SCSUL RULE CHANGES - Discussion

[Goodie's Guns]

Indeed, thanks very much @KLo30 - I too have now voted.

I’m not sure if you are voting on the polls Ken, but if you aren’t, I think I complete the set of 9 other coaches voting (so you could proceed to the next poll whenever it suited you - obviously no rush on my side).

Ken must have already voted, as I’ve also just completed my vote to take it to 10 votes.

** Assuming that only coaches have voted and not other SCS members randomly.

 

[KLo30]

There are a number of rule changes in proposal form which need discussing before implementation. Time is running out to have these introduced before the season begins, let alone the draft and trading.

I'm going to put a new one out every few days for discussion and then voting (if required), so please keep an eye out over the next few weeks.



The first rule for voting is the one that was discussed above in regards to 2nd Contracts.

Yes or No in the poll at the top.

• Option 4: Year 1 current price, Year 2 current price, Year 3 - 5 (1.4, 1.6, 1.8)
• Only for new 2nd Contracts. No backdating
• Implemented for season 2022

Yes if you agree with all three dot points
No if you disagree with any or all dot points

@Goodie's Guns @Connoisseur @Bomber18 @Philzsay @lappinitup @Diabolical @Deeman1 @Darkie @Jordan's Jets

 

[Bomber18]

View attachment 39212

Always good to get unanimous agreement. Well done all and a big thanks from me too to Ken for all your admin work on this!

 

[KLo30]

Thanks for this! That makes sense but sorry a few more comments / queries.

On 1, I take it that a team could eg elect to leave two spots open in the PSD (with $300k put aside) but then be able trade to fill those spots before the MSD, using the $300k space to do so.

On 2, an aggregate of 410k makes sense to me and seems reasonable. The other query/thought I had is whether the relief would also be capped to the LTI player’s salary? EG say I draft a fringe 120k rookie that does an LTI, I would get 120k cap relief and not 410k?

That's what a discussion thread is all about!

1. Yes, they can fill those spots via trade. However, a team cannot trade away players to enter the MSD. They must have already left a spot on their list open or have a LTI(s) in order to participate.

2. Most teams have little salary cap space. Losing a star player makes it very tough in this game, so replacing with a rookie and being able to use the extra dollars in a trade would be reasonable in my eyes. You can't replace a Steele, Gawn, Lloyd, etc via one player in a draft. You might be able to be creative with drafting and trading to lessen the impact.

Having a closer look at the draft rule and my response to Bomber18, I've contradicted myself.

So either the rule stays as written, which means that leaving two spots open requires the team to make two selections in the MSD and the team will have more than 44 players.

OR

We allow teams to trade into a position before the MSD to be able to enter the MSD even though they original did not have a list position.

What are teams thoughts on this?

 

[Darkie]

View attachment 39213




Having a closer look at the draft rule and my response to Bomber18, I've contradicted myself.

So either the rule stays as written, which means that leaving two spots open requires the team to make two selections in the MSD and the team will have more than 44 players.

OR

We allow teams to trade into a position before the MSD to be able to enter the MSD even though they original did not have a list position.

What are teams thoughts on this?

I would prefer that teams can trade into a position to enter the MSD.

It adds flexibility and encourages trades, both of which I see as positive.

 

[KLo30]

I would prefer that teams can trade into a position to enter the MSD.

It adds flexibility and encourages trades, both of which I see as positive.

The net result needs to be 10 x 44 = 440 players across all teams, with LTI replacements in addition.

Which brings me to the next rule that was going to discussed in List Sizes.

LIST SIZES

Teams must have a list size between the minimum of 42 players and the maximum of 46 players at the completion of the trade period.


DRAFT

This probably needs to go to between 41-47 or 40-48, to give more flexibility. The idea was that teams couldn't just buy a premiership and/or teams don't just do a fire sale at the end of the season.

 

[Goodie's Guns]

View attachment 39213




Having a closer look at the draft rule and my response to Bomber18, I've contradicted myself.

So either the rule stays as written, which means that leaving two spots open requires the team to make two selections in the MSD and the team will have more than 44 players.

OR

We allow teams to trade into a position before the MSD to be able to enter the MSD even though they original did not have a list position.

What are teams thoughts on this?

I would prefer that teams can trade into a position to enter the MSD.

It adds flexibility and encourages trades, both of which I see as positive.

I am happy to see teams be able to trade themselves into a position to take a MSD selection, even if they had a list of 44 at the completion of the PSD.

