MSWL UNITEDMSWL U2 TMBL MSWL The Manager
Tuesday, August 14th, 2018 - 06:08:33 PM (gmt)
 
ball MSWL UNITED ① - Landing
 
Home Auctions Blog Forum History Login Rules Scores Stats Tables Teams
 
Coaches Directory Donate Guest Rankings Schedule Updates Waitlist Wall
 

Join
MSWL
UNITED!

Recent Entries

Allan Sellers
3 Comments
Mike Parnaby
3 Comments
Brian Beerman
6 Comments
Tim Batth
1 Comment
Allan Sellers
1 Comment
Rob Baptiste
7 Comments
Allan Sellers
8 Comments
Brian Beerman
7 Comments
Allan Sellers
3 Comments
Paul Cockayne
3 Comments
Paul Cockayne
3 Comments
Dave Dowson
4 Comments
Roy Rolsten
2 Comments
Dave Dowson
4 Comments
Brian Beerman
1 Comment
Brian Beerman
1 Comment
Dave Dohm
2 Comments
Brian Beerman
3 Comments
Brian Beerman
6 Comments
Allan Sellers
4 Comments
Allan Sellers
5 Comments
Allan Sellers
2 Comments
Allan Sellers
2 Comments
Allan Sellers
6 Comments
Brian Hayes
1 Comment
Brian Beerman
2 Comments
Brian Beerman
1 Comment
Brian Beerman
3 Comments
Allan Sellers
5 Comments
Rob Baptiste
7 Comments
Allan Sellers
12 Comments
Allan Sellers
8 Comments
Allan Sellers
2 Comments
Andy Bate
3 Comments
Rob Peterson
6 Comments
Allan Sellers
4 Comments
Allan Sellers
4 Comments
Allan Sellers
8 Comments
Allan Sellers
1 Comment
Graham Wilkes
4 Comments
Brian Beerman
19 Comments
Brian Beerman
20 Comments
Allan Sellers
7 Comments
Andy Bate
1 Comment
Kevin Martin
1 Comment
Allan Sellers
21 Comments
Allan Sellers
14 Comments
Allan Sellers
12 Comments
Allan Sellers
6 Comments
Allan Sellers
11 Comments
Brian Beerman
9 Comments
Brian Beerman
3 Comments
Graham Wilkes
1 Comment
Jose Freitas
4 Comments
Allan Sellers
5 Comments
Dave Dohm
10 Comments
Brian Beerman
2 Comments
Rob Baptiste
8 Comments
Allan Sellers
5 Comments
Graham Wilkes
6 Comments
Graham Wilkes
5 Comments
Dave Dohm
11 Comments
Allan Sellers
11 Comments
Rob Peterson
5 Comments
Brian Beerman
11 Comments
John Holden
3 Comments
Brian Beerman
13 Comments
Allan Sellers
13 Comments
Kevin Martin
1 Comment
Allan Sellers
5 Comments
Allan Sellers
2 Comments
Kevin Martin
4 Comments
Allan Sellers
19 Comments
Allan Sellers
13 Comments
Allan Sellers
12 Comments
Allan Sellers
7 Comments
Allan Sellers
8 Comments
Rob Baptiste
2 Comments
Allan Sellers
16 Comments
Allan Sellers
7 Comments
Allan Sellers
11 Comments
Allan Sellers
14 Comments
Rob Baptiste
5 Comments
Mark Stretch
5 Comments
Jake Hanny
1 Comment
Andy Bate
6 Comments
Allan Sellers
1 Comment
Allan Sellers
25 Comments
Graham Wilkes
2 Comments
Brian Beerman
6 Comments
Brian Beerman
9 Comments
Allan Sellers
12 Comments
Allan Sellers
10 Comments
Allan Sellers
13 Comments
Allan Sellers
16 Comments
Brian Beerman
7 Comments
David Blair
2 Comments
Brian Beerman
12 Comments
Brian Beerman
5 Comments
David Blair
8 Comments
Allan Sellers
18 Comments
Graham Wilkes
4 Comments
Allan Sellers
3 Comments
Mark Stretch
17 Comments
John Holden
16 Comments
Allan Sellers
5 Comments
Rob Peterson
1 Comment
Brian Beerman
11 Comments
Allan Sellers
11 Comments
Allan Sellers
1 Comment
Allan Sellers
25 Comments
Allan Sellers
30 Comments
Allan Sellers
6 Comments
Allan Sellers
7 Comments
Brian Beerman
9 Comments
Allan Sellers
8 Comments
Allan Sellers
5 Comments
Allan Sellers
10 Comments
Allan Sellers
9 Comments
Allan Sellers
6 Comments
Allan Sellers
9 Comments
Allan Sellers
12 Comments
Allan Sellers
15 Comments
Andy Bate
12 Comments
Allan Sellers
10 Comments
Mike Cabral
4 Comments
Andy Bate
2 Comments
Allan Sellers
1 Comment
Allan Sellers
14 Comments
Kevin Martin
7 Comments
Allan Sellers
26 Comments
Allan Sellers
6 Comments
Brian Beerman
3 Comments
Allan Sellers
11 Comments
Allan Sellers
10 Comments
Allan Sellers
23 Comments
Kevin Martin
6 Comments
Dave Dohm
4 Comments
Allan Sellers
4 Comments
Allan Sellers
4 Comments
Allan Sellers
2 Comments
Allan Sellers
7 Comments
Brian Beerman
4 Comments
Brian Beerman
14 Comments
Brian Beerman
2 Comments
Andy Bate
2 Comments
Andy Bate
2 Comments
Kevin Martin
3 Comments
Dave Dowson
2 Comments
Allan Sellers
14 Comments
Allan Sellers
12 Comments
John Holden
4 Comments
Mike Cabral
9 Comments
Andy Bate
5 Comments
Allan Sellers
6 Comments
Allan Sellers
2 Comments
Allan Sellers
2 Comments
Allan Sellers
23 Comments
Allan Sellers
6 Comments
Simon Compton
5 Comments
Allan Sellers
7 Comments
Allan Sellers
2 Comments
Abe Hamdali
1 Comment
Allan Sellers
4 Comments
Roy Rolsten
6 Comments
Andy Bate
5 Comments
Roy Rolsten
2 Comments
Andy Bate
5 Comments
Allan Sellers
20 Comments
Andy Bate
3 Comments
Allan Sellers
4 Comments
Allan Sellers
3 Comments
Andy Bate
7 Comments
Andy Bate
3 Comments
Andy Bate
2 Comments
Andy Lewis
5 Comments
Allan Sellers
4 Comments
Simon Compton
4 Comments
Kevin Martin
12 Comments
Simon Compton
6 Comments
Allan Sellers
5 Comments
Simon Compton
1 Comment
Simon Compton
1 Comment
Dave Dowson
2 Comments
Kevin Martin
7 Comments
Allan Sellers
11 Comments
Rene Wilkens
5 Comments
Trevor Taylor
3 Comments
Rob Peterson
17 Comments
Allan Sellers
16 Comments
Allan Sellers
9 Comments
Trevor Taylor
7 Comments
Trevor Taylor
2 Comments
Allan Sellers
6 Comments
Allan Sellers
3 Comments
Allan Sellers
6 Comments
Allan Sellers
27 Comments
Allan Sellers
6 Comments
Dan Fitzgerald
9 Comments
Allan Sellers
5 Comments
Allan Sellers
13 Comments
Alon Atie
5 Comments
Allan Sellers
9 Comments
Rob Peterson
10 Comments
Allan Sellers
8 Comments
 
