|
Post by ds on Sept 5, 2009 12:25:00 GMT -5
Most leagues I've been in tend to have forums that aren't very active. Come to think of it, the predecessor to this league was probably the most 'forum active' league I've been in.
BuHL seems to go through spurts of activity, so far late season, early playoffs and early off season seem to be our hot points. Right now we're in that dull period of the mid-season.
So my question to you is: What type of activity in the league would encourage you to become more active on the forums? (Not 'active' in a sense of feeling like you're forced to be active, but active as in you'd actually want to contribute to the discussion.)
|
|
|
Post by whalersgm on Sept 5, 2009 13:53:03 GMT -5
AN IDEA I'VE HAD 4 A WHILE WOULD BE TO BRING UP A TEAM IN THIS LEAGUE THAT MAYBE IS STRUGGLING OR NOT PERFORMING THE WAY MOST THINK THEY SHOULD BE, AND WHOEVER WANTS TO, CAN THROW IN THEIR 2 CENTS ON WHAT THEY WOULD DO TO IMPROVE THAT TEAM. KIND OF LIKE A ROUND TABLE DISCUSSION ABOUT WHERE A TEAM WILL BE AT SEASONS END IF THEY DO THIS OR SIGN THIS GUY OR TRADE FOR PICKS OR ANYTHING ALONG THOSE LINES. I'M SURE EVERYONE HAS LOOKED AT ONE TEAM OR ANOTHER IN THIS LEAGUE AND THOUGHT, IF I HAD THAT TEAM I WOULD TRADE THAT GUY OR TRY TO PICK UP HELP AT THIS POSITION AND THEY WOULD PROBABLY DO BETTER.
|
|
canucks
Nice work! Good GM - 3 Player points, 2 million
Posts: 184
|
Post by canucks on Sept 5, 2009 16:28:46 GMT -5
In a league I was in a few years ago, what we did was give out X amount of points for every set of lines a team set in, or an article that was posted - anything like that. At the end of the year each teams point total was tallied up and the top 3 teams received a reward - something like 5 million cash or a pick or whatever. I always thought that was a good idea. I was usually in the top 3 so I might be biased but I recommend giving it some thought.
I just went through the "Old Rules" section and saw that GMs are being rewarded already - guess it didn't really click, the whole "Stable GM - 1.5 million - 3 player points" thing.
I guess to add something of value to this topic, we could implement a rule where everyone has to write at least 2 min. 250 word articles on their team/the league or whatever.
|
|
|
Post by ds on Sept 7, 2009 8:44:43 GMT -5
I'm a big fan of participation based awards. I'm always a little weary of having strict enforcement on an article rule. 250 words is such a low amount though. Less than 20 minutes.
Maybe some forum post benchmarks or an article would suffice. (IE: GMs owe at least 1 250 word article on their team or the league or 20 forum posts per season) Cash and player points are always good rewards as well. Part of the idea of the way we develop youth is that GMs should have more player points than normal to spread around their team and develop the youth they see fit. We should start pushing that as a benefit to being active. (since at the moment it's a bit understated)
Remo, I like your idea as well. It might be a little rough for the team to make trades (we could do majority rules), but we could easily pull an 'NHL' and open up a team like the Breakers for league wide management. I'm sure there are even long term strategies that we could easily learn from one another by opening things up this way. It might also help attract a few newer-to-STHS GMs who might see tackling the SIM as a bit of a daunting task. (I mean the forum thread with our discussions about team building strategies would be a good place to learn about the seemingly rough world of SIM hockey.)
Another idea would be to take one open team from each conference, (In this example: Leafs and Breakers) put the NHL GMs in control of the Breakers and the WHA GMs in control of the Leafs. Write out a list of goals and award player points/cash for meeting them. It'd be hard to pit the performance of the Leafs against that of the Breakers since they're at different stages of development, but if the idea worked out, it could easily turn into a multi-season thing that can be much more directly competitive. (IE: Leafs v. Breakers: Which team can accumulate the best win/loss record over three seasons. Reward: 10 players points each for the GMs of the winning team.)
As long as none of you turn into Brutus and Cassius on us. Hopefully any back end politics would be mitigated by the group and competition.
|
|
canucks
Nice work! Good GM - 3 Player points, 2 million
Posts: 184
|
Post by canucks on Sept 7, 2009 13:55:15 GMT -5
I agree that the player points thing is a tad understated. I think more need to be handed out to make it more enticing to become active.
The idea to impliment a min. number of forum posts is a good idea, but what would you do if a GM doesn't match that number? Boot them?
The NHL/WHA controlled teams is quite interesting, but it seems like it would kind of put a handicap on trading - maybe not.
|
|
|
Post by ds on Sept 7, 2009 14:30:33 GMT -5
If a GM doesn't make the forum post min or article min (see the 'new ideas section' for the draft of the rule) then we look at what else they do in the league. For example, if a guy rarely posts on the forums or makes trades, but has 50 load lines during the season - or makes regular contact with the commissioners and is involved in the free agency process. Then there's nothing to worry about. He's still active. Not as active as I'm sure we'd like him to be, but he's there, just missing out on the extra player points and cash.
Yeah, I'm a bit intrigued by the notion. I see it going one of two ways:
If GMs are able to put the egos of their own teams aside, work together to achieve certain goals and keep the interests of the shared team in their mind, I can see this working out. I'm sure the agreed upon benchmarks and prizes should be enough to keep everyone in line. Having the entire conference in on trade discussions, line formations and free agency talks (free agency talks will probably be the hardest thing to do since that's clearly a case where we have to keep our own teams in mind.) should keep everyone honest.
Or we've unwittingly put a bunch of snakes in on the same scheme (not calling you guys snakes) and we have a truck load of stacking or raping of assets that'll go down instantly. Backdoor deals will be made - you know; a vote for a specific trade in exchange for something further down the road. I'd like to think that we're all mature enough not to resort to that, but I have been surprised before. Technically, it'd take only seven people on the same page to control the team.
I hope it wouldn't limit trading. Maybe seeing trade discussions out in an open forum would help some GMs with less experience develop their abilities.
|
|