The draft is kind of stagnated, so I thought it was time to nail down the details of the first of the competitions. Anyways,heres my proposal: Draw into 4 groups 4 by PM of numbers from 1-1000, ordering teams in groups A-D based on order of the numbers selected. Play a single round robin of games, top 2 teams from each group advancing to the next stage. The 8 surviving teams play in a single elimination knockout. Games consist of 2 threads. There is one master thread started at 1pm ET by the administrator of the league, where players list their starting lineup. At 1pm ET on Thurstay the administrator of the league will start a poll for each game, listing the last valid starting lineup made by each coach for . For group games that poll will have 3 options, win for team A, win for team B, draw. The option with the most votes is the result of the game. For knockout games there will just be 2 options, team A win, or team B win. Polls will close after 72 hours. Ties will be broken in round robin play by first taking head to head, then the average percentage votes for them winning, then average % of votes for them tying. If its still tied, one player will be designated odd, the other even. They each send in a number, either 1 or 2, and if the total is even, even wins, odd, odd wins. At any point in the competition, no player can be used in 2 consecutive games. No player who is currently injured at the time of the master game thread for that round of games can be used.
i like everything but these last two... which i loooooathe 1- instead of this perhaps everyone could list 3 "key subs", which voters can factor into their decisions 2- this is hypothetical so everyone should be hypothetically fit
The first is to test depth. 3 key subs is nice, but doesnt particularly test depth. Btw, that 2 consecutive games should be 3. Makes a slight difference. The second I suppose could be tossed out.
i'm all for testing depth, but consider: 1- let's say you know who greg folk is and i know who greg folk is, but i can assure that 90% of the voters wouldn't know greg folk from greg luzinski 2- from the beginning, we know only 14 guys are getting into any one game - a world cup style tourney will last a month and consist of 7 matches (in our case, 6) - all i'm saying is lets not give depth testing too much signifigance - if we were doing a season i'd certainly agree to some sort of rotation rule
I certainly want to toss the injury rule I'm all for testing depth, but not sure if there is any good way to do so. I suppose the no three consecutive rule is better than no two, but I can't say Im enthusiastic about either.
I too am for testing depth, but lets be realistic about it. All teams in any kind of tournament have a core group of 4-6 players that play every game, I think our tourney should be the same. I'm for a rule something like, of each teams 23(?) players all must at least once appear on the list of 14 players eligible for a game in the tourney and during the tourney each team must have 15 of their players start at least one game.
I had suggested that (assuming your team makes the final) every player must sit at least one game. That way, you have to strategize when your top players and top goalie will sit. Will it be in the opening round and chance not advancing or in the single elimination knockout phase and chance being eliminated? I also think the starting lineups should be PMed to the tourney admin to keep things fair. I have no problem with the three sub rule.
I don't want to participate in this tournament. For me that wasn't the purpose of the team that I drafted. Nevertheless, feel free to have another person pick up my team.
I'd lke to combine som eof the ideas used in this thread. 4 groups of 4, top 2 advance. 18 man rosters, alternatives you can switch in and out at the end of the group stage. Every player on the 18 must start at least one match. 2 GK required. Base it upon 100% health but also include current form. Example, John O'Brien can be a 100% but his current form won't bey very good because he's played approx 3 matches over the 9 months. Also, European out of season players will have the form they ended the season with. We use 8 judges. Judges have to know USA soccer inside out and they also need to know tactics. These would be my suggestions: Nutmeg, The Wanderer, Treetaliano, Gersman, Sandon Mibut, Knave, Bison, and FireGirl. This way have something of everything, USA experts, youth experts, tactics experts, MLS experts, Male, Female
Im fine with most everything though Im not sure everyone is ready to get this show on the road. just start something and I'll be down for it
I've been on vacation but now I'm back. I suggested earlier about having 4 groups of 4 with the top 2 qualifying like appooOnU's idea. But I think having select judges gets complicated and perhaps long winded if they're not around etc. I suggest a simple poll thread for each matchup with different scorelines e.g. option 1: Team A beats Team B 1-0 option 2: Team A beats Team B 2-0 option 3: Team A beats Team B 3-0 option 4: Team B beats Team A 1-0 option 5: Team B beats Team A 2-0 option 6: Team B beats Team A 3-0 option 7: Team A ties Team B 0-0 option 8: Team A ties Team B 1-1 Leave the poll open for 1 week, have polls for 2 matchups in all 4 groups going at the same time. Also, maybe force 3 team changes between games and have no more than 3 players play every game. That will force the team's manager to change his team a lot and think about who he can play. What do you all think?