Claimed:An Alternative Proposal to the Two Player System [Reviewed]

[Fire Tortorella 2,653]

An Alternative Proposal to the Two Player System

 

As we all know, the VHL is approaching it's 50th season. Throughout the years, the league has remained strong by keeping to its roots while also adapting (sometimes slowly, but changing nonetheless) when needed. As part of the league's 50th season celebration, there has been much discussion over some major changes to the league. At first, the idea was floated to move to V2 or V3 of the sim engine, but it was decided that version of the sim is incompatible with how VHL rosters are managed and the update scale. Simply put, the CPU and low TPE players are dominated by those with high attributes in the upper 90s. While being able to track giveaways and takeaways would be one of the major positives of the change, having to have 3rd line players with reduced ice time would be a major drawback, as one of the points of pride in this league is that everyone plays and contributes regardless of what line you're on.

 

The idea that has gained the most traction so far is allowing members to create a second player. The discussion can be found here. The main attraction of having a second player is having more to do around the site regarding point tasks and fan590s while also having a second player to track and a second locke rroom to promote discussion. Draper's poll shows that of those who voted, roughtly 2/3rds support the idea. However, with only 17 total participants, it's not exactly a proper sampling of the league. Personally, I can get behind the idea of the second player, but I disagree on what the main purpose of the player should be.

 

The current proposal allows you to create two players two seasons apart where all point task related work can only be claimed for one player at a time. For example, if I did two point tasks in a week, I could apply a point task to each player. However, if I did one point task and then welfare, I could only assign 6 TPE to one player and 2-4 TPE to another. There are also rules in place that discourage members forcing their two players onto the same team, but it can happen naturally through the draft and free agency. Simply put, my biggest grievance with the above is that I don't believe you should be able to have two players playing in the VHL at the same time. 

 

My proposal is based off of the NCAA's capped and uncapped player system. Essentially, you will always have only one player playing in the VHL at a time. However, you may have a second capped player playing in the VHLM. A capped player can only earn a certain amount of TPE per season. This is to ensure that new members playing with an uncapped player in the VHLM still have an advantage over the the capped player in terms of raw TPE earning. 

 

My thoughts on the capped player. All capped players may earn up to 30 TPE a season while they are capped. At max, players who remained capped throughout their career will have 120 TPE, which is 30 starting TPE plus 30 TPE earned a year for 3 seasons. You'll notice there is no carryover involved, and there's more on that later. After 3 seasons, all capped players are auto-retired IF THEY DO NOT BECOME UNCAPPED. However, once the uncapped VHL player retires, the VHLM player who was previously capped now becomes uncapped. So for example, Player A is starting the 8th season of his VHL career. Player B is in his 3rd VHLM season, and is starting the season at 90 TPE. Once Player A is retired, Player B is no longer capped in how much TPE he can earn per season. However, Player B must enter the upcoming VHL Draft regardless of when Player A is retired, so no more trade deadline re-creates. All TPE earned is applied to both players, with the exception of rookie profiles and biographies. However, because the "old members" would have a large TPE advantage over a new member starting out with an uncapped player in the VHLM, all new members have their point tasks/welfare doubled in their VHL Draft season.

In order to promote more healthy player movement in the VHLM, we would also need to reduce the draft rights teams have on a player to 2 seasons. THis would allow a member to go to free agency if they desire for one final year in the minors. VHLM teams would then be given a "salary cap" of sorts to spend on only active free agents, and this money can be spent on the player store.

 

To summarize:

 

• 1 uncapped player in the VHL, 1 capped player in the VHLM
• Capped player earns up to 30 TPE per season, can become uncapped once capped player retires, must enter next VHL Draft.
• No trade deadline recreates
• New members with uncapped VHLM players have point tasks doubled in their VHL Draft season
• All TPE applies to both players
• 2 year VHLM draft rights, 1 year VHLM free agency
• VHLM teams given salary cap for capped players, which can be spent on Player Store

 

This is a rough outline of an idea. None of these numbers are final and are subject to change. What are everyone's thoughts?

