![[DEV] ISFL Forums](http://dev.sim-football.com/forums/images/emerald/logo.png "[DEV] ISFL Forums"){kind=logo}
+- [DEV] ISFL Forums (http://dev.sim-football.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Announcements (http://dev.sim-football.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=495)
+--- Forum: Announcements (http://dev.sim-football.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=32)
+---- Forum: Head Office Announcements (http://dev.sim-football.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=230)
+---- Thread: Major Announcements (/showthread.php?tid=8446)
Major Announcements - dropbear - 04-24-2018
What's the go with position changes? Personally, I don't think performances from one position should be considered alongside another. So if you change halfway through your career, you're essentially halving the amount of seasons you have to try and be HOF-worthy in that position.
Major Announcements - ADwyer87 - 04-24-2018
(04-24-2018, 03:50 PM)TheMemeMaestro Wrote:I like the SBA system. There are different levels. 5 different tiers depending on how good the player was.I'm not a fan. IMO if the league is worried about leniency, then this would be the worst option. my current player in SBA is an absolute lock to make it in the new system over there and i'm not much better than a role player.
(04-24-2018, 04:26 PM)TheMemeMaestro Wrote:It's an alternative. I do not like the current system we have. If we don't want a tier system, I say we should go with sapp's system of 12/15. 10/15 makes it too lenient.I'm not sure it really makes a positive difference? I dont think any non-deserving people will make it in with the 10/15 vote system, but i do think some deserving people will not make it in with 12/15 vote system.
(04-24-2018, 04:57 PM)BenLongshaw Wrote:I agree that the threshold should be higher. 66.67% is just better than average, which isn't HOF-worthy at all. Also definitely would not want a tiered system. You're either in or you're not.I think this is a pretty flawed argument. I dont think any "just better than average" players will be getting close to 10 votes. a just better than average player should get maybe a couple votes. hell, i doubt a much better than average player would get more than 5-6.
80% should be the cut-off as a minimum. The HOF needs to be hard to get into to mean something.
Major Announcements - iamslm22 - 04-24-2018
(04-24-2018, 07:28 PM)BenLongshaw Wrote:What's the go with position changes? Personally, I don't think performances from one position should be considered alongside another. So if you change halfway through your career, you're essentially halving the amount of seasons you have to try and be HOF-worthy in that position.
I'm obviously biased - but I completely disagree. Why should we penalize people for playing a position that no longer exists being selfless. Pro Bowls add up.
Major Announcements - iamslm22 - 04-24-2018
(04-24-2018, 05:48 PM)sapp2013 Wrote:^ from Wikipedia
If 32 teams produce 8 HoFers, 8 teams should produce 2. @Beaver
That's kind of a ridiculous standard though. The BEST QB in the NFL gets in, should we only put the best offensive player in the league in the hall?
Major Announcements - dropbear - 04-24-2018
(04-25-2018, 10:33 AM)iamslm22 Wrote:I'm obviously biased - but I completely disagree. Why should we penalize people for playing a position that no longer exists being selfless. Pro Bowls add up.
If you're referring to the offensive line, I think that gets an exemption. But should, for examlple, Boss Tweed get in over another RB if the distinguishing factor is his performance at linebacker? I don't think so
Major Announcements - AsylumParty - 04-24-2018
(04-24-2018, 07:33 PM)iamslm22 Wrote:I'm obviously biased - but I completely disagree. Why should we penalize people for playing a position that no longer exists being selfless. Pro Bowls add up.I don't think it's about penalizing people, but not being able to accurately assess an entire career as the stats of an olineman can't transfer in a meaningful fashion to a qb. Even if you perform well at a different position, a much less objective analysis would be made trying to compare that part of your career to people that were playing a single position the entire time.
Major Announcements - ADwyer87 - 04-24-2018
(04-24-2018, 06:42 PM)AsylumParty Wrote:I don't think it's about penalizing people, but not being able to accurately assess an entire career as the stats of an olineman can't transfer in a meaningful fashion to a qb. Even if you perform well at a different position, a much less objective analysis would be made trying to compare that part of your career to people that were playing a single position the entire time.I think it will relatively penalize just on principal alone. Like, if you play QB 7 years, have 6 HoF worthy seasons and 1 dud, then it will still look like a good resume. If you like, play 3 at CB and 4 at QB, one bad season will be a much bigger negative
Major Announcements - ADwyer87 - 04-24-2018
(04-24-2018, 06:34 PM)iamslm22 Wrote:That's kind of a ridiculous standard though. The BEST QB in the NFL gets in, should we only put the best offensive player in the league in the hall?i think its a relatively decent goal. I just think people need to know that the early classes won't define that necessarily just because of how it is. S1 and S2 draftees are going to naturally have a bigger class because A) They were always the best players so more chance at being elite and B ) theres no draft class spreading out, unlike what we should have in the future, so the first true class or two will be full of HoF talent, with some surrounding 3-4 classes with no one of HoF talent.
Major Announcements - AsylumParty - 04-24-2018
(04-24-2018, 07:49 PM)ADwyer87 Wrote:I think it will relatively penalize just on principal alone. Like, if you play QB 7 years, have 6 HoF worthy seasons and 1 dud, then it will still look like a good resume. If you like, play 3 at CB and 4 at QB, one bad season will be a much bigger negativeIt's a consequence of switching positions, not a penalty. We can't just assume that the seasons spent at another position would have been on par with the rest of the league. Those 3 HOF worthy years have to equal a career's worth and I don't think half a career of great performances should earn anyone a spot in the HOF.
Major Announcements - ADwyer87 - 04-24-2018
(04-24-2018, 06:56 PM)AsylumParty Wrote:It's a consequence of switching positions, not a penalty. We can't just assume that the seasons spent at another position would have been on par with the rest of the league. Those 3 HOF worthy years have to equal a career's worth and I don't think half a career of great performances should earn anyone a spot in the HOF.huh?
if a player switched positions, their whole body of work would be taken into account, not just post-position change work. so guys like Akselsen, Blocksdale, Oles will be judged over everything they did. The point is just that they will be judged harsher than normal just by the situation, hence the hypothetical example. My point was essentially that a QB who plays all 7 years asa WB and has 6 HoF seasons, will have a naturally better resume than a guy who plays 3 years at CB/OL/whatever, 4 years at QB, and has 3 HoF seasons at each, 6 overall.