*Will we need to fold two NSFL teams?

[Beaver]

SBA just had a massive recruitment drive like 50+ new people in a season. To a point where they had to add 4 new NCAA teams and 2 new SBA teams after they had just added 1 the year before. If we could get something like that we would be golden.

How'd they do it?

As best as I can tell with a quick browse around our forums the only recruiting incentive is $1m when your recruit hits 150 TPE (something of which I just learned and judging by the fact there are 4 replies to the topic I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of people didn't know about this). I'm interested in how the SBA handled it - and more importantly how much of that class is retained - because the first thought that came to my mind would end up very similar to the SHL's which also doesn't seem very effective. Despite having ~250 people hop on the site on any given day only 6 participated in the most recent recruitment drive and less than a quarter of the previous draft class was both a) recruited and B) earned 45 TPE (SHL starts at 155).

Bumping up that recruiting incentive couldn't hurt but I'm skeptical on how much help it'd be. I'd be a fan of making it tiered, as well, if we do. Maybe something like:

$1m for 75 TPE
1 TPE for 150 TPE
2 TPE for 300 TPE
3 TPE for 500 TPE
5 TPE for 750 TPE

All of which would be cumulative. That would mean you could potentially earn 11 extra TPE and $1m for recruiting someone who gets enough into the league that they create an all-star caliber player (about 30 players are currently 750+ TPE) or 3 TPE and $1m if they participate enough to create a good player. You also get a little something for recruiting someone that gives the league a shot even if they don't end up panning out ($1m for earning and applying 25 TPE). That's like recruiting the squad you play fortnite or whatever with gets you a season of free training if they gain 25 TPE each with the added benefit that a couple of them might stick around.

If we're concerned about TPE inflation we could also engineer this to death by having a pool of recruitment TPE that we're comfortable with that gets handed out every offseason. Each recruit that reaches 150 TPE (or whatever) gets you 1 share of that pool, 300 gets you 2, 500 gets 3, and 750 gets 5. Every player's shares are summed up and divided into the pool value to figure out how much each share is worth. Example:

50 recruitment TPE per offseason with 10 max per individual
User A has a recruit hit 500 TPE and another recruit hit 150 TPE - 4 shares
User B has a recruits hit 300 TPE and another recruit hit 150 TPE - 3 shares
User C has a recruit hit 150 TPE - 1 share
User D has 5 recruits hit 150 TPE - 5 shares
User E has a recruit hit 750 TPE, a recruit hit 500 TPE, and 2 recruits hit 150 TPE - 10 shares
User F has a recruit hit 300 TPE - 2 shares
25 total shares means each 2 TPE per share
A gets 8
B gets 6
C gets 2
D gets 10
E gets 10
F gets 4

The advantage here would be that it makes recruiting worth more when there isn't a lot of recruiting going on and worth less when there is (automatic counter-cyclical stabilizers). The major disadvantage would be that it's not easy to explain and it's way more complicated than necessary.

Dunno but I'm definitely interested in what's worked for other leagues since "recruit more users/retain more users" is by far the best way out of this. Hopefully some newer members can chime in about what hooked them into sticking around.

[AdamS]

The 3R cycle is about to happen.

Regression
Retire
Recreate

After it does we will have a better idea of where we stand in terms of players, and capability to field teams at a high level. It's hard to judge where we really stand with things like S1 skewing things so much that Bovo's quoted "21.3%" retention should actually be 28.5%. That's the number you get if you treat each season as an equal part of the equation. Even then the number is skewed by the lack of inclusion of active players who have maxed out on tpe. As noted. When that cycle happens we'll have a much better idea of where we are.



Also, I disagree with the logic that for the league to be active we need the max number of players updating. If the absolute max number of players is updating, that means you don't have anymore room. Remember..this is ONLY counting the people who update. Not the various inactive players. Having 140 of 144 (instead of 98 out of 104 for example) updating right now would mean we go ahead and just cancel the next draft class and stop approving players because our rosters can't fit those new people. Max actives means that there are no positions to fill.

