Post by bossman on Aug 22, 2020 0:28:11 GMT
Before I go on to express the idea, I must stress a couple of things.
1. This is only a suggestion and discussion.
2. In no way, shape or form would this happen in this off-season as it is a huge change to the way the game is played and coaches would need to plan ahead. If this idea is liked, it would at least influence how bidding will go even though no change to squad limits would be done this off season.
Last night, Bill made a suggestion to me about squad limits for PL teams. When he first made the suggestion, I admit that I thought “Fuck, no way”. The more I thought about though, the more that I thought that the idea has some merit. I will stress the the word “some” because I think the idea has some limitations too.
POSITIVES
*There would undoubtedly be more players off-contract and on the player market. This would give coaches with weakened squads more opportunity to get that kind of player that a top squad player may not want to invest in but a weaker squad can fit in.
*I think it would test EVERY coach on how they would balance a or roster when they realise they only have 30 spots rather than take low risk options of multiple players on 100k in contract bidding or instant five year promotions of talent. I think this rule would absolutely make the game more competitive for all.
*Make the RSC more authentic and more challenging to run. To prove my point, check out your rsc squad and count how many players that have not played a game. I have 6 players that have not played a game. I would guess that in some clubs, that number would be closer to 10. To me, that is the definition of stockpiling. It would force clubs that get a big injury toll to make some very crucial decisions. Some 6/7 type players would be getting a run in PL and there would be big decisions made in rsc about cutting possible talent due to too many injuries in the squad.
*Added complexity to the game. This could be viewed as a negative as well as a positive. Coaches will have to contend with two things every off season.....squad cap and salary cap. Teams that have large amounts of players off contract will have more obvious opportunities to recruit than ones that have little amounts of players off contract. This naturally evens itself out over the long run with the smarter coaches still should be ahead of the game.
NEGATIVES
*Totally inbalanced squads. If this was implemented, I can forsee a time where some coaches may mismanage squads to the point where they have squads in the low 20s due to desperately trying to acquire talent and paying up for players due to only having a 30 player limit. This did happen when CWB implemented it. I remember one season having only 21 players in the top squad.....cop the tip....I did not have a good season that year.
*Added complexity. It will be easier for new coaches to just contend with a salary cap. One way I have improved the Oilers is to put multiple low bids on players with potential and it has definitely helped me to build a much stronger squad. 4-5 seasons ago, the Oilers were in a fairly weak state roster wise. No restrictions on squad size has definitely helped me to build a squad with minimal risk. It would have been harder to build a side to what it is today with a squad limitation of 30 players.
SUMMARY
I can honestly see some merit and limitations to both sides of the argument. Im a bit flipflopping between the ideas myself. Life has taught me that if that happens, we should stick with the status quo rather than make big changes that can put noses out of joint from some long serving coaches here, the majority of whom already have big squads. It is worth a discussion but will only put it to a vote is the mood is towards a change.
If the change did happen, it would certainly happen over a long period of time (like a 39 limit, 38 the following season type change) rather than an instant type change which would be extremely unfair and totally fuck up 1-3 contract bidding periods for those clubs with big squads through no fault of their own.
1. This is only a suggestion and discussion.
2. In no way, shape or form would this happen in this off-season as it is a huge change to the way the game is played and coaches would need to plan ahead. If this idea is liked, it would at least influence how bidding will go even though no change to squad limits would be done this off season.
Last night, Bill made a suggestion to me about squad limits for PL teams. When he first made the suggestion, I admit that I thought “Fuck, no way”. The more I thought about though, the more that I thought that the idea has some merit. I will stress the the word “some” because I think the idea has some limitations too.
POSITIVES
*There would undoubtedly be more players off-contract and on the player market. This would give coaches with weakened squads more opportunity to get that kind of player that a top squad player may not want to invest in but a weaker squad can fit in.
*I think it would test EVERY coach on how they would balance a or roster when they realise they only have 30 spots rather than take low risk options of multiple players on 100k in contract bidding or instant five year promotions of talent. I think this rule would absolutely make the game more competitive for all.
*Make the RSC more authentic and more challenging to run. To prove my point, check out your rsc squad and count how many players that have not played a game. I have 6 players that have not played a game. I would guess that in some clubs, that number would be closer to 10. To me, that is the definition of stockpiling. It would force clubs that get a big injury toll to make some very crucial decisions. Some 6/7 type players would be getting a run in PL and there would be big decisions made in rsc about cutting possible talent due to too many injuries in the squad.
*Added complexity to the game. This could be viewed as a negative as well as a positive. Coaches will have to contend with two things every off season.....squad cap and salary cap. Teams that have large amounts of players off contract will have more obvious opportunities to recruit than ones that have little amounts of players off contract. This naturally evens itself out over the long run with the smarter coaches still should be ahead of the game.
NEGATIVES
*Totally inbalanced squads. If this was implemented, I can forsee a time where some coaches may mismanage squads to the point where they have squads in the low 20s due to desperately trying to acquire talent and paying up for players due to only having a 30 player limit. This did happen when CWB implemented it. I remember one season having only 21 players in the top squad.....cop the tip....I did not have a good season that year.
*Added complexity. It will be easier for new coaches to just contend with a salary cap. One way I have improved the Oilers is to put multiple low bids on players with potential and it has definitely helped me to build a much stronger squad. 4-5 seasons ago, the Oilers were in a fairly weak state roster wise. No restrictions on squad size has definitely helped me to build a squad with minimal risk. It would have been harder to build a side to what it is today with a squad limitation of 30 players.
SUMMARY
I can honestly see some merit and limitations to both sides of the argument. Im a bit flipflopping between the ideas myself. Life has taught me that if that happens, we should stick with the status quo rather than make big changes that can put noses out of joint from some long serving coaches here, the majority of whom already have big squads. It is worth a discussion but will only put it to a vote is the mood is towards a change.
If the change did happen, it would certainly happen over a long period of time (like a 39 limit, 38 the following season type change) rather than an instant type change which would be extremely unfair and totally fuck up 1-3 contract bidding periods for those clubs with big squads through no fault of their own.