Can I please get a clarification on the following situation, say I have a list of 43 at the completion of the PSD. Prior to Round 10 I’ve traded in 2 players to take me to 45 on my list, and I still have sufficient cap space to take a MSD selection. Should I wish to, I am able to take one MSD selection, based off my list size of 43 at the completion of the PSD? However, alternatively I could also choose not to participate in the MSD as I’ve technically covered that one spot I had left open via my trading?

EDIT: Ken’s latest post sort of fits with the list size clarification to go with the actual ruling on if a MSD selection would be required in the above case.

 

[KLo30]

I am happy to see teams be able to trade themselves into a position to take a MSD selection, even if they had a list of 44 at the completion of the PSD.

Can I please get a clarification on the following situation, say I have a list of 43 at the completion of the PSD. Prior to Round 10 I’ve traded in 2 players to take me to 45 on my list, and I still have sufficient cap space to take a MSD selection. Should I wish to, I am able to take one MSD selection, based off my list size of 43 at the completion of the PSD? However, alternatively I could also choose not to participate in the MSD as I’ve technically covered that one spot I had left open via my trading?

EDIT: Ken’s latest post sort of fits with the list size clarification to go with the actual ruling on if a MSD selection would be required in the above case.

Under the rule as currently written you must make a selection at the MSD.

If we allow the ability to trade into the MSD, you are over the 44 list size and would not be able to participate in the MSD.

 

[Bomber18]

View attachment 39213




Having a closer look at the draft rule and my response to Bomber18, I've contradicted myself.

So either the rule stays as written, which means that leaving two spots open requires the team to make two selections in the MSD and the team will have more than 44 players.

OR

We allow teams to trade into a position before the MSD to be able to enter the MSD even though they original did not have a list position.

What are teams thoughts on this?

The net result needs to be 10 x 44 = 440 players across all teams, with LTI replacements in addition.

Which brings me to the next rule that was going to discussed in List Sizes.


This probably needs to go to between 41-47 or 40-48, to give more flexibility. The idea was that teams couldn't just buy a premiership and/or teams don't just do a fire sale at the end of the season.

I think I like the point you made about there needing to be a net result of 440 players across all teams (after the MSD), excluding LTI replacements.

Following this principle, I think the second alternative makes the most sense.

 

[KLo30]

If we call open positions on a list caused by a long term injury or not using all selections/signings in the pre-season "Supplemental Selections", then teams can trade for another team's supplemental selection(s).

This way we keep 440 players plus LTI replacements, and not end up with another 20+ players on lists.

 

[KLo30]

I am happy to see teams be able to trade themselves into a position to take a MSD selection, even if they had a list of 44 at the completion of the PSD.

Can I please get a clarification on the following situation, say I have a list of 43 at the completion of the PSD. Prior to Round 10 I’ve traded in 2 players to take me to 45 on my list, and I still have sufficient cap space to take a MSD selection. Should I wish to, I am able to take one MSD selection, based off my list size of 43 at the completion of the PSD? However, alternatively I could also choose not to participate in the MSD as I’ve technically covered that one spot I had left open via my trading?

EDIT: Ken’s latest post sort of fits with the list size clarification to go with the actual ruling on if a MSD selection would be required in the above case.

Taking into consideration my post just above, then the answer would now be:

If you kept your supplemental selection, you must ensure you have $150K to go with your SS and you must use that SS in the MSD.

 

[KLo30]

VOTE IN POLL ABOVE FOR EACH PROPOSAL - YES or NO

PRESEASON DRAFT - LIST SIZE

Teams will be permitted leave up to two positions (supplementary selections) on their 44 player list unfilled at the completion of the Pre Season Draft. Teams must leave a minimum of $150,000 of salary per player available in their salary cap for drafting of top up players in the Mid Season Draft. Supplementary selections are a tradeable asset. These positions can only, and must, be filled via the Mid Season Draft.

PROPOSED


LONG TERM INJURY LIST

The SCSUL Long Term Injury (LTI) list would work in the same manner as the AFL. Teams would be able to place players on the LTI list who won't play, and/or take any further part, in the current season.

Teams are eligible to claim up to $410,000 in salary cap relief of the players salary for the season. Teams will be responsible for the payment of the remainder of the players salary in that season, however the contract year won't be counted for cap purposes.

Teams will be able to replace the player through either the Pre Season or Mid Season Drafts.

A maximum of two players from a team will be eligible to be replaced through this process.

Positions opened on the list via a player placed on LTI list will be known as supplemental selections - LTI, which are a tradeable asset.