Starter Teams
Posted by Allan Sellers on Sunday, Dec. 28th, 2008 at 2:13 AM

The rules we're using don't have a "sample starter team", so we'll have to develop that on our own.

I have created some sample teams, however, those were just a sample.  I think the key inputs around starter teams are:

  1. They should have about 20 players.
  2. We know that 6 SBYs can be 'discovered' AFTER this starter team is created.
  3. We know that up to 6 SBYs were created "in the previous season" so there should be about 4-6 APPs on the roster.
  4. We need a mix of ages 1-5.
  5. SLs in this league will be low; I think I saw where the "top player" would be SL 15/16, although I suspect most players are < 10.

I'd like to have some variability here.  That could be where managers pick their own SLs/Positions based on certain parameters (tho that requires a lot of manual input from me...so isn't my first choice) or a general format for starter teams with a little randomness so not all teams look the same in terms of "exact age" or "exact SL".  That may sound a little unfair...however, life is unfair. 

So again, I'm open to ideas here.  I'll then take that input and try to put something together. 

Additionally we need to talk about backroom boys.

Thanks,
Al

Readers Comments

My suggestions might revolve round everybody having say 2 GKs, 6 DFs, 6 MFs, 2 WGs, and 4 FWs - around that randomness should be brought in with a couple of provisos.

1          Each team should be allowed a STAR player - lower age and higher SL and he can place him wherever he likes - call

            him a Captain..

2          A watch needs to be placed on a random setting where a low age high SL player are generally preferred to high age

            high SL player so we don't have teams with equal SLs and equal ages but in a wrong format.  Managers could pick

            their lads and ages and SLs as we can do if we decoide to restart over in the lowest division.

 

 

David Blair on Sunday, Dec. 28th, 2008 at 3:08 AM
 

  For what it's worth here is a sample (my squad in a United based league I play in )

It is considered a Mid table 3rd Division Team

 

 

SQUAD POS. PLAYERS NAME AGE LVL MAX
NO.        
           
1 GK   I 10 14
2 SW   III 7 10
3 DF   II 10 12
4 DF   II 8 11
5 DF   II 8 11
6 DF   III 8 11
7 DF   YTS 4 99
8 MF   I 11 16
9 MF   II 11 14
10 MF   II 8 11
11 MF   III 7 10
12 MF   III 7 10
13 FW   II 11 14
14 FW   I 10 15
15 FW   III 7 10
16 FW   III 7 10
17 FW   III 7 10
18 UT   III 12 13
19 UT   IV 8 11
20 MF   APP 2 12
21 FW INDIGO SB1 0 10
Dave Dowson on Monday, Dec. 29th, 2008 at 12:21 AM
 

I'm going to work on the assumption that a little bit of coding is going to go into this. If not, we can always just come up with a "rubber-stamp template". With my assumption, here's my recommendation:

Position Breakdown:

  • Fix the number of players to 20.
  • Fix the number of GK to 2
  • Determine, randomly, whether the team will have 0, 1, or 2 SWs, each with an equal opportunity to occur (ie, 33 1/3%). Subtract this number from 18 to determine the combined number of DF/MF/FW.
  • Formulate 2 random numbers between 5-8. The first number will be the number of DFs, the second number will be the number of FWs. The remainder will be the number of MFs.
  • EXAMPLE - 20 players, 2 GK = 18 Outfielders. Random number determines 1 SW. 18 - 1 = 17 remaining outfielders. Random numbers generated are 6 (DF) & 5 (FW). 17 - 6 - 5 = 6. There will be 6 MFs.

Age Breakdown:

  • # APP = 4
  • # I = 2
  • # II = 3
  • # III = 5
  • # IV = 3
  • # V = 3
  • Avg Age based on above is 3.5 (assuming APP = 1, I = 2, II = 3, III = 4, IV = 5, V = 6)
  • Using the Ave Age as a base, randomly spread the ages amongst the positions, using the following method:

Age Distribution Method:

  • Count number of players in position (NUM PLAYERS). Count SWs as DFs for purposes of Age distribution.
  • Multiply NUM PLAYERS * 3.5 = TOTAL AGE. This is the total age to be spread out amongst the position. This will ensure that each position gets a good spread of old and young players and that no one position is favored. If there are an odd number of players in a position (this will either occur 0 times, or 2 times), round down for the more offensive position and round up for the more defensive position (ie, 7 DF/SW = 24.5, rounded up to 25; 5 FW = 17.5, rounded down to 17)
  • Generate random numbers between 1 & 6 for NUM PLAYERS - 1. The final player's age will be determined for him based on the other players generated in the position.
    • Each time a random number is generated, checks need to be made to A) make sure that the age is available; and B) to make sure that the age generated allows for the 3.5 avg age to be adhered to.
    • If both checks are successful, then the age is assigned to the next player in the chosen position and a counter for that age is decremented by 1.
    • If either check fails, another random number is generated and checked.
    • EXAMPLE (GK)
      • NUM PLAYERS = 2
      • TOTAL AGE = 7
      • GK1: Random number = 5. There are 3 available Age 5 (Age IV) players and this will allow for the 3.5 avg age to work.
      • Because there is only 1 GK left, GK2 = 2 (Age I) (7 – 5 = 2).
      • The ages of all the players average out to 3.5
    • EXAMPLE (DF)
      • NUM PLAYERS (DF + SW) = 7
      • TOTAL AGE = 24.5, rounded up to 25
      • SW1: Random number = 3. There are 3 available Age 3 (Age II) players and it does not impede the avg age check.
      • DF1: Random number = 1. There are 4 available Age 1 (APP) players and it does not impede the avg age check.
      • DF2: Random number = 1. Available = 3, Avg Age check = True
      • DF3: Random number = 2. Available = 1, Avg Age check = True
      • DF4: Random number = 4. Available = 5, Avg Age check = False. With 18 Age points to assign between 3 players, all 3 players must be Age 6 in order for the Age check to be true. Therefore DF4, DF5, DF6 all must be Age 6.
      • Subtracting the 0.5 that was added during the rounding phase, the average ages of the players is 3.5.
    • EXAMPLE (MF)
      • NUM PLAYERS = 6
      • TOTAL AGE = 21
      • MF1: Random number = 5. Available = 2, Avg Age check = True
      • MF2: Random number = 6. Available = 0
      • MF2: Random number (take 2) = 1. Available = 2, Avg Age check = True
      • MF3: Random number = 4. Available = 5, Avg Age check = True
      • MF4: Random number = 4. Available = 4, Avg Age check = True
      • MF5: Random number = 5. Available = 1, Avg Age check = False. With only 2 MFs left, the ages must add up to 7 (21 – (Sum(MF1:MF4)). If MF5 = 5, then MF6 must be 2. There are 0 available Age 2 players. Therefore, this fails the Avg Age check test.
      • MF5: Random number (take 2) = 3. Available = 2, Avg Age check = True
      • MF6: Age determined for him… Age 4
      • The average age of the players is 3.5.
    • EXAMPLE (FW)
      • FWs become the easiest to determine. There are no random numbers needed. Based on the distribution of GK, SW/DF, and MF, there are 5 ages left:
        • Age 1: 1
        • Age 3: 1
        • Age 4: 2
        • Age 5: 1
      • Adding back the 0.5 that was taken away during rounding, the average age of the players is 3.5.

