SRG wrote:Fair enough, I wouldn't have taken the team if I didn't have a plan for them
Sure. But value is relative per league. It's hard to join a new league, especially if you've been out of the game for a while, and be able to assess value properly.
Draft pick value is dependent on how strong drafts are here. Market might be slim for certain positions. etc.
UOducksTK1 wrote:OK, but I'm not a fan of him riding a CPU generated depth chart and sitting at 7-1. IMO we should start punishing for not doing depth charts.
Agreed but at this point Lukey would be fired ha
I cant think of a way that punishes if they have their pick though
UOducksTK1 wrote:OK, but I'm not a fan of him riding a CPU generated depth chart and sitting at 7-1. IMO we should start punishing for not doing depth charts.
Agreed but at this point Lukey would be fired ha
I cant think of a way that punishes if they have their pick though
I can think of ways. Don't let them participate in Playoffs predictions. Don't let them participate in free giveaways. Don't let them leverage their MLE/LLE. Give them a stricter hard cap for the next 3 seasons.
UOducksTK1 wrote:OK, but I'm not a fan of him riding a CPU generated depth chart and sitting at 7-1. IMO we should start punishing for not doing depth charts.
Agreed but at this point Lukey would be fired ha
I cant think of a way that punishes if they have their pick though
I can think of ways. Don't let them participate in Playoffs predictions. Don't let them participate in free giveaways. Don't let them leverage their MLE/LLE. Give them a stricter hard cap for the next 3 seasons.
So many things we can do IMO.
The main problem isn't lack of activity though. It's lack of interest. That's the first problem to address, in my opinion.
UOducksTK1 wrote:OK, but I'm not a fan of him riding a CPU generated depth chart and sitting at 7-1. IMO we should start punishing for not doing depth charts.
Agreed but at this point Lukey would be fired ha
I cant think of a way that punishes if they have their pick though
I can think of ways. Don't let them participate in Playoffs predictions. Don't let them participate in free giveaways. Don't let them leverage their MLE/LLE. Give them a stricter hard cap for the next 3 seasons.
So many things we can do IMO.
The main problem isn't lack of activity though. It's lack of interest. That's the first problem to address, in my opinion.
Right so either fire those who are uninterested, or put rules in place that will eventually weed them out because it'll make them hard to thrive when they are inactive.
Otherwise we are stuck with GMs who do nothing with their team, promote no activity, and stay in their inactive state of mind for years.
Cool thing is when we ever restarted, we know which GMs not to keep.
UOducksTK1 wrote:OK, but I'm not a fan of him riding a CPU generated depth chart and sitting at 7-1. IMO we should start punishing for not doing depth charts.
Agreed but at this point Lukey would be fired ha
I cant think of a way that punishes if they have their pick though
I can think of ways. Don't let them participate in Playoffs predictions. Don't let them participate in free giveaways. Don't let them leverage their MLE/LLE. Give them a stricter hard cap for the next 3 seasons.
So many things we can do IMO.
The main problem isn't lack of activity though. It's lack of interest. That's the first problem to address, in my opinion.
Right so either fire those who are uninterested, or put rules in place that will eventually weed them out because it'll make them hard to thrive when they are inactive.
Otherwise we are stuck with GMs who do nothing with their team, promote no activity, and stay in their inactive state of mind for years.
Cool thing is when we ever restarted, we know which GMs not to keep.
That’s good and all, but hand in hand with that we have the issue of finding GMs to fill teams. How do you propose we go about that? I know Oregon tried the reward model but not much doing there. Maybe some other ideas?