Austin's Rule Proposals

[Huskies311]

I really can’t think of a solid reason for anyone to vote against either of these.

[Baron1898]

Sign me up for the awards committee. I should’ve won S14 DSFL MVP over Gump goddamnit but the Tijuana GM just voted their team down the entire ballot

[Jay_Doctor]

Just want to weight in on the SFL league, yeah it's fricking huge. They are on tv and have like 120 rookies in their upcoming class. It's actually the reason I found this league. I google searched (quite poorly evidently) and found here. I'm also trying to join theirs, but it is quite a production.

[Hallmonitor_20]

It's time to stop holding onto something just for the sake of holding onto it.

Basically everything in this league. "BUT MY HISTORY"

[manicmav36]

As someone who has been a GM and is currently HO, I just don't see the need for an awards committee. I agree our current system isn't perfect and needs some tweaks, but it works well overall, especially since we changed awards voting to a Google form, where copy/pasting isn't an option as you can't see other voters. The large pool of voters also helps to eliminate favoritism or any team bias that may sway a voter. In a group of 7, or even 5 more so, just one voter like that is a massive swing.

Edit: 100% on-board for a name change though.

[Modern_Duke]

I don’t see the argument against awards committee. There’s going to be favoritism no matter who votes. At least with a dedicated group having a discussion, i imagine it would be easier to snuff out

[infinitempg]

I think if we do go with an awards committee they should essentially nominate 3-4 people for each award and list relevant stats. it would help get rid of unanimous awards being completely boring in the presentation and might allow GMs to see players that they overlook. And of course if the committee overlooks someone the GMs can always add extra nominations. the committee wont vote but simply make the GMs lives a little easier and help shine light on players that mightve been overlooked

[AdamS]

I think if we do go with an awards committee they should essentially nominate 3-4 people for each award and list relevant stats. it would help get rid of unanimous awards being completely boring in the presentation and might allow GMs to see players that they overlook. And of course if the committee overlooks someone the GMs can always add extra nominations. the committee wont vote but simply make the GMs lives a little easier and help shine light on players that mightve been overlooked

I think if they did all that, they would vote as well.

It's good to step outside the insulated world of "I'm right because I'm in charge and I'm in charge because I'm right" that sometimes occurs. Sometimes people are so in love with their own opinion that they don't see the need for other opinions.

[AdamS]

http://nsfl.jcink.net/index.php?showtopic=...ndpost&p=231904

This is an example of the kind of analysis the current voters simply don't have the time to create or look into. But a dedicated committee on the other hand.....

[slothfacekilla]

I was on a SHL awards committee and we had a discord to talk about each award and someone made charts and everything. It really enhances the award picks imo and would love something like that here.

Also the name change makes sense since the acronym is not great