SL Distribution coming in my next post. It will follow the same train of thought as the Age Distribution – keeping things spread out and even, but still somewhat random.

Rob Peterson on Tuesday, Dec. 30th, 2008 at 1:45 AM
 

All of the above has taken a bit of work to sort out and is fine.

Would it not be an idea to let each manager have 20 players with parameters such as:

2 GKs total age = 7

1 SW plus 6 DFs  OR 7 DFs total age = 25

5 MFs total age = 21

5FWs total age = 17

1 UT total age 4

Will there not be any WGs or will they need to be "earned" by playing a MF as a FW or vice versa so he becomes multi positional?

and give each team a total number of LVLs so they can put them wherever they like.

Each team has to select say 2 GKs but they can age them 1 & 6, 2 & 5, 3 & 4 but they must equal total age 7

Each team must select in amongst all their players 1 x YTS (level 0), 1 X APP (level 1), and 1 x SBY (level 0) - although I think SBY and YTS might get confusing to some managers - maybe better to stick to one or the other.

Total of all LvLs must equal the figure you give - some managers play more on MFs or FWs and these personal preferences will be reflected in their choices of players and skill LVLs.

It also personalises each team and gives managers some say in the set up of their team.

 

 

 

David Blair on Tuesday, Dec. 30th, 2008 at 7:42 PM
 

I was thinking if all teams were given a total of say 200 LVLs to split, it gives them decisions to either spread evenly throughout the ages, or to encourage higher LVLs onto lower age players and look to replace old timers earlier.

By the way in my previous post the line "Will there not be any WGs etc etc ) was meant to be below the next line as the latter was meant to be read straight after "1UT total age 4"

David Blair on Tuesday, Dec. 30th, 2008 at 7:47 PM
 

From what I can tell, there are no WGs in this game. The positions are GK/SW/DF/MF/FW. Playing players OOP enough times can turn a FW into a MA, a MF into either a MA or a DM, a DF into either a DM or a SD, or a SW into a SD.

The reason I'm suggesting something that can be coded is that I think Al's goal with this game is to make it as simple to "play" as possible. By that, I think he's also looking to make it more accessible to those who might not be all that familiar with MSWL. One of the toughest things for a newbie manager to figure out, in my opinion, is where to focus the resources on to build the best players for the best possible team. Going back about 7 or 8 years when I first got into these games, I had NO clue where to spread my initial SLs. This way, we can assure that teams will be relatively even at the start, with enough variation in the teams where it's not a "template".

Rob Peterson on Tuesday, Dec. 30th, 2008 at 11:39 PM
 

20 players Total SL 200 = Average level 10

I think that may be a little high for start up teams(remember)

Al said

  1. They should have about 20 players.
  2. We know that 6 SBYs can be 'discovered' AFTER this starter team is created.
  3. We know that up to 6 SBYs were created "in the previous season" so there should be about 4-6 APPs on the roster.
  4. We need a mix of ages 1-5.
  5. SLs in this league will be low; I think I saw where the "top player" would be SL 15/16, although I suspect most players are < 10.

