Warrior General Games

Extra relegation would have to go all the way down (kind of- as only half of the AAA to AA leagues would need an extra team relegated). I like the idea, although it does kind of suck that extra teams would get relegated, although, if your top teams aren't good enough to cut it in WPL, the teams in that regions pro league that finish 14th probably don't really deserve to be considered Pro teams anyway.

With additional relegation this plan is my favorite option right now. I'm not sure how people would like having the possibility of 3 teams in each conference relegated, but IMO it's almost necessary in most leagues anyway.

Originally posted by tomcollins
... I'm not sure how people would like having the possibility of 3 teams in each conference relegated, but IMO it's almost necessary in most leagues anyway.

Yeah, that is why I was stressing the point that before the extra relegations there would be extra promotions. And there would be further extra promotions if your league's teams succeed in the WL. Give and take. Of course that 3rd relegated team would surely gripe on the way down but I doubt they'd complain if pulled up to fill an open spot. Counting the initial set-up, there would be two possible opportunities for teams to get an un-earned promotion compared to that one chance that a team gets demoted from the 14th spot in the standings.

The one thing that is inaccurate is that there technically could be 18 teams from one league in WPL. That could be a big mess if a ton of them came down.

Imagine if USAPL has every team make playoffs in S1 of WPL. They have 6 the next year.
Then all of those 6 make the playoffs. Up to 8 next year.
etc....
until there are 16 teams in, they all make the playoffs, then 18 the next year.
At that point only 16 can make the playoffs.

But suppose 8 (or more) teams the next season sucked and came crashing down, so we would need to relegate an extra 6 teams down to USA AAAs. It's possible but unlikely for those kinds of situations to happen.

Or you could cap how many teams from one region can make it in by having a max 4 teams automatically stay in per conference.

Originally posted by turnit643
* OK, maybe not the worst case ... say many seasons from now, USAPL has sent 16 teams to the WL and they all tank in one season and all miss the playoffs. They would all be sent back to the USAPL and bump 14 teams down.

Well, in that case...you take the good you take the bad. If for some reason all the USAPL teams all start sucking at the same time, they'll be massive demotions and massive shuffling.

Of course, who is to say some of those teams sucking aren't because they gutted and are dropping down to the Minors? In that case you basically don't have to worry about pushing down extra demotions. However, let's assume that they everyone else just figures out how to get the "X-Factor" on all their dots but none of the USAPL teams figure it out and decent teams are demoted down....we'll...just deal with it. USAPL would have had 14 more teams than anyone else in the World League and would have 14 extra teams promoted into USAPL as a result. This (to paraphrase Obama's preacher), "is America's chickens coming home to roost."

Originally posted by tomcollins
The one thing that is inaccurate is that there technically could be 18 teams from one league in WPL. That could be a big mess if a ton of them came down.

Imagine if USAPL has every team make playoffs in S1 of WPL. They have 6 the next year.
Then all of those 6 make the playoffs. Up to 8 next year.
etc....
until there are 16 teams in, they all make the playoffs, then 18 the next year.
At that point only 16 can make the playoffs.

But suppose 8 (or more) teams the next season sucked and came crashing down, so we would need to relegate an extra 6 teams down to USA AAAs. It's possible but unlikely for those kinds of situations to happen.

Or you could cap how many teams from one region can make it in by having a max 4 teams automatically stay in per conference.

Yeah, again, that's the good and bad of it. For each of those teams that was pulled up to the WL along the way, a AAA team got the call to the Pro's before earning it - so, they get promoted knowing that as the number of USAPL teams (for example) in the WL grows, so do the chances of more teams being relegated if a bunch of the USAPL WL teams should crash at the same time. It would be a fluid thing from season to season but it would all be on the table - you would know ahead of time how many teams could possibly be coming back down and you'd just have to win enough to avoid that increased relegation. Tough to feel too sorry for those teams when a large number of them may have been gifted a trip to the Pro's as a part of the same system in the first place.

Originally posted by turnit643
Originally posted by tomcollins

The one thing that is inaccurate is that there technically could be 18 teams from one league in WPL. That could be a big mess if a ton of them came down.

Imagine if USAPL has every team make playoffs in S1 of WPL. They have 6 the next year.
Then all of those 6 make the playoffs. Up to 8 next year.
etc....
until there are 16 teams in, they all make the playoffs, then 18 the next year.
At that point only 16 can make the playoffs.

But suppose 8 (or more) teams the next season sucked and came crashing down, so we would need to relegate an extra 6 teams down to USA AAAs. It's possible but unlikely for those kinds of situations to happen.

Or you could cap how many teams from one region can make it in by having a max 4 teams automatically stay in per conference.

Yeah, again, that's the good and bad of it. For each of those teams that was pulled up to the WL along the way, a AAA team got the call to the Pro's before earning it - so, they get promoted knowing that as the number of USAPL teams (for example) in the WL grows, so do the chances of more teams being relegated if a bunch of the USAPL WL teams should crash at the same time. It would be a fluid thing from season to season but it would all be on the table - you would know ahead of time how many teams could possibly be coming back down and you'd just have to win enough to avoid that increased relegation. Tough to feel too sorry for those teams when a large number of them may have been gifted a trip to the Pro's as a part of the same system in the first place.



This plan definitely now makes way too much sense to ever be implemented... although the league structures with the clouds is definitely a needed improvement that happened, maybe Bort is finally getting it

I like turnit's system. It allows for all the regions to participate and have the same chance but doesn't have built in handicaps. If you get to the WPL and turn out to be a crappy team, you get sent back down to your region in hopes the new champion from the crappy region is better. It's a fair system that allows the teams to prove it on the field which is what i like.