[Fire Tortorella 2,653]

Bringing this up because there appears to be some traction for it from the other threads discussing these changes. 

[Fire Tortorella 2,653]

@Mr. Power @Advantage @Victor @Draper @sterling @YEAH!stlemania @Molholt @eaglesfan036 @JardyB10 @Higgins @Frank @gregreg @Banackock @Da Trifecta @ADwyer87 @Streetlight @tfong @Knight @Kendrick

 

All of those who contributed to the original thread.

[Victor 10,535]

1. Why are you against two VHL players? You didn't actually explain that.

 

2. You have been the main advocate of "keep it simple". This is so much more complex than the proposal I support.

[Evans 305]

This seems pretty similar to the way we run the NCAA (our development league) in the SBA. I like the idea on it's own, but not sure how I feel about it if it's going directly against the two players idea. 

[Banackock 7,639]

I agree with Victor and prefer that version more. This seems to complex and would be difficult to bring about and control imo. Also, would it not create a flood of players into the VHLM - while still having the similar amount in the VHL? It would be great for the VHLM but wouldn't do much for the VHL. The purpose was to affect both the VHL and VHLM.

 

Along with that, I have a question regarding the seasons spent in the VHLM as CAPPED. Obviously those seasons WOULD NOT count as you 8 seasons in the VHL and it would only start counting once Player A were to retire, correct?

 

Again, too complex and I prefer the other version better. This way would maybe largely help the VHLM keeping all of us down their to help the newer means and keep things active and interesting, however, the other way balances it out and allows us to increase multiple aspects in both the VHL and VHLM. It makes both leagues more competitive, more active and all around more enjoyable imo and I think for a celebration to S50, It's something we should strongly look at implementing in the offseason and giving it a spin. Of course, try it out and make tweaks as we need to in following off seasons but I think this 2 player thing will largely benefit the league, especially if we continue to see good recruiting being done. Could mean more competitive leagues.. actually 2-3 lines of forwards OR a small expansion.

[Tagger 2,722]

Hmm, few things I'd like some clarification on:

 

1) You said " You'll notice there is no carryover involved, and there's more on that later.", but I can't see anywhere it's actually explicitly talked about later on in the article. I'm guessing though that it would be added once you're either uncapped VHLM or you enter the VHL?

 

2) I think I understand what you're trying to say but it's a bit confusing with the way it's written, you're saying that players enter the VHL Draft following the season they were uncapped right? 

 

[Fire Tortorella 2,653]

14 minutes ago, Victor said:

1. Why are you against two VHL players? You didn't actually explain that.

 

2. You have been the main advocate of "keep it simple". This is so much more complex than the proposal I support.

 

1.) This is completely subjective, but I just don't believe you should have two players on different teams. Where is the rivalry if I have a player on both Toronto and Seattle?

2.) This is more complex as in there's more change regarding the structure of the VHLM and carryover, but I don't believe it's complex to keep track of once implemented. Main thing is that it keeps the VHL system itself mostly intact.

 

9 minutes ago, Evans said:

This seems pretty similar to the way we run the NCAA (our development league) in the SBA. I like the idea on it's own, but not sure how I feel about it if it's going directly against the two players idea. 

 

I've been pretty open that this is where the idea originates from. As you know, I'm not too active over there, so if this is literally a copy and paste of how it's done there, then all credit to the SBA.

 

1 minute ago, YEAH!stlemania said:

Hmm, few things I'd like some clarification on:

 

1) You said " You'll notice there is no carryover involved, and there's more on that later.", but I can't see anywhere it's actually explicitly talked about later on in the article. I'm guessing though that it would be added once you're either uncapped VHLM or you enter the VHL?

 

2) I think I understand what you're trying to say but it's a bit confusing with the way it's written, you're saying that players enter the VHL Draft following the season they were uncapped right? 

 

 

1.) No, all capped players would start at 30 TPE. There would be no carryover if you're using the capped to uncapped system, as you start out with up to 90 TPE during your draft year and still have an entire year plus VHLM Achievement Tracker and VHL Training Camp to earn TPE. Again, the numbers can be adjusted if there are too many players having to stay in the VHLM their first season after the draft.

