(S30) Ultimus Week

[StadiumGambler]

Code:

13. Expansion Expansion Expansion! The league seems to love talking about it, but it has still not happened. Tell us why it should happen / should not happen soon?

The Case For League Expansion: 16 teams is a much rounder and nicer number than 14 teams, making the league better for an aesthetic standpoint. 16 teams also justifies an 8 team playoff format, unlike 14 where the league seems to not want to award middling teams with a possible first round upset chance. It would also enable the league to expand to new big population locales to increase fictional television revenue and prestige. Ohio, Seattle, and Charlotte would make good spots for a team, or perhaps the league could consider going for more international flair with a team in England, Japan, or Australia. Also, it would be a good way to normalize the league a bit, and get some top teams to stop hoarding its top players (assuming that is a thing people care about in this league.)

The Case Against League Expansion: While 16 teams is a nice number, its not something the league should strive for yet. As it stands, there is very little depth even among top teams in the league, so expansion drafts would be eating into starting caliber players for a lot of teams. The IFA free agent depth in this league is nothing to speak of really, probably a lot of DSFL-level, 300 TPE flotsam and jetsam. Even if the expansion teams were somehow good and could pick 2 from each team, those 2 holes would not be easily filled by a lot of teams, thus forcing them to plug the gap with substandard players that warp performance. This may force teams to raid DSFL teams further for talent, and thats a big problem because the DSFL is in a shaky position of its own for depth, with few teams over the years being able to field 11 quality players on either side of the ball.

Perhaps the league could consider adding ISFL GM Bots, some 600-700 TPE fillers to be used in emergencies to ensure teams don't just have burnt toast factories in one random position on the field. It could also enhance defensive flexibility, as there are some teams playing a 4-3 or a 3-4 who might want to run a 3-3-5, but can't find the defensive personnel to complete the jigsaw. Being able to give teams a couple different looks would be nice. Also, the league can go eight playoff teams with 14 teams in the league if they wanted to. Most of the 4 seeds come close to making the playoffs, or finish a respectable 8-8. I think this league could go 8 teams, and if there is a first seed upset, hey, that happens sometimes in real life too.

---

Code:

17. Your team has announced that they will be laying ground on a new stadium next season. What additions would you like to see included in it. No graphics option available here.

I would want my team to first of all, make sure the sponsor isn't objectionable. I am not sure if something like Comcast Field or Huawei Stadium or something like that exists IRL, but we need a sponsor that is not ethically objectionable to name our field after.

Second of all, the sponsor needs to make some degree of sense for a name. Something like Tropicana Field for the MLB's Tampa Rays is alright, because the name sounds like something you could give to a field even if Tropicana wasn't a company. It'd be a natural name for the Hahaluas stadium, for example. So whatever corp sponsor we pick is key.

For a new stadium, I'd like the field to be either natural grass, or some form of artificial turf that doesn't shorten careers. The infamous AstroTurf caused many injuries and wear and tear due to the harsh surface, so we would want a surface that has durability in extreme weather conditions, but isn't so durable that it refuses to give whenever a linebacker spears a running back into it.

Finally, I'd like to remove the ESPN-reserved press box, and force them to cover shows in the parking lot. They really don't deserve the right to cover any sport at the moment, so screw em.

---

Code:

25. Imagine your current position was not available to be picked when you created your player. What other position would you have picked, and why?

I would have likely picked Running Back. For me, I wanted to play offense over defense and kicker, because offense is easier to write about, as it feels easier to make a tangible impact on the field, as opposed to defense where you can have a couple sacks or an interception, but actually play badly due to getting burned on a dozen unnoticed plays. Plus, I was told it was hard to make an iconic LT-style pass rush threat, due to the increased quality of offensive line bots and the hard times teams had generating proper pressure. (It's probably also hard to make a Revis Island-style corner as well.)

So for offense, while offensive line is nice and important, it's also hard to write about because its a position you never notice unless things are going horribly wrong. Quarterback was out, due to the fact that players are regularly dissuaded from playing QB due to a positional glut. Tight End was out due to the position lacking as much big play impact as real life, where a superstar tight end can achieve better numbers than most receivers because of their destructive power overwhelming linebackers and safeties. So it was Wide Receiver or Running Back, and I chose Wide Receiver on the theory that teams would pass more like the real NFL. IF Wide Receiver wasn't available, I would've picked Running Back to be able to write about my player easier, with a tangible idea of what he was doing.