That group of inactives essentially needs to exist to create room for new players. In fact the biggest change post 3R is most likely going to be that the inactive players who are holding starting positions will drop significantly in quality. Some of them will be filler bots once that passes. Either way they need to continue to exist.

[nunccoepi]

The 3R cycle is about to happen.

Regression
Retire
Recreate

After it does we will have a better idea of where we stand in terms of players, and capability to field teams at a high level. It's hard to judge where we really stand with things like S1 skewing things so much that Bovo's quoted "21.3%" retention should actually be 28.5%. That's the number you get if you treat each season as an equal part of the equation. Even then the number is skewed by the lack of inclusion of active players who have maxed out on tpe. As noted. When that cycle happens we'll have a much better idea of where we are.



Also, I disagree with the logic that for the league to be active we need the max number of players updating. If the absolute max number of players is updating, that means you don't have anymore room. Remember..this is ONLY counting the people who update. Not the various inactive players. Having 140 of 144 (instead of 98 out of 104 for example) updating right now would mean we go ahead and just cancel the next draft class and stop approving players because our rosters can't fit those new people. Max actives means that there are no positions to fill.

That group of inactives essentially needs to exist to create room for new players. In fact the biggest change post 3R is most likely going to be that the inactive players who are holding starting positions will drop significantly in quality. Some of them will be filler bots once that passes. Either way they need to continue to exist.

I think you're forgetting about people who retire or just lose interest each season. Recruiting at the optimal level will equal the number of people we're losing when all positions are filled and will be greater than the number we're losing until those positions are filled. That's likely a long way away though.

[SwagSloth]

Recruitment for the next season will be super critical.

At this point, I think rolling the DSFL players back into the NSFL is probably a solid move, especially once regression kicks out many inactives.

Another option I've been giving thought to, if the DSFL stays, is Player-Controlled Filler Characters. Other leagues use this already to help fill their development leagues, so that locker rooms aren't ghost towns. It also allows players that are bored with their "main" to experiment with a position at a lower level and allow players that are tempted to multi to create a second player in a way that doesn't break the rules or deceive the league. These filler characters would also be at a disadvantage compared to "main" characters. (Probably a 50 TPE / season limit on fillers like SBA/EFL.)

[Durden]

Tighten salary cap and you'll see it average out (in reference to the average active players per team).


If one team can have SEVENTEEN active players and still be under the cap... they're either low TPE earners or the cap sucks.


Yes it's hard, yes it frustrates people, but it creates parity. And that's HO's job is to make sure (almost) any given team can win. You're not the Yankees. Baseball sucks.

[tlk742]

I think there's a fair and objective way to reduce the teams in the NSFL and no one will like it.

We don't fold one franchise, we fold all franchises, and then raffle the spots for 6 GM teams among existing GMs. We would have to have a complete and entire redraft but it may solve a lot of the problems. Those new teams can choose to keep their history or start anew entirely.

[AzhekAhriman]

I think at the point you fold all franchises and restart you basically fold the league. I would be severely uncomfortable with staying around in that hypothetical.

[timeconsumer]

One big recruiting class changes the whole thing. Just one big ass class.

Get your friends involved. Show them how fun it is.

[SwagSloth]

I think at the point you fold all franchises and restart you basically fold the league. I would be severely uncomfortable with staying around in that hypothetical.

I'm not for folding teams, but if we did, I think we'd be better off drafting players the players from the folding teams. A lot of people are attached to their teams and completely wiping the slate might cause people to lose interest like you said.

[iamslm22]

I'm not for folding teams, but if we did, I think we'd be better off drafting players the players from the folding teams. A lot of people are attached to their teams and completely wiping the slate might cause people to lose interest like you said.

Yea I don't think we need to fold teams, and we're certainly not choosing it randomly and not scrapping all the teams.