENOUGH of the scoring figures are listed. Points differ for loose ball gets, gathers, half-tackles…its all over the shop and unclear, surely this is not hard for Champion Data to display more clearly?

    0

    0
  20. Getting rid of this retarded rule where, if the coach prefers to have TWO (2) selected emergencies in DEFENCE, the HIGHER score (alas, the better team), has a chance of winning. Under current rules, the lowest score is taken. Skill in team selection should be valued over LUCK of selection.

    I also agree with more DPP’s:

    Charlie Dixon
    Jarrad McVeigh
    Chad Wingard
    Jake Carlisle
    Patrick Dangerfield

    These are naming just a few…

    RoOSTA

    0

    0
  21. Less trades; makes the game too easy for those not skilled enough to select and/or stick with developing or premium players.

    RoOSTA

    0

    0
  22. The competition can start after the first 3 rounds to assist coaches with the best team selection; however the league should be shortened; as scoring in bye rounds is ridiculous. If anything, the best 15 players is acceptable, then that way (as it should) the BEST team would actually win. Games during the bye rounds are just excuses for people to waste trades! Season shortened and byes during the three-week bye run would be best

    RoOSTA

    0

    0
  23. A CONTINUATION/HISTORY on Supercoach players home page; ladder position in previous years, best/worst scores; premierships won; trade history, etc – if we pay for Supercoach gold, this is a no brainer…All the very simple data is linked to the same email we re-register with each year. This suggestion is mentioned above – I concur!

    RoOSTA

    0

    0
  24. ****BIGGEST SUGGESTION****

    Much like THE AGE, you can modify certain things/rules in your own league. So if one chooses to start a private league, it BAFFLES me that the league admin cannot:

    * Send out emails to the group (only psyche out crap)
    * More generic administrative control over the league; eg: SET YOUR OWN PRIZE PAGE for 1st/2nd or major/minor premierships for those setting up PRIVATE LEAGUES

    * With scoring aside, be able to adjust rules regarding EMERGENCIES scores; eg – I can’t cop a Cotchin score of 60 onfield while Viney scores 109 on the bench. If HE is selected as Emergency, the best team needs to win each week, where I see it only for for a +49 added to my score. As this doesn’t affect SC scoring in any way; it only affects the LEAGUES that nominate/activate this “sub rule” (etc)

    More to come!

    RoOSTA

    0

    0
  25. THE DREADED SUB RULE..

    See my comment above about the emergency scores, which could lead to a modification in the rule that leagues use. I think a player STARTING as the sub needs to be “flagged” when scores are entered into the SC/CD database, as it should check for the selected emergency for that area of the ground and then score should look like this:

    If Ben Kennedy (*STARTED AS SUB) score of 12 < EMERGENCY selected for (FWD) position – eg Brent Staker 78. Then Brent Staker's score counts in place of the sub-score.

    0

    0
  26. So this isn’t really a suggestion, but http://www.afl.com.au is reporting that teams will get two byes in season 2014. They will be:

    – Between rounds eight and ten (which means six byes/week) and
    – Between rounds 18 and 19 (which means one week of ten byes and another of eight)

    *This is not quite as relevant, but noteworthy nonetheless: Only two weeks of NAB cup next season, and then a final week where teams play intra-club games and a rep game will be played (although the structure of that game is not yet decided). The first two weeks appear to be full matches which is nice to see that they have done away with the Mickey Mouse stuff that we have had to suffer through for a while now. This means slightly less time to assess the kids though which is not good news (to clarify that, it is actually better for the teams, but not so much for the SC community).

    The former piece of news could be carnage for the game as the second set of byes will come two and three weeks before the finals, meaning that we will have to be focused on a bye structure for the majority of the season. It will be really interesting to see how Virtual Sports deal with this scenario.

    0

    0
  27. Please give us three trades a week. Dont change overall number of trades. This would help in situations such as what happened with freo where ten of their best players didnt play. Chances are most teams probably have 3 or 4 of these players so means they can all be traded. Please add this, especially with two bye rounds next season

    0

    0
  28. I would like to see Private Leagues given the option of choosing whether or not partial lockouts should apply for their private competition. Most guy’s in my League do not have the time to spend constantly logging in over the weekend to check on team changes and then alter their teams, emergencies and captain accordingly, and are therefore significantly disadvantaged in comparison to those that can. We would like a choice of a full lockout for our League effective before the commencement of the first match of the weekend. We would also like to see an option to limit the number of trades available through the year so all the teams don’t end up so similar. Would also like to see players values change after their first game rather than their third, thereby rewarding Coaches who made good selections at the time of original recruitment.

    0

    0

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *