- Video
-
Club Roar
Captured a great grassroots sporting moment? We want to see it!Content Collections
The Roar Community
- Join
- Login
The rules of the AFL sponsored fantasy football competition – AFL Dream Team – have been reported as radically different to previous seasons.
Not all of the proposed changes have been received in an enthusiastic manner. We’ve had positional restructuring, increased emergency player numbers, rolling lock-outs and a massive increase in the number of available trades.
For what it’s worth, my view is that the positional restructuring makes sense and is probably a little overdue.
Certainly, of all the proposed changes, this one has been positively received and on the whole, it’s hard to find a critic of the move.
Then we have the increased emergency rule, with a fourth emergency player being added.
So, now we can cover all our lines, even the ruck position. Again, it seems to be a positive move and I have noticed good feedback.
Personally, I would have been OK with it staying as it was, even though it cost me a crunch game last year in my league. Damien Hardwick and Ivan Maric up at the Gold Coast, take a bow.
Having said that, it’s not a big stretch and the change has some merit.
While the above have been well received, it is the final two controversial matters that have really got everyone’s attention to date.
One of my favourite websites for information regarding Dream Team is DT Talk.
The guys do a fantastic job. The other contributors also add great articles.
I was looking at their article regarding the increased trades for the 2013 season and noted that there is a huge backlash against this move by Virtual Sports.
It doesn’t take a Rhodes Scholar to figure out that the guys who are on the DT Talk website at this time of year are the “serious” fantasy football players – me included!
The guys have stuck up a poll to see who’s in favour and who’s not, of the new trade limit. Presently, 60% are opposed and only 23% in favour, with the remainder undecided at this time. Split the undecided crowd down the middle and it would read almost 70% against the change, which is pretty damning if you ask me.
The other thing that I had a little giggle about on the DT Talk website, was the number of posters writing in and having a crack at people for posting negative comments about this proposed change.
These were in a lot of cases the same people who themselves posted negative comments about the concept of the rolling lock-out.
You can’t have it both ways, fellas. But also, people making the negative remarks should remember, the idea is not to shoot the messenger. Having said that, Virtual Sports do seem to listen and really this is the only way many people who feel very strongly about this issue can get their point across to the powers that be.
The “rolling lock-out” idea was knocked on the head before it even got up and I wonder if that was a choice made by VS, on the back of feedback from such websites.
I have no problem with that, if that was the case, as I think that is the way it should happen. Accordingly, that makes the need for open and honest debate, covering all the positive and negative numbers regarding the increased number of trades, a legitimate course of action.
The reasoning for the change is that the new rules will make the game more attractive to new players and keep them “engaged”, further into the season.
A point I saw in one post made a lot of sense. The question was, what do these new players contribute to the competition?
Are they likely to buy the Prospectus, the Assistant Coach package, or even anything online through sites like DT Talk?
I think a lot of them go on at the beginning of the year and enter for the sake of entering and are usually out by week three or four.
I’d be very interested in the numbers on how many players did buy the Assistant Coach package last season, as a percentage of the overall number of entries. I reckon it would be around 20-25%.
Even the Prospectus sales figures would have some correlation to the actual number of competitive coaches, versus the once off noobs.
With that in mind, should we even be worrying about the increasing numbers, or focussing on getting more out of those people who are serious about their “fantasy football” and giving more back?
Perhaps an increase in prizes would make more sense. Or, just more prizes – surely the AFL and its sponsors are getting more than one car’s worth out of the Dream Team competition.
The essence of the whole “fantasy” concept is to put yourself in the position of an AFL coach and see how you go!
What does an AFL coach have to work with on a Thursday afternoon? A list of 40 to 45 players, minus a few injuries or a suspension.
They get to name a starting 22, plus three emergencies. They have a salary cap at the beginning of the year that their squad has to fit into.
They don’t have a rolling lock-out, or 46 trades for the season.
I understand a lot of the fun and appeal of the game is the trading aspect and as such, it is an integral part of the game. But as I’ve said many times, getting your squad right at the beginning of the season is what being an AFL coach is all about.
Plus, with a larger choice of players, the annual problem of the MBRs is sorted.
Sure – keep the trades, but personally, I reckon you could reduce the number back to 10 or 12. I did this last year with some friends on Ultimate Footy and it worked a treat – very competitive league with everyone right there until the end of the season.
When all is said and done, competitions will live or die based on the participation level. That may be overall numbers, or more likely it will be the individual’s “level” of involvement.
Would you prefer 240,000 sheep and 60,000 hardcore players, or a straight up 100,000 fanatics who live and breathe AFL Fantasy?
Who’s in your ultimate team? Pick the best team and compete with other fans for daily prizes on Draftstars. For the best odds on the game try out Aussie bookmaker PlayUp. Think. Is this a bet you really want to place? Set a deposit limit.