 

2.) Yes. Basically, it's an incentive to retire your player during pre-season versus at the trade deadline in order to eliminate the free half a season re-creates get in the VHLM.

[Evans 305]

@flyersfan1493 Oh, I'm not saying you stole it or anything lol. Just pointing out that anyone that has a player in the SBA would be familiar with the concept. 

[Victor 10,535]

3 minutes ago, flyersfan1493 said:

1.) This is completely subjective, but I just don't believe you should have two players on different teams. Where is the rivalry if I have a player on both Toronto and Seattle?

How likely is that statistically though? I personally wouldn't care if I was in that situation, but I feel like the odds of it happening given the 3 season restriction and the VHL being cyclical and the probability of expansion are not huge.

[Molholt 2,183]

I'd rather see two fully functioning players. I like what we do in the SBA, but I don't prefer it to the other proposal for the VHL. We have smaller teams and requirements, whereas the VHL has larger roster needs. 

 

That being said, if the two player proposal falls through, I'd go for this because I hate the NCAA in the SBA and I hate the VHLM in the VHL.

[Kendrick 4,724]

I'd go for this over anything else.

 

For those saying it's complex, they run almost the exact same style in the SBA and it actually is very simple.

[eaglesfan036 4,583]

I like this idea a lot better than the other two-player proposal. Initially, I was worried that letting all these people have VHLM players would make it harder for the noobs to be successful, but the 30 tpe cap a season and 120 tpe overall cap after 3 seasons still lets noobs on the first players have an advantage. 

 

If I am reading this right, you do the normal tpe earning for your uncapped player, then you have to write the occasional extra media spot on the side in order to earn tpe for your capped player? I think the capped player should have to do Point tasks to get his tpe instead of welfare, because the whole point of the capped player is giving people more things to do on here. This would make the VHLM more active, give people more things to do, and avoid having two players in the VHL at once. Initially it seems confusing, but after reading this through a second time it seems simple enough. 

[eaglesfan036 4,583]

5 minutes ago, Kendrick said:

I'd go for this over anything else.

 

For those saying it's complex, they run almost the exact same style in the SBA and it actually is very simple.

Kendrick and Flyersfan agree on something! That for sure means this is a great idea :3

[eaglesfan036 4,583]

@Streetlight @Banackock @flyersfan1493 @Tixe @Dangles13 @eaglesfan036 @der meister @boom @solas @enigmatic @701 @Nonsense @jjdynamite @bukss_a @Digg @JR95 @Mr.Baller @RomanesEuntDomus @JPL @jack @hedgehog337 @Cuffy @Wasty @Paramorise @Quads @svb @Storm @nikkurri17 @Gregy @Ventas @Jala @Mr. Power @YEAH!stlemania @jRuutu @Victor @brovy @Draper @sterling @JardyB10 @ADwyer87 @StevenStamkos91 @tfong @Higgins @stevo @CowboyinAmerica @DollarAndADream @Molholt @Phil @Kendrick @Smarch @diamond_ace @CoachReilly @gorlab @Frank @STZ @Velevra @Glaciem @evrydayimbyfuglien @Tim @frescoelmo @atw2592 @Tylar @Knight @fever95 @gregreg @Beketov @Gooningitup @KingRobbie @Daniel @Toast @Green @Evans @Lunaro @Advantage @boubabi @Da Trifecta @Munk @HF92 @Mike @NUCK @Christmas @Kylrad @iRockstar @Individual @Jamie @Dmoushey_31

everyone read this proposal as well please

[sterling 1,990]

I personally like this idea more than the other one.