But I do like your ideas David regarding setting parameters but allowing Managers to design their players within those parameters

I think 20 players with a Total SL of 140 -160 (average SL 7/8)would be more suitable

If we are starting with a player squad of 20 ,we need to set upper & lower limits

say 18 Minimum & 25 Maximum

Assuming also that all SBoys/YTS/Apprentices start at level 0 this needs to be factored into the parameters

Dave Dowson on Tuesday, Dec. 30th, 2008 at 11:43 PM
 

Thanks for the feedback guys, I appreciate it.

Here are the parameters I'll start with:

Starter Team Ages and SLs
Age Total Player 1 Player 2 Player 3 Player 4 Player 5 Player 6
SBY 0            
APP 6 Gk 3 Sw 3 Fw 3 Df 3 Mf 2 Df 2
I 5 Fw 8 Mf 8 Df 7 Df 7 Sw 7  
II 4 Gk 10 Mf 9 Df 9 Fw 8    
III 3 Fw 11 Mf 10 Mf 7      
IV 2 Df 9 Mf 7        
               
               

The totals are 20 players at 140 SL.

2 Gks, 2 Sws, 6 Dfs, 6 Mfs, 4 Fws.

10 players can be moved to different positions.

The above is exactly what a 2nd Division team will look like.

A 1st Division team gets an extra III/7 player.

A 3rd Division team loses a III/7 player.

The above is negotiable, but its "in the ballpark" for what I think will work.

With the above I can generate teams quickly and then have folks send me instructions to "move players to different positions"...otherwise I'd have to hand type more info.

To account for the Backroom Boys (do they really call off-field coaches that?) we could add another V/5 player (or two).  I guess I don't want all teams to have a full complement of BB's to start with...but rather have those grown or added to over time.  In fact that could be a way to differentiate 1st/2nd/3rd divs (and forget the player addition/subtraction idea above).  1st gets two V/5 players, 2nd gets one V/5 and 3rd gets none?

Thoughts?

Thanks!
Al

 

Allan Sellers on Thursday, Jan. 1st, 2009 at 2:06 PM
 

So is there an upper & lower limit on number of players & backroom boys.?

Can we choose which catergory of Backroom boy they are (Coach/Youth Coach /Physio etc.) or is it random ?

Dave Dowson on Friday, Jan. 2nd, 2009 at 3:25 AM
 

If teams in D3 are losing a III/7 player, then I vote to allow them to have 1 Backyard Boy (we really need to change this name to something more appropriate - "Coaching Staff" perhaps? This way, the only difference between a D2 and D3 team is the loss of the III/7 player. The D1 team still gets the extra III/7 player and the extra Staff member.

Rob Peterson on Friday, Jan. 2nd, 2009 at 4:30 PM
 

Rob, your points sound reasonable on the differences.  Although I'm starting to enjoy the Backroom Boys name...

Dave, I think we'll go with min 18, max 25.  Sound reasonable?

Al

Allan Sellers on Saturday, Jan. 3rd, 2009 at 12:08 AM
 

How many backroom boys allowed per team (Will it vary according to division) or perhaps be linked to success.?

Say a team that wins a cup or league title is permitted to add an extra 'backroom boy'?

Player limits set at 18 & 25 is spot on

Dave Dowson on Saturday, Jan. 3rd, 2009 at 2:07 AM
 

I haven't wamed up yet to the name, Al... but I'll try.

To start, I think we're looking at 1 BB per team. I don't think a maximum has been established. It may be that we have to see what the overall impact is before we can come up with an educated assessment as to what the maximum should be. I have other questions about the BBs, so I think I'll start a new topic for that (hopefully Al doesn't object).

Rob Peterson on Saturday, Jan. 3rd, 2009 at 4:34 AM
 

Have we considered starting with 3 equal strength leagues for season 1.

Then the top 3 and best placed 4th finisher can make up the 1st division for season 2,with a similar formulae for div 2.

This will make the first season really exciting as everyone will be playing for their league position with a big incentive for finishing seventh as opposed to 8th as that would probably be around the 2nd/3rd div split.

 

Alon Atie on Thursday, Jan. 8th, 2009 at 11:02 PM
 

I think Alon has a great idea here. We did the same thing for PSFA's inagural season - worked pretty well.

