DSFL - Get Rid of Inactives

[speculadora]

As a DSFL player I agree on all points, for whatever that is worth

[kckolbe]

I was partially discouraged in the beginning when I noticed that other teams had such great OLs and didn't think that as a DT I could make an impact until I had higher TPE. Having a bunch of inactives makes no sense from a management stand point either. I'd rather have the GMs get more control over the type of team they want to build around the drafted actives rather than be at the mercy of best available inactives.

Unfortunately this is going to be an issue no matter what. OL starts out much better than DL.

[PDXBaller]

Are there any reasons to actually keep inactives on rosters? I haven't seen a legitimate scenario other than the possibility of someone returning in sapp's example.

I believe this idea aligns with the goals of a DSFL GM. Our job isn't to be competitive, but to keep the interest of new players first and being able to craft a team around newly drafted actives would help us showcase our active players and generate excitement for each new user. If this isn't the case, I'd like HO to step in and fully define what our role is since that's the assumption I was operating on.

[Roly]

I get what you are going for PDXBaller, but it seems complicated and a lot of work for GMs to be asked to create new rosters each off-season. And then update those rosters periodically through the season.

Riffing off your idea - what about sets of bots that GMs can either select/draft/purchase/whatever. In the offseason, after the draft, you can then grab a Pass Defense or Rush Defense set, Rush Offense or Pass Offense set. It comes with pre-made bots with defined attributes. The bots can still be traded between teams, but at the end of the playoffs they are reformed into their sets and reassigned to teams.

GMs have to do nothing except select the set that matches their draft choices. Or you make the sets draftable so there's some element of skill in building teams - or purchasable if you want to be conservative.

To be honest I don't think the current system is the worse though. The active players are still the stars of the DSFL, to my knowledge.

[PDXBaller]

I get what you are going for PDXBaller, but it seems complicated and a lot of work for GMs to be asked to create new rosters each off-season. And then update those rosters periodically through the season.

Riffing off your idea - what about sets of bots that GMs can either select/draft/purchase/whatever. In the offseason, after the draft, you can then grab a Pass Defense or Rush Defense set, Rush Offense or Pass Offense set. It comes with pre-made bots with defined attributes. The bots can still be traded between teams, but at the end of the playoffs they are reformed into their sets and reassigned to teams.

GMs have to do nothing except select the set that matches their draft choices. Or you make the sets draftable so there's some element of skill in building teams - or purchasable if you want to be conservative.

To be honest I don't think the current system is the worse though. The active players are still the stars of the DSFL, to my knowledge.

I've actually got a plan to help GMs with creating new rosters each off-season and it'll be very easy for them to define the archetypes by player and where to allocate TPE. I'm hoping that it would only take an hour for them to build out a complete roster once I'm done with a roster builder tool.

GMs are already updating player bots with some GMs updating 2 player bots a week. I don't think updating a few more every 4 week interval will be an issue.

I do like the idea of bots that GMs can select and a good compromise might be to allow each team the ability to select a bot set with pre-made attributes.

[Supersquare04]

I get what you are going for PDXBaller, but it seems complicated and a lot of work for GMs to be asked to create new rosters each off-season. And then update those rosters periodically through the season.

Riffing off your idea - what about sets of bots that GMs can either select/draft/purchase/whatever. In the offseason, after the draft, you can then grab a Pass Defense or Rush Defense set, Rush Offense or Pass Offense set. It comes with pre-made bots with defined attributes. The bots can still be traded between teams, but at the end of the playoffs they are reformed into their sets and reassigned to teams.

GMs have to do nothing except select the set that matches their draft choices. Or you make the sets draftable so there's some element of skill in building teams - or purchasable if you want to be conservative.

To be honest I don't think the current system is the worse though. The active players are still the stars of the DSFL, to my knowledge.

The offense of the Tijuana Luchadores is run through spinelli, who is inactive. Our run game is run through John Goose not Borro Gore, Goose is inactive and Gore is very active. Gore should be the star of our rushing attack not Goose.

[speculadora]

If there's a concern about managing a new roster every year just let every GM create a 2-deep bot squad (the equivalent of PB or NOR). Your starting roster for the year is all of your bots. then as you add active players you basically send a bot at that position back to the bot squad and off your active roster. As players become inactive you have to send them off the roster (no matter if the bot is worse) for one of your bots. maybe I'm missing the actual debate here bc I'm on my phone, but the roster management aspect does not seem difficult to account for

[PDXBaller]

If there's a concern about managing a new roster every year just let every GM create a 2-deep bot squad (the equivalent of PB or NOR). Your starting roster for the year is all of your bots. then as you add active players you basically send a bot at that position back to the bot squad and off your active roster. As players become inactive you have to send them off the roster (no matter if the bot is worse) for one of your bots. maybe I'm missing the actual debate here bc I'm on my phone, but the roster management aspect does not seem difficult to account for

That's a good way of looking at it too! The sim allows you to send players to the practice squad so we could easily move bot players off the main roster into the practice squad for the team.

[speculadora]

also the elimination of the salary cap is a no brainier for me. all it does is benefit guys who have created new players that GMs have a previous relationship. It feels to me like those guys will get the bulk of the money while your question marks might get less. Maybe I'm being anecdotal, though. Just give every rookie a one time signing bonus, say $3M. It gives them a head start on training without anyone being pressured into a small deal or putting GMs in a spot where playing favorites exists

[Roly]

The offense of the Tijuana Luchadores is run through spinelli, who is inactive.  Our run game is run through John Goose not Borro Gore, Goose is inactive and Gore is very active.  Gore should be the star of our rushing attack not Goose.

Guess that's what happens when you miss half of a season! hahah *awkward laugh*

The offense in TIJ though looks pretty evenly split between Spinelli (inactive) and loco's Lil Bot (active). Lil Bot even has 2 more attempts than Spinelli.

As for POR, must've been a decision made by your GM. I think he's usually around the boards somewhere ...

All that said, I see your point.