Why not create a rookie category in the U.K. and Europe like the states have. Would that not make it a little easier for teams to decide what to play in?
Just a suggestion.
Just a suggestion.
Millennium Series : Prizes for Novice teams please
- Thread starter markh
- Start date
Am I missing something?
If, however, the organisers decide that the best way round this is to insist that if you want to play in the series at all then you have to play e.g. at least 4 or 5 rounds or even the whole series so we don't get this problem, then I think we'd find about half the number of teams or less attending thereby making them unprofitable.
I still think your idea is the best though TJ.
Would work well IF teams all played all the rounds, like the UK soccer league system. However, not all teams do play every round and it's not always the novices that miss them out. So you can have the situation where a team is relegated even though they kicked a$$ at the one & only round they attended - this doesn't mean the team is only good enough to play Novice, just that they couldn't afford the bills.
If, however, the organisers decide that the best way round this is to insist that if you want to play in the series at all then you have to play e.g. at least 4 or 5 rounds or even the whole series so we don't get this problem, then I think we'd find about half the number of teams or less attending thereby making them unprofitable.
I still think your idea is the best though TJ.
It's not perfect but
it's the only way that I can see...besides, in Am and Novice, if you turned up to just one event and won it, I suspect that'd be enough points to stop you getting relegated...
it's the only way that I can see...besides, in Am and Novice, if you turned up to just one event and won it, I suspect that'd be enough points to stop you getting relegated...
TJ...
... agreed it would be the easiest but let me pose this question:
The Rushers win all the events this year and even beat dynasty 6 time in the same tournament etc. Everyone calls for them to move up next year - I would, wouldn't you.
But now Richmond Italia comes around and builds an euro all-star team and wants the Rushers 3 best players.
Do the Rushers then need to play Pro with a "weaker" squad then they had that made them world beaters? It isn't that fair & the only choice they would have would be to change their name.
I would say that automatic promotion & demotion could be effective only if the team stays them same from one year to the next. I do think there should be something done - it's just a matter of finding the right balance.
goose
... agreed it would be the easiest but let me pose this question:
The Rushers win all the events this year and even beat dynasty 6 time in the same tournament etc. Everyone calls for them to move up next year - I would, wouldn't you.
But now Richmond Italia comes around and builds an euro all-star team and wants the Rushers 3 best players.
Do the Rushers then need to play Pro with a "weaker" squad then they had that made them world beaters? It isn't that fair & the only choice they would have would be to change their name.
I would say that automatic promotion & demotion could be effective only if the team stays them same from one year to the next. I do think there should be something done - it's just a matter of finding the right balance.
goose
Why?
FC Copenhagen win the Div 2 soccer championship by a mile and get promoted, but cos they played so well they lose several players to Milan, Mau United and Juve...**** happens, they're promoted and they have to deal with it.
I said it ain't perfect, but it's the only viable alternative.
FC Copenhagen win the Div 2 soccer championship by a mile and get promoted, but cos they played so well they lose several players to Milan, Mau United and Juve...**** happens, they're promoted and they have to deal with it.
I said it ain't perfect, but it's the only viable alternative.
Agreed in mind but...
... in heart I disagree.
The main difference is the players get paid and have to play in any division they are told to. As long as individual teams/people are paying to enter tournaments we can't expect them to move up to a higher division if their team is weaker than what got them to that point.
If a team was owned by someone like Jerry Braun and he was outbid for his players talents than that is his problem and should probably do something to rectify it (he probably would too). But as long as 99.99999% of the teams don't have this kind of financial backing/ownership it shouldn't be done.
Don't get wrong - I wholeheartedly & wholemindedly (I know it's not a word but it sounds cool) agree that teams retaining the same roster year after year should be forced to step-up.
goose
P.S. TJ I'm from Canada - just happened to be trapped here for 11 years - so using Danish football trivia on me doesn't work
... in heart I disagree.
The main difference is the players get paid and have to play in any division they are told to. As long as individual teams/people are paying to enter tournaments we can't expect them to move up to a higher division if their team is weaker than what got them to that point.
If a team was owned by someone like Jerry Braun and he was outbid for his players talents than that is his problem and should probably do something to rectify it (he probably would too). But as long as 99.99999% of the teams don't have this kind of financial backing/ownership it shouldn't be done.
Don't get wrong - I wholeheartedly & wholemindedly (I know it's not a word but it sounds cool) agree that teams retaining the same roster year after year should be forced to step-up.
goose
P.S. TJ I'm from Canada - just happened to be trapped here for 11 years - so using Danish football trivia on me doesn't work
Well said TJ
I agree dude.
Goose, I gather you're a promoter/organiser and it's well cool that you're putting some ideas in, others tend to shy away from this kind of debate as it calls for change and some responsibility....anyway, I think you may be complicating things a bit that one though like tha man says tough **** really. If the teams loses players and gets ripped they get demoted, fair enough really.
