Discussion in 'Leaguegaming Hockey League (LGHL)' started by SweeT 9 LoU 84, Apr 12, 2019.
75% of the no votes are guys on good contacts and/or mgmt who's team they're on lol
hmmm 75.2% for yes
Rather than having this conversation YOY, a decision should be made on when, if any, resets should be made.
An example of a better system would be owners being aware of a reset in every iteration of the game. Meaning first season of 19 is reset, first season of 20 is reset, etc.
To control this, 3 year contracts can only be offered at start of the season, from there its 2, then 1 to prevent any overlap, etc. Obviously a lot of people won’t be happy with this, but if something is established and consistent it would be better. Of course it’s better to have management committed (and actually good management), but no system chosen will ever be perfect.
That’s just one option, I know it probably isn’t the best one available, but the best step moving forward is to at least get a majority consensus on when rosters should be reset if any. While bad managers continue to be an issue for multiple reason, it also doesn’t help for a rookie owner to take on a poorly managed and thus poorly performing team because they likely won’t be able to change anything if it’s on a level playing field. YOY resets or owners being aware of when any resets would be well in advance would help.
Establish a consistent reset schedule to avoid this conversation every season and adjust contract offerings accordingly to ensure nobody would be on a team during a reset. IE. one season until reset, only 1yrs can be offered
GM and AGM can only be assigned after bidding then their contract is locked in for all future seasons.
Until someone gets two players at 500k who get really good then people will continue to cry like they do about every single thing they think is unfair.
Can we please just get over the fact that it will never be perfect? There will be terrible owners and terrible teams, always has been and always will be, no matter what rule changes are made.
Just repeating it for visibility, a reset doesn't solve anything. Just get rid of re-signs, it's that simple. There's no imbalance issues with contract years, but you remove re-signs and all this stuff goes away.
This just doesn't seem like a good idea. Mainly because what is the discussion every year? We need more good owners. Decreasing the perks for owners likely doesn't help Brodie or the league in terms of stability.
Look, call me an elitist or call me washed up garbage, idc, many good players don't play LG because they don't want to play on bad teams. Making it harder to build good teams will only hurt the league more than it will help.
The vast majority of bad players who don't really care all that much will continue to sign up regardless of how the league is ran, because they just enjoy playing NHL in some sort of structured league.
Maybe I'm wrong, but that's just been my observation over the 5+ years I've played in the league.
It doesn't do anything about making it harder to BUILD good teams, it makes it harder to KEEP your team good. There's a pretty big difference when it comes to balancing the league. You said it yourself, there will always be bad teams.
Re-signs get more players into bidding, more good players in bidding means more opportunity to build a good team. There's little point to having a salary cap if there aren't some checks and balances towards trying to get the cap hits more in line with the actual ability. Nobody should ever be able to go 3+ seasons without going into bidding that isn't taking on a management role.
I don't mind the resigns but I do feel like they need to be reformatted. A player who is consistently putting up 50+ points shouldn't be getting a 250k bump multiple seasons in a row. If we can figure out a better resign system and I think it would benefit the league and good players who are "scared of being on a bad team"
direct quote from @CaLL Me Jakoo "if it ain't broke don't fix it"
Never gonna happen but I still support a franchise wide snake draft where players salaries are based off where they get picked and having all AHL players 1 Mil so they dont get stuck down there. If a players signs up after the draft starts they can only play in CHL. Could just do 3 or 4 rounds a night and it would take the same amount of time. When a top player ends up going to a bad team early they can atleast have some influence towards the owner on what other players other rounds to pick up.
Tbh this is something I've always thought too. All AHL / CHL players when called up to the NHL roster (other than DPs) should be on a league minimum contract. If they were in NHL bidding and didn't get bid on, it doesn't make sense for them to cost their AHL contract.
I'm a fan of a snake draft for GM / AGM positions or a one time 5-10 round draft after the roster reset.
I think it would be interesting just because in my opinion the league gets stale... even for me in WPG/NYR it was a great position to be in but after so many seasons it’s just not as fun anymore playing with the exact same core of people season after season. Which is why I think it would be nice to see all teams broken up and see new cliques possibly formed.
252 YES - 79 NO
Everyone voting no is on a good contract or is a manger with good contracted players on their teams or even a player on a long term deal.
The league does become stale as everyone has stated. A roster reset DOESNT FIX everything, there will always be good and bad teams like everyone is saying, that is not the point of resetting the roster Its to freshen things up, get new mgmt teams to apply, bring back some players who dont play, bring PS4 people over who are afraid theyd go for too much in bidding, have the drafted guys go into bidding and help with scouting, let DP players who were under contract now be eligible to manage.
It also allows us to implement all of these new rules and structures people are talking about like potentially changing the resigns, adding a 32 team, BUT to do that you should reset everything completely. Changing things and adding rules is beneficial to those teams already established. The main issue we continue to have is teams mgmt. failing and then leaving and new mgmt. not wanting to come in and take over their shitty team with no assets. It is part of the process and what makes it fun to build teams and prove yourself though, but at the same time is what continues to kill mgmt. applications.
-The supposed positive hype a reset brings isn't worth the actual negative effects which a reset causes. A reset results in more steal contracts, which is bad for team parity, and bad team parity is what drives people away from the league. As soon as those steals hit and a couple trapes happen, we're just worse off in terms of trying to retain and attract quality players
-There doesn't actually need to be a reset in order to implement many of the proposed rule change ideas out there. Rules can be integrated without a reset and still be a more fair way to move forward
-A reset can be counterproductive to our effort to make ownership more attractive to the kind of knowledgeable, committed people needed to run teams. There are good, dedicated owners/mgmt who do NOT want a reset. And it's not necessarily that they are just being selfish about keeping their assets. It's that they spent months and years working to bring stability to their org by acquiring players they are comfortable with. Or maybe they are rebuilding and have been selling for future assets. (And to some orgs it's not fair to reset picks, yet to other orgs it's not fair to NOT reset picks. Part of the 2nd point)
-A main problem is that NHL 19 is a more frustrating chel than we are used to. We should be creative in making adjustments to improve what we can actually control (rules and regulations) but a reset would be too big of a panic button
@LG McDonald @ShortyxLOSE @Josh l96l
The reason you went low is because you said you didn't have the game. Then you repeatedly told people in the chat you didn't have the game. Being toxic = lower contract
Well I didn’t own the game. Did you want me to lie? Ask @Pandaleupagus he asked me to played 3s and I couldn’t because I didn’t own the game!
To me it's always been easy to fix our off-season problems. We have years and years of stats and precedents to formulate a system based on overall league stats. Tris already has something like this in place to calculate a area of player worth. We can get rid of toxicity, bad trade deals and encourage off season team building.
We can have a system where more top players have options where they go, less 3rd liners going for 1st line prices and encourage AHL players to come up to the NHL.
I hope we can create a system like this in the future.
Logically, no scenario you did makes it ok.
If you never planned to buy the game then why sign up and tell EVERYONE you didn't have the game?
If you did plan to buy the game then why tell everyone you didn't have the game and say you didn't have it in your bidding box?
Either way it was a negative impact and continues to be why we all argue in the off season and can't have a reliable off season system.
Separate names with a comma.