[Da Trifecta 1,896]

20 minutes ago, eaglesfan036 said:

@Streetlight @Banackock @flyersfan1493 @Tixe @Dangles13 @eaglesfan036 @der meister @boom @solas @enigmatic @701 @Nonsense @jjdynamite @bukss_a @Digg @JR95 @Mr.Baller @RomanesEuntDomus @JPL @jack @hedgehog337 @Cuffy @Wasty @Paramorise @Quads @svb @Storm @nikkurri17 @Gregy @Ventas @Jala @Mr. Power @YEAH!stlemania @jRuutu @Victor @brovy @Draper @sterling @JardyB10 @ADwyer87 @StevenStamkos91 @tfong @Higgins @stevo @CowboyinAmerica @DollarAndADream @Molholt @Phil @Kendrick @Smarch @diamond_ace @CoachReilly @gorlab @Frank @STZ @Velevra @Glaciem @evrydayimbyfuglien @Tim @frescoelmo @atw2592 @Tylar @Knight @fever95 @gregreg @Beketov @Gooningitup @KingRobbie @Daniel @Toast @Green @Evans @Lunaro @Advantage @boubabi @Da Trifecta @Munk @HF92 @Mike @NUCK @Christmas @Kylrad @iRockstar @Individual @Jamie @Dmoushey_31

everyone read this proposal as well please

 

FU your tagging don't work on me.

[Kendrick 4,724]

@eaglesfan036 Stop tagging me if I just commented. For fuck sakes.

[eaglesfan036 4,583]

10 minutes ago, Kendrick said:

@eaglesfan036 Stop tagging me if I just commented. For fuck sakes.

Sorry coach

[DollarAndADream 3,356]

I'm honestly all for both ideas. I don't care which way we go. I'm pretty neutral on it all.

 

 

I like the way the SBA does it with the NCAA, but I also like the other proposal....

 

 

 

I'd also like to point out that you write how it's similar to the NCAAs capped and uncapped rule, but you don't mention the SBA at all. People coming in and reading just your post might wonder what NCAA thing you're talking about. Although Evans brings up the SBA a few posts after.

[Kesler 1,514]

1 hour ago, eaglesfan036 said:

@Streetlight @Banackock @flyersfan1493 @Tixe @Dangles13 @eaglesfan036 @der meister @boom @solas @enigmatic @701 @Nonsense @jjdynamite @bukss_a @Digg @JR95 @Mr.Baller @RomanesEuntDomus @JPL @jack @hedgehog337 @Cuffy @Wasty @Paramorise @Quads @svb @Storm @nikkurri17 @Gregy @Ventas @Jala @Mr. Power @YEAH!stlemania @jRuutu @Victor @brovy @Draper @sterling @JardyB10 @ADwyer87 @StevenStamkos91 @tfong @Higgins @stevo @CowboyinAmerica @DollarAndADream @Molholt @Phil @Kendrick @Smarch @diamond_ace @CoachReilly @gorlab @Frank @STZ @Velevra @Glaciem @evrydayimbyfuglien @Tim @frescoelmo @atw2592 @Tylar @Knight @fever95 @gregreg @Beketov @Gooningitup @KingRobbie @Daniel @Toast @Green @Evans @Lunaro @Advantage @boubabi @Da Trifecta @Munk @HF92 @Mike @NUCK @Christmas @Kylrad @iRockstar @Individual @Jamie @Dmoushey_31

everyone read this proposal as well please

fuck off

[Quads 20]

Any way would be fine by me

[eaglesfan036 4,583]

7 minutes ago, brovy said:

fuck off

Love you too

[evrydayimbyfuglien 600]

I like this idea. I have no valid reason for disliking two players in the VHL but I don't like it. 

[Fire Tortorella 2,653]

3 hours ago, eaglesfan036 said:

I like this idea a lot better than the other two-player proposal. Initially, I was worried that letting all these people have VHLM players would make it harder for the noobs to be successful, but the 30 tpe cap a season and 120 tpe overall cap after 3 seasons still lets noobs on the first players have an advantage. 

 

If I am reading this right, you do the normal tpe earning for your uncapped player, then you have to write the occasional extra media spot on the side in order to earn tpe for your capped player? I think the capped player should have to do Point tasks to get his tpe instead of welfare, because the whole point of the capped player is giving people more things to do on here. This would make the VHLM more active, give people more things to do, and avoid having two players in the VHL at once. Initially it seems confusing, but after reading this through a second time it seems simple enough. 

 

No. All TPE earned applies to both players. It's just that after earning 30 TPE, you stop for the capped player.