Rob Peterson on Thursday, Jan. 8th, 2009 at 11:40 PM
 

Yea I must agree with Alon (Theres a first)& Rob

It worked in PSFA  (we had a North & South Division for the first season

Dave Dowson on Friday, Jan. 9th, 2009 at 1:01 AM
 

I agree. Good idea Alon, 

with a play-off game for the inaugural league winners?

James Tucker on Friday, Jan. 9th, 2009 at 1:10 AM
 

I agree with Alon and also a good idea form James with the play off games

Rene Wilkens on Friday, Jan. 9th, 2009 at 4:03 PM
 

I have to admin this isn't my first choice...but I understand the point. 

Part of it is probably that I WANT TO PLAY IN THE 3RD DIVISION.  

I'd like to be in a league where I work my way up.  I wouldn't "tank" games to try to get into the 3rd division obviously, but would rather start there...

So I'll keep thinking about this...but I would like more opinions (either confirming the concept or using a preferred/random positioning into divisions). 

Still time to decide on this one...

Thanks,
Al

Allan Sellers on Sunday, Jan. 11th, 2009 at 1:37 AM
 

With 6 Schoolboys and 6 Apprentices in a squad, is an upper limit of 25 players per squad going to be feasable?

That only leaves 13 players to be split between your age I, II, III, IV and age V.

In order to get BB you'll have to retire age V players. It might be impossible to get BBs if the squads are limited to 25 players.

How about having your SBs and APPs not included for the purpose of upper squad limits?

So you're allowed 25 age I to  age Vs and whatever number of SBs and Apps you bring through, upto 6 of each.

Or are we presuming that we'll actually only bring through 3 or 4 SBs per season?

 

David King on Sunday, Jan. 25th, 2009 at 4:28 PM
 

I think there is not a straight answer to how many SBYs/APPs that there will be on a given roster. I think that's going to depend on the team's strenghts, weaknesses, the managers preferences and the team's standings. I think that the idea will be to balance a couple BBs and a few SBY/APPs per season.

Rob Peterson on Sunday, Jan. 25th, 2009 at 11:18 PM
 

The rules do say you can find upto 6 per season and it also specifies that any you don't discover can still be brought in as Apprentices the following season anyway.

If you manually add 3 SBYs, the next season you get them as Apprentices and can still add 3 more APPs. If you assume a given manager is going to bring through 3 SBYs then you're still looking at 9 players from your squad of 25

25 seems to be a figure that is just used as a standard from other games. I'm not sure we have to stick to it for this one.

By the way, has anyone calculated if we need a T17 in this version or not?

 

David King on Sunday, Jan. 25th, 2009 at 11:32 PM
 

25 as a total limit is a good mark in my opinion.

If you have 25 players +6  SB's & 6 APP's when will the SB's & APP's get a game?

I play in another United league with SB's & APP's & the 25 limit is ample & does not prove a hinderance

Dave Dowson on Tuesday, Jan. 27th, 2009 at 4:27 AM
 

Having just looked at the suggested average starting teams I think we need to realise the following. Based on squad development through SBY and APP I calculate the number of CP's required to coach this team is around 206 per season.

Given that we are going to have 3 leagues of 10 = 18 matches per season then the maximum a team can gain is 180 CP's. Then taking 2 cup comps and winning 5 games in each = 100 extra CP's. Given that extra CP's are received for Age I upwards, one per player, but that fitness coaching for Age II+ is greater I would anticipate using at least 20 CP's per session to keep my squad in good health. So this cost 50 CP's out of the 280 gained through winning every game leaving 230.

So I would therefore need to win vertually every game to achieve and maintain an average team! And also for the teams which start on a bad loosing streek no improvement for Age I+ players will be possible at all without creating major fitness problems.

Of course there is the option of buying players in the improve a squad. Little has been said about a transfer market, auctions and club finances, but if these are not looked at then I can only see the best teams maintaining a squad of this strength.

I think more thought is required here.

Trevor Taylor on Saturday, Jan. 31st, 2009 at 2:29 PM
 

Please make recommendations regarding your ideas...also start a new thread for auctions as I'd be interesting in recommendations on the 'age/skill' of players we should offer.

Al

Allan Sellers on Saturday, Jan. 31st, 2009 at 2:43 PM
 

Just adding that Alon's idea was also used in SFLSL 1st season.

Steve Turner on Saturday, Jan. 31st, 2009 at 5:03 PM
 
 
 
Terms and Conditions