MSWL UNITEDMSWL U2 TMBL MSWL The Manager
Thursday, August 16th, 2018 - 02:24:23 AM (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
 
New Backroom Boy: Psychiatrist - Poll
Posted by Allan Sellers on Sunday, Sep. 16th, 2012 at 12:20 PM

Your first read on the title of this topic has to be: "Has Al gone off the deep end?".   And you'd be wrong...clearly I'm already there.  

The usage of this BRB would be as follows:

1) If you have one you get the option (each session) in your orders page to select one game (you choose) that you think you will win.

2) If you win the game, because your team psychiatrist is so good, the team gets 3 CP added to their balance to improve their skills.

3) If you lose or draw the game (its considered a draw if you go into extra time/PK shootout tied) you get 0 CP.  

As you read this you can already picture where Kevin's "is this a rich get richer meter" moving the arrow.   

I'd argue that most teams can win a match each session (they have the home field typically in one).  Plus since there is divisional play in all but one session you are typically playing teams at your skill level in your division.  The exception of course being "COMPO" in MSWL U1 where his Northampton Cobblers seem to have the Top 3 T-11 but often play 3rd division football...but like most rules, we just can't always account for Compo nuances.

I just had my boys do the story problem and they say that 3 CP and 10 sessions means this BRB has a maximum value of 30 CP over a season.

Like the other poll for the Youth Director, this is a poll and please provide your vote and any input you have.   Because I'm proposing it doesn't mean it should be implemented.  Thanks.

Readers Comments

Love it Al, keep up the humour and looking forward to the new season

Simon Compton on Sunday, Sep. 16th, 2012 at 12:52 PM
 

I would never use it - the risk/reward is not enough for me.

John Holden on Sunday, Sep. 16th, 2012 at 12:57 PM
 

The idea is okay, but I think it needs to be made clear if these added BRB options mean we can have more effective BRB, ie more than the 5 now.

If I were to take on a Youth Director, would it be in place of one of the existing BRB options or will these options be on top on the 5 effective BRB now?»

Mike Parnaby on Sunday, Sep. 16th, 2012 at 3:33 PM
 

Mike, there would be no restriction on the number of BRBs you have.  So this would just be another option if you wanted to put the resources towards saving an older player for the role.

Allan Sellers on Sunday, Sep. 16th, 2012 at 6:14 PM
 

Can I just clarify the 0 CP for a draw/loss - is that 0 CP bonus or from the match in total

i.e. 9 age I-V players and two youths = 9 CP from one match - do  you lose the 9 CP in a drawn/lost match?

Roy Rolsten on Sunday, Sep. 16th, 2012 at 9:06 PM
 

ï»If we are to have changes I am happy with this one.It adds a new element and does not throw the game out of balance.  Also can help give mid table teams something to play for in last few sessions when they are out of the cups.

Alon Atie on Monday, Sep. 17th, 2012 at 2:33 AM
 

I rarely vote 'no' on something but I do see this as the "rich get richer" scenario.  This has virtually no benefit to a team that needs CP badly and is still going to lose.  Can they predict a loss and still receive 2 CP as long as they are not shutout?  If that's the case, I'll change my vote to a 'yes'.  Don't think teams are going to throw 10 weeks down the tubes for 20 CP.  What if the team wins?  Well... they will be the beneficiary of 10 CP anyway.

Rob Baptiste on Tuesday, Sep. 18th, 2012 at 3:25 AM
 

I think this is potentially the worst idea put forth in United since I joined season three.

Brian Beerman on Tuesday, Sep. 18th, 2012 at 8:20 AM
 

I see this as potentially giving teams a little extra incentive to go all out in a match instead of just making a game of it or playing for draws everywhere if they think they might lose.  Further, I have no fears of teams getting penalized unfairly.  You don't have to get one of these BRB.  Even if you have one, you don't have to use him in a session where all losses is likely.  Just like you don't have to use a Youth Coach if you don't want to click from "N" to "Y" in the boxes.  I don't see this as a game changer, though we're potentially talking about +2 SL to a team's T16 lineup per season.  It would heighten the anticipation of a key match each session though, and force managers to think twice about playing for the win and up to 13 CP, or just play for the draw and 5 CP.  2 wins (+8 CP vs. the draw) makes up for 3 draws (and losing the 5 CP each you would have earned), so you'd only need a 40% success rate to come ahead by 1 CP per 5 sessions.

Kevin Martin on Friday, Sep. 21st, 2012 at 9:24 PM
 

 

Some interesting comments on this one.

Dr. Beerman came out with his "worst idea ever" comment just minutes after chastising his fellow managers on another thread for not wanting any change.  That made me laugh.  :-)

Kevin's "rich get richer" meter didn't tick up too high on this one though others seemed to feel it as a possibility.

The voting (after updating the numbers for 1 person 1 vote) show:

No  - 15

Yes - 14

So we're going to table this one for now.  

HOWEVER, I would strongly encourage managers to:

a) Revisit other threads on the forum for new BRB types and revive them is warranted.

b) Create new Forum topics for new BRB types/ideas.

c) Add on to/revise this idea to make the concept more improved/palatable (if that's possible).

My main goal with this and the other BRB I recently posted are to create some additional BRB options.  

Currently its pretty much (or seems to be) a "let's all get 5 BRBs".  I'd like to have more (8?) options so that there is a little variety and team's might have to choose which ones to go for rather than just say "let's get all 5".

Allan Sellers on Saturday, Sep. 22nd, 2012 at 7:00 PM
 

Ha, Al...glad you threw out the Simpsons reference on this one.

Brian Beerman on Tuesday, Sep. 25th, 2012 at 12:48 AM
 
 
 
Terms and Conditions