PROPOSED


MID SEASON DRAFT

A Mid Season Draft will be held before the commencement of round 10. Teams with supplemental selections who have available salary and contract space will be eligible to participate in the Md Season Draft. Teams are able to draft up to four players to fill spaces on their list caused by LTI and/or held back from the Pre Season Draft.

Teams may offer players up to 2 years (pro rata) in contract length. Rookie eligible players must be drafted to a 2 year (pro rata) contract.

PROPOSED


LIST SIZES

Teams must maintain a primary list size between the minimum of 40 players and the maximum of 48 players throughout the season.

PROPOSED

 

[Jordan's Jets]

Another possibility if we wanted to maintain the 440 player thing could be list sizes must stay between 42-44.
- Teams can participate in the MSD if they have sufficient cap space/players, regardless of whether that happened through trade or in free agency.
- Teams may choose to carry only 42 players but not leave salary for the MSD. Effectively spread your cap around less players but sacrifice depth to do so.
- To maintain trading flexibility, if a trade occurs whereby a coach would have >44 players, they must de-list players to get under the limit. Full salary would still count to their cap, maybe they get a discount on contract years or something (I think we already have a rule for this?)

Might be overcomplicating things this close to the season but just a thought

 

[Jordan's Jets]

VOTE IN POLL ABOVE FOR EACH PROPOSAL - YES or NO

PRESEASON DRAFT - LIST SIZE

Teams will be permitted leave up to two positions (supplementary selections) on their 44 player list unfilled at the completion of the Pre Season Draft. Teams must leave a minimum of $150,000 of salary per player available in their salary cap for drafting of top up players in the Mid Season Draft. Supplementary selections are a tradeable asset. These positions can only, and must, be filled via the Mid Season Draft.

PROPOSED


LONG TERM INJURY LIST

The SCSUL Long Term Injury (LTI) list would work in the same manner as the AFL. Teams would be able to place players on the LTI list who won't play, and/or take any further part, in the current season.

Teams are eligible to claim up to $410,000 in salary cap relief of the players salary for the season. Teams will be responsible for the payment of the remainder of the players salary in that season, however the contract year won't be counted for cap purposes.

Teams will be able to replace the player through either the Pre Season or Mid Season Drafts.

A maximum of two players from a team will be eligible to be replaced through this process.

Positions opened on the list via a player placed on LTI list will be known as supplemental selections - LTI, which are a tradeable asset.

PROPOSED


MID SEASON DRAFT

A Mid Season Draft will be held before the commencement of round 10. Teams with supplemental selections who have available salary and contract space will be eligible to participate in the Md Season Draft. Teams are able to draft up to four players to fill spaces on their list caused by LTI and/or held back from the Pre Season Draft.

Teams may offer players up to 2 years (pro rata) in contract length. Rookie eligible players must be drafted to a 2 year (pro rata) contract.

PROPOSED


LIST SIZES

Teams must maintain a primary list size between the minimum of 40 players and the maximum of 48 players throughout the season.

PROPOSED

Quick question:

Is the 40-48 rule only during the season for trading purposes? I.e we must still have 44 players (or 42 + MSD salary) at the end of preseason?

And just to be clear - the way I’m reading it, in order to participate in the MSD, you need:
A) Fewer than 44 players on your ‘active’ list
B) Minimum $150k cap space per MSD selection available
Does that sound about right?

 

[KLo30]

Quick question:

Is the 40-48 rule only during the season for trading purposes? I.e we must still have 44 players (or 42 + MSD salary) at the end of preseason?

And just to be clear - the way I’m reading it, in order to participate in the MSD, you need:
A) Fewer than 44 players on your ‘active’ list
B) Minimum $150k cap space per MSD selection available
Does that sound about right?

In order to participate in the MSD a team needs to have a supplemental selection, and the available cap space.

40-48 is only during the season. At the end of the preseason teams need to have 44 including supplemental selections.

 

[Bomber18]

If we call open positions on a list caused by a long term injury or not using all selections/signings in the pre-season "Supplemental Selections", then teams can trade for another team's supplemental selection(s).

This way we keep 440 players plus LTI replacements, and not end up with another 20+ players on lists.

This makes sense to me.

The SCSUL IT team will have its work cut out to try add this to the team summaries haha

 

[KLo30]

Another possibility if we wanted to maintain the 440 player thing could be list sizes must stay between 42-44.
- Teams can participate in the MSD if they have sufficient cap space/players, regardless of whether that happened through trade or in free agency.
- Teams may choose to carry only 42 players but not leave salary for the MSD. Effectively spread your cap around less players but sacrifice depth to do so.
- To maintain trading flexibility, if a trade occurs whereby a coach would have >44 players, they must de-list players to get under the limit. Full salary would still count to their cap, maybe they get a discount on contract years or something (I think we already have a rule for this?)