Promoting and demoting seems the best way to deal with this and will spice up the series a bit perhaps, I was thinking that when teams are promoted it would put a lot more pressure on the teams but to be honest if you come top 4 in AM at the end of the series (Millennium as example) you gotta be rippin ass all over really and committed to enough of the events so no real problem there is there?? If perhaps there were promotion bonuses for teams too....example, Ass Rippers UK (Novice team) know that by coming top 4 Novice in Millennium will secure them a full set of tops for the team all printed up nice perhaps some goggles or pants too, this could be where the sponsors play an extra lil' part in the picture. X-Killers (UK AM team) know that by finishing top 4 AM they can secure a full years full sponsorship with whoever or enhance exisiting sponsors maybe even get some free entrees to some tourneys. Obviously the pros take home all the money, jet skis, mustangs and land cruisers.
I agree dude.
Goose, I gather you're a promoter/organiser and it's well cool that you're putting some ideas in, others tend to shy away from this kind of debate as it calls for change and some responsibility....anyway, I think you may be complicating things a bit that one though like tha man says tough **** really. If the teams loses players and gets ripped they get demoted, fair enough really.
Promoting and demoting seems the best way to deal with this and will spice up the series a bit perhaps, I was thinking that when teams are promoted it would put a lot more pressure on the teams but to be honest if you come top 4 in AM at the end of the series (Millennium as example) you gotta be rippin ass all over really and committed to enough of the events so no real problem there is there?? If perhaps there were promotion bonuses for teams too....example, Ass Rippers UK (Novice team) know that by coming top 4 Novice in Millennium will secure them a full set of tops for the team all printed up nice perhaps some goggles or pants too, this could be where the sponsors play an extra lil' part in the picture. X-Killers (UK AM team) know that by finishing top 4 AM they can secure a full years full sponsorship with whoever or enhance exisiting sponsors maybe even get some free entrees to some tourneys. Obviously the pros take home all the money, jet skis, mustangs and land cruisers.
Baca
2--indeed they should but they don't want it as they are afraid it will put some teams off and impact the bottom line. What they need to recognize is that their best feature is their status as a part of the premier league and that some compulsory regulation of who plays where reinforces that fact in the minds of all players (and probably why some players find this whole "sandbagging" thing so irritating as it undermines the whole league's status, at least in their eyes).
As to some of the other posts Teej is fundamentally right (with a small modification), Liz offers a fair objection and Goose is gonna have to pick between players and teams--so it's a good thing he's actually on a committee and has a voice that will be listened to.
Only thing Series needs to consider regarding individual players is division hopping down as it potentially compromises the integrity of the league.
And the reason you don't worry about ranking or sorting out individual players is because any team is more than the sum of it's parts and any promoted team in the event of a situation like Goose hypothesized stands a much better than average chance of also picking up quality players by virtue of its rep and upgraded status. Doesn't mean it won't be a potentially difficult circumstance but as Teej rightly pointed out every permutation can't be accounted for.
Promotion in the Nov and Am ranks should be compulsory for Ams and both compulsory and unrestricted for Novs so that teams that choose to may advance whether they are required to or not. This would allow Nov teams that want to test their mettle free to do so but would restrict the jump to Pro to an exclusive and limited number maintaining and preserving the division's status and making joining it's ranks more desireable.
Calculating promotions should be a function of accumulated results weighted by events participated in and the numbers promoted should be a factor of the average number of participating teams for the Series. This is the tricky part, figuring out what the numbers should be. But a calculation something like this takes into account consistent level of achievement, relative quality of achievement (1st out of 14 isn't quite the same thing as 1st out fo 42) and the size of the division extant. Why take only 4 of 40 when the next division is promoting 4 of 24? So the calculation includes a percentile as the threshhold for promotion allowing flexibility in numbers promoting given an ever changing scale of divisions.
Relegation exists only in Pro and Am ranks (doh!) and may be calculated in a similar manner to promotions. The Pro cut may be matched to the Am promotions or to a pre-determined max number of teams allowed to compete in Pro division. The Am relegations are purely a function of a baseline threshhold as total numbers in division not really that important.
And lastly, to reorient the status of Nov division as a unique and valid level of play the entry for Am and Nov should be the same. (I'm not saying up the price to Am level necessarily but however it's decided the entry should be the same. Of course I also think Pro entry should the same as well with the deciding factor a team's actual competitiveness--but hey, that's just me.)
Which leads in a very roundabout way back to Mark's original question of prizes in Novice division. And the answer is of course there ought to be Nov prizes particularly if Nov if reassigned a separate and legitimate status and not viewed as the big boys chew toy. Prizes should be limited to the finalists in each division and prizes should improve by division as recognizably superior play deserves recognizably superior rewards.
Whew!
1--one system enforces promotion based on an irrelevant factor--time in division while the other method relies on results--moving the obviously superior teams up.
2--indeed they should but they don't want it as they are afraid it will put some teams off and impact the bottom line. What they need to recognize is that their best feature is their status as a part of the premier league and that some compulsory regulation of who plays where reinforces that fact in the minds of all players (and probably why some players find this whole "sandbagging" thing so irritating as it undermines the whole league's status, at least in their eyes).
As to some of the other posts Teej is fundamentally right (with a small modification), Liz offers a fair objection and Goose is gonna have to pick between players and teams--so it's a good thing he's actually on a committee and has a voice that will be listened to.
Only thing Series needs to consider regarding individual players is division hopping down as it potentially compromises the integrity of the league.
And the reason you don't worry about ranking or sorting out individual players is because any team is more than the sum of it's parts and any promoted team in the event of a situation like Goose hypothesized stands a much better than average chance of also picking up quality players by virtue of its rep and upgraded status. Doesn't mean it won't be a potentially difficult circumstance but as Teej rightly pointed out every permutation can't be accounted for.
Promotion in the Nov and Am ranks should be compulsory for Ams and both compulsory and unrestricted for Novs so that teams that choose to may advance whether they are required to or not. This would allow Nov teams that want to test their mettle free to do so but would restrict the jump to Pro to an exclusive and limited number maintaining and preserving the division's status and making joining it's ranks more desireable.
Calculating promotions should be a function of accumulated results weighted by events participated in and the numbers promoted should be a factor of the average number of participating teams for the Series. This is the tricky part, figuring out what the numbers should be. But a calculation something like this takes into account consistent level of achievement, relative quality of achievement (1st out of 14 isn't quite the same thing as 1st out fo 42) and the size of the division extant. Why take only 4 of 40 when the next division is promoting 4 of 24? So the calculation includes a percentile as the threshhold for promotion allowing flexibility in numbers promoting given an ever changing scale of divisions.
Relegation exists only in Pro and Am ranks (doh!) and may be calculated in a similar manner to promotions. The Pro cut may be matched to the Am promotions or to a pre-determined max number of teams allowed to compete in Pro division. The Am relegations are purely a function of a baseline threshhold as total numbers in division not really that important.
And lastly, to reorient the status of Nov division as a unique and valid level of play the entry for Am and Nov should be the same. (I'm not saying up the price to Am level necessarily but however it's decided the entry should be the same. Of course I also think Pro entry should the same as well with the deciding factor a team's actual competitiveness--but hey, that's just me.)
Which leads in a very roundabout way back to Mark's original question of prizes in Novice division. And the answer is of course there ought to be Nov prizes particularly if Nov if reassigned a separate and legitimate status and not viewed as the big boys chew toy. Prizes should be limited to the finalists in each division and prizes should improve by division as recognizably superior play deserves recognizably superior rewards.
Whew!
Looks like between you all we're really getting some great ideas going. Just about everyone seems to be in favour of the promotion/relegation system, and those that aren't don't seem to be coming up with anything better (though I did like the inherent fairness of Goose's player experience points idea).
OK, next problem issue. This promotion/relegation system works well when you have a set number of teams which all want to play every year (again, like the UK soccer leagues). But we have both the size of the events fluctuating and the number of teams that wish to be in each category.
Examples : At event A there are 80 teams of which 15 are Pro, 30 are Am & 35 are Novice. At event B however, there are 150 teams of which 20 are Pro, 50 are Am & 80 Novice. Clearly event A is easy pickings for the best teams in each category, and the Pro teams have a 50% chance of qualifying for the Semis. Half the Novices qualify at event A and only 20% at event B. Would there be any way of weighting the points to allow for this kind of thing?
Second potential problem. Someone creates another Diablo Image style "superteam". Due to the initial self-categorisation of the Millennium series, these guys could theoretically enter as Novice. Fine you say, within 2 seasons they would have promoted themselves to Pro. That works as long as they play enough events to ensure they're promoted, but how many events did Image play last year? I know this is a very exaggerated example, but you can see what I mean when it comes to glory hunters who never want to go beyond Am - they just have to miss out one or two events in the series to avoid promotion.
Please note I'm NOT coming up with these potential problems to be obstructive, just trying to foresee potential risks & issues so they can be mitigated before they get to be a real problem rather than theoretical.
OK, next problem issue. This promotion/relegation system works well when you have a set number of teams which all want to play every year (again, like the UK soccer leagues). But we have both the size of the events fluctuating and the number of teams that wish to be in each category.
Examples : At event A there are 80 teams of which 15 are Pro, 30 are Am & 35 are Novice. At event B however, there are 150 teams of which 20 are Pro, 50 are Am & 80 Novice. Clearly event A is easy pickings for the best teams in each category, and the Pro teams have a 50% chance of qualifying for the Semis. Half the Novices qualify at event A and only 20% at event B. Would there be any way of weighting the points to allow for this kind of thing?
Second potential problem. Someone creates another Diablo Image style "superteam". Due to the initial self-categorisation of the Millennium series, these guys could theoretically enter as Novice. Fine you say, within 2 seasons they would have promoted themselves to Pro. That works as long as they play enough events to ensure they're promoted, but how many events did Image play last year? I know this is a very exaggerated example, but you can see what I mean when it comes to glory hunters who never want to go beyond Am - they just have to miss out one or two events in the series to avoid promotion.
Please note I'm NOT coming up with these potential problems to be obstructive, just trying to foresee potential risks & issues so they can be mitigated before they get to be a real problem rather than theoretical.
Re: Baca
Doh! Beat me to it by typing faster. Still, great minds think alike & all that & if 2 of us from very different viewpoints think similarly then there MUSt be something in it.