Originally posted by tomcollins
Extra relegation would have to go all the way down (kind of- as only half of the AAA to AA leagues would need an extra team relegated). I like the idea, although it does kind of suck that extra teams would get relegated, although, if your top teams aren't good enough to cut it in WPL, the teams in that regions pro league that finish 14th probably don't really deserve to be considered Pro teams anyway.

With additional relegation this plan is my favorite option right now. I'm not sure how people would like having the possibility of 3 teams in each conference relegated, but IMO it's almost necessary in most leagues anyway.

Bingo. Turnit can explain his idea better than I can; I've just jumped on board with it.

Originally posted by tomcollins
Originally posted by turnit643

Originally posted by tomcollins


The one thing that is inaccurate is that there technically could be 18 teams from one league in WPL. That could be a big mess if a ton of them came down.

Imagine if USAPL has every team make playoffs in S1 of WPL. They have 6 the next year.
Then all of those 6 make the playoffs. Up to 8 next year.
etc....
until there are 16 teams in, they all make the playoffs, then 18 the next year.
At that point only 16 can make the playoffs.

But suppose 8 (or more) teams the next season sucked and came crashing down, so we would need to relegate an extra 6 teams down to USA AAAs. It's possible but unlikely for those kinds of situations to happen.

Or you could cap how many teams from one region can make it in by having a max 4 teams automatically stay in per conference.

Yeah, again, that's the good and bad of it. For each of those teams that was pulled up to the WL along the way, a AAA team got the call to the Pro's before earning it - so, they get promoted knowing that as the number of USAPL teams (for example) in the WL grows, so do the chances of more teams being relegated if a bunch of the USAPL WL teams should crash at the same time. It would be a fluid thing from season to season but it would all be on the table - you would know ahead of time how many teams could possibly be coming back down and you'd just have to win enough to avoid that increased relegation. Tough to feel too sorry for those teams when a large number of them may have been gifted a trip to the Pro's as a part of the same system in the first place.



This plan definitely now makes way too much sense to ever be implemented... although the league structures with the clouds is definitely a needed improvement that happened, maybe Bort is finally getting it

I figured you'd like it.

Originally posted by chronoaug
I like turnit's system. It allows for all the regions to participate and have the same chance but doesn't have built in handicaps. If you get to the WPL and turn out to be a crappy team, you get sent back down to your region in hopes the new champion from the crappy region is better. It's a fair system that allows the teams to prove it on the field which is what i like.

Exactly. All regions are given an equal playing field, yet that will certainly change as teams prove themselves (or fail to) on the field.


I think everyone's biggest problem right now is that they think the World League will break if a team doesn't make the playoffs, and the new conference champion for their region set to replace them isn't as good as the incumbent team.

I don't really see the problem with that personally. The new team has one shot to prove themselves before getting sent back down. Say Emmaus makes it from EEPL then gets sent back down. I can see a lot of people saying the new EEPL team doesn't deserve to be there over Emmaus, etc. (forgetting that Emmaus could get back there in as little as one season back in EEPL). I think the GLB community would love to see the nobody from EEPL making the playoffs (and maybe more) in the World League.

We could even continue the scenario a season and assume Emmaus is able to make it back up and join that EEPL team the next season. Who would you have ranked higher?

Originally posted by tomcollins
The one thing that is inaccurate is that there technically could be 18 teams from one league in WPL. That could be a big mess if a ton of them came down.

Imagine if USAPL has every team make playoffs in S1 of WPL. They have 6 the next year.
Then all of those 6 make the playoffs. Up to 8 next year.
etc....
until there are 16 teams in, they all make the playoffs, then 18 the next year.
At that point only 16 can make the playoffs.

But suppose 8 (or more) teams the next season sucked and came crashing down, so we would need to relegate an extra 6 teams down to USA AAAs. It's possible but unlikely for those kinds of situations to happen.

Or you could cap how many teams from one region can make it in by having a max 4 teams automatically stay in per conference.

I think having a maximum number of teams per region is worse than having a minimum. If your region is strong enough to have more teams than the max, then the World League becomes two things. 1) fighting to make the playoffs and 2) fighting AGAINST your own region. There's definitely nothing wrong with keeping rivalries going up there and I am all for it, but by having a maximum you are creating problems like being forced to drop down a playoff team just because too many of their region's teams made the playoffs. Without a max it doesn't take anything away from an ***O*** vs. Shockers game for example.


Also there is already a theoretical maximum in place of 18 teams. However, in order for that to happen a league would have to hold ALL 16 playoff spots year in and year out from their 18 teams. How likely do you think it is for any league to be able to sustain that for very long?

If all of your teams make the playoffs in a season, then you gain two additional spots for the next season as none of your teams drop down and two more come up to join. If one team misses the playoffs you still gain a spot, and if two miss them you keep the same representation. Any more than two teams miss the playoffs in a year and your share of the World League starts shrinking.

Those rules don't changes whether a region has 18 teams or 2 teams in the World League. However, the more and more teams you have in the World League, the more teams your region must have in the playoffs to match that. You start with 4 teams the first season, and can gain 2 teams per year, which means that starting off with 4 teams, it would take 7 seasons to build your way up to 18 teams. And that's only if you manage to continue gaining 2 spots each season.

If your region can build your way up to that many teams, then it's highly unlikely you would ever see a large drop at once, (and the extra relegation would offset the extra promotions to Pro that had been occurring). Even as you are building up, keep in mind that you can lose teams faster than you can gain them.

Originally posted by Mercaptopropyl

I think everyone's biggest problem right now is that they think the World League will break if a team doesn't make the playoffs, and the new conference champion for their