Might be overcomplicating things this close to the season but just a thought

We are trying to closely align with the AFL model, so having less than the maximum list size would certainly fit. To my knowledge, there is no delisting mid season and being able to replace a player in the MSD.

Given we are already voting on these rules, these adjustments might have to wait until next season.

 

[lappinitup]

VOTE IN POLL ABOVE FOR EACH PROPOSAL - YES or NO

PRESEASON DRAFT - LIST SIZE

Teams will be permitted leave up to two positions (supplementary selections) on their 44 player list unfilled at the completion of the Pre Season Draft. Teams must leave a minimum of $150,000 of salary per player available in their salary cap for drafting of top up players in the Mid Season Draft. Supplementary selections are a tradeable asset. These positions can only, and must, be filled via the Mid Season Draft.

PROPOSED


LONG TERM INJURY LIST

The SCSUL Long Term Injury (LTI) list would work in the same manner as the AFL. Teams would be able to place players on the LTI list who won't play, and/or take any further part, in the current season.

Teams are eligible to claim up to $410,000 in salary cap relief of the players salary for the season. Teams will be responsible for the payment of the remainder of the players salary in that season, however the contract year won't be counted for cap purposes.

Teams will be able to replace the player through either the Pre Season or Mid Season Drafts.

A maximum of two players from a team will be eligible to be replaced through this process.

Positions opened on the list via a player placed on LTI list will be known as supplemental selections - LTI, which are a tradeable asset.

PROPOSED


MID SEASON DRAFT

A Mid Season Draft will be held before the commencement of round 10. Teams with supplemental selections who have available salary and contract space will be eligible to participate in the Md Season Draft. Teams are able to draft up to four players to fill spaces on their list caused by LTI and/or held back from the Pre Season Draft.

Teams may offer players up to 2 years (pro rata) in contract length. Rookie eligible players must be drafted to a 2 year (pro rata) contract.

PROPOSED


LIST SIZES

Teams must maintain a primary list size between the minimum of 40 players and the maximum of 48 players throughout the season.

PROPOSED

Great work Ken.

On the LTI list - can you remove a player from the list (who is still injured) to add a more valuable player to the list? E.g two rookies adding up to $300k go down and are placed on list then your captain goes down.. you obviously want to find a way to get that extra $110k utilised.

On the mid-season draft - are players drafted at their current (end of Rd 9) SC salary? Sorry, this one might be self explanatory, however I think I missed it throughout the thread.

 

[Darkie]

I just voted in favour of the list size proposal (which I’m in favour of), partly to see if I was holding up the process. [In general I’ve been waiting to see if someone raises something I haven’t properly considered, before casting a vote.]

I can’t see how I can now change or add to my vote on the other items, without the risk of stuffing things up (possibly because I’m an LG member, and am able to directly edit the poll itself - ie the questions, rather than the answers).

I’m happy to put myself down as a Yes for all 4 proposals. That would be an addition of 1 vote for the first 3 items (not displayed in the poll results), and no change to the list size votes (already included in the displayed results).

I think you can all see individual voters’ preferences on each poll option in any case, but please let me know if anything is unclear regarding my votes.

 

[Bomber18]

Great work Ken.

On the LTI list - can you remove a player from the list (who is still injured) to add a more valuable player to the list? E.g two rookies adding up to $300k go down and are placed on list then your captain goes down.. you obviously want to find a way to get that extra $110k utilised.

On the mid-season draft - are players drafted at their current (end of Rd 9) SC salary? Sorry, this one might be self explanatory, however I think I missed it throughout the thread.

On the second query, it would be the same as preseason prices from my understanding based on some earlier queries in the thread.

Like the ideas @KLo30!

Just a few ideas/initial thoughts on the mid season draft:
- would it make sense to have it after the AFL mid season draft so that those players are also available?
- presume prices for existing undrafted players would be based on preseason prices for that year (not recalculated based on their season avg to date?)
- is the option of trading salary cap space still under consideration?

1. Up for debate. After 6 games is a third of the season. That was the basis of the draft proposal. Waiting for the AFL would mean doing so after 11 games.
2. Prices would remain the same as pre season.
3. Teams would be able to trade prior to the Mid Season Draft as per normal, and thus freeing up salary cap space to help in the Mid Season Draft.