|
|
Post by huntleybrian8 on Jan 30, 2020 15:22:33 GMT
Gentleman,
This has been on my agenda for some time, but thought it would be a good time to start the conversation. Beginning with the 2020 season, I would propose that one set of penalty cards are used for all teams. It would be my opinion that we use the set closest to +/- zero in the given year of play. If there is more than one team that would qualify to be used, it would be chosen randomly amongst the qualifying teams.
I believe by doing this the following will occur;
1) Fairness to all relative to penalties. Let's face it, nobody should be gaining an advantage due to penalty cards. We don't coach good or bad penalties.
2) No misreads of penalties. This occurs more often than you may realize since many people use multiple special teams cards while playing.
3) Speed of the game. This won't improve it much, but it will improve. No more fumbling around to find the right card to read and most players will have the card being used for the season memorized at some point.
I vote "yes" to start using this method next season
Brian
Patriots/Jaguars
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 30, 2020 21:15:12 GMT
I vote NO
Not all teams have all penalties.
Your proposal would eliminate some penalties entirely, depending on the set used.
Misreads of penalties ? You should have the penalty cards separate from the other cards that you are using and MARKED as the penalty cards that are being used.
Speed up the game? That is definitely a matter of opinion.
How about >NO PENALTIES< AND >NO INJURIES< NOW, that will speed the game up!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by huntleybrian8 on Jan 31, 2020 10:31:21 GMT
It doesn't matter that all teams don't have all penalties. The penalty readings usually fall into a range of the numbers anyway which cover most penalties anyways.
For the record, please never tell me again what somebody should be doing relative to the handling of their cards. What you believe they should be doing is of no bearing to what actually occurs. many people use multiple cards spread out all over the place, but I digress. The point is a single set of cards virtually eliminates the possibility of mistakes unless both coaches don't notice it.
Speeding up the game is not a matter of opinion. It's a matter of fact. The use of a singular card becomes repetitious in your mind, easier to locate on the big board just as the other charts have.
As far as the penalty, injury statement goes, Not worth debating it's merrits either way as it adds an unrealistic flavor to the game.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 31, 2020 14:05:24 GMT
Let's, for discussion purposes, pick a set of cards from this year that would be the ones we would use this year.
Based on your parameters of closest to +/- zero, the following cards would be considered;
Denver, San Francisco, and Seattle. These teams are even up.
On all of them, penalty #1 does NOT appear.
Denver no #1, #3, #4
San Francisco no #1, #3, #6
Seattle no #1, #4, #6, #7
And what is this penalty reading range that you mention that covers most penalties ?
For the record, I was making a suggestion in regards to "card handling".
There are many factors involved in the "speed" of the game. I suppose that someone "fumbling" around with their cards causes a slowness to the game.
A person using minimum time could also, Someone taking their time in making a decision on a play would also slow down the game.
The no penalty/no injury suggestion was (and is) sarcastic.
And talk about "unrealistic flavor" . . .
|
|
|
|
Post by Jets and Chargers on Jan 31, 2020 17:58:57 GMT
Regarding the "fairness" of penalties …
I believe that penalties and defensive cards are inextricably linked. It is part of the "hidden" yardage within the game. Defensive cards appear to be generated based upon yards allowed/yards per play. If a team doesn't give up a lot of yards, but gives up a lot of penalty yardage for pass interference -- those penalties need to be associated with those cards.
Similarly -- I believe punt return yardage should be associated with the punter (not the defensive cards) because that is more about hang time and directional punting.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 31, 2020 18:50:54 GMT
Yes, punt coverage should be linked to the punter.
But, what happens when you are using the "generic" punter. That persob is
|
|
|
|
Post by Jets and Chargers on Jan 31, 2020 18:54:07 GMT
The generic punter still has an NFL team associated with him.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 31, 2020 20:57:22 GMT
Not quite. We use the worst stats for the generic. We are NOT using the player.
We should have the worst coverage on the cards assigned to the generic as he is not that good at that position.
|
|
|
|
Post by John on Feb 1, 2020 2:27:04 GMT
The generic punter/coverage should be selected based on both factors. . ( mostly coverage )
|
|
|
|
Post by huntleybrian8 on Feb 1, 2020 3:19:04 GMT
What happens if your punter is injured during the game? do we switch cards mid game? Please nobody actually answer this....somehow we got away from penalty talk.
|
|
|
|
Post by John on Feb 1, 2020 3:51:25 GMT
Then use generic punter/coverage.
Penalties...interesting thought with some merit. But I agree with Rich.
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Feb 1, 2020 17:28:17 GMT
This is similar to our discussion regarding using generic defenses. Having a well-rounded defense that also has a positive penalty rating is a significant asset. Having the same penalty card for all teams would be repetitive and boring, much like the generic defenses were.
I also see Rich's point about punt & kick return defenses being linked to the actual punter and kickoff person. I would vote for that. They should be linked together. If you have Thomas Morstead as a punter, you should have the New Orlean's punt return defense.
|
|
|
|
Post by huntleybrian8 on Feb 1, 2020 21:12:49 GMT
I'm just curious why they should be linked together? Personally I don't really give a shit, but the players covering those punts which are part of the actual result/ratings are not on our individual teams? My argument about the penalty system is basically the same but factoring in a different part of the game. Not intended to just be directed at Mark, but if you're going to suffer witha defenses good or bad penalty card why should you be rewarded/penalized by the kickers actual team? Personally I have no probelm using both systems but we're gigressing off the original discussion.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Penalties
Feb 1, 2020 21:59:00 GMT
via mobile
Post by Deleted on Feb 1, 2020 21:59:00 GMT
I like the diversity of penalty cards. I also think the outcome of punt coverage has more to do with the players in special-teams coverage than the punter. I stick with my original suggestion that we draft teams as a whole in reverse order of the standings from the year before creating a whole new scenario every year and parity for all players involved in the league. Simple, playable, and compassionate for all levels of player. P
|
|
|
|
Post by huntleybrian8 on Feb 1, 2020 22:35:03 GMT
Now back to the matter at hand. I've slighty rethought this and sibec we're opposed to the route of generic anything except as a result of injuries, why don't we incorporate all defensive cards, penalty cards and return cards as part of the whole draft. If they are truly supposed to be an asset, then they should be treated similar to our other assets. This way you have to determine how and when to draft those particular assets. Special teams more important than some randon backup TE being drafted in the 6th round? Maybe you use that pick to draftt a penalty card, team defense or return card? We do it with everything else but when it comes to team defenses and all associated readings, it get it's own draft. You get 20 picks and incorporating all into one would make some of thos elower picks potantially more valuable.
Thoughts if you really like the catm and diversity of all individual readings since in a roundabout way they're all assets. What's now important to the team you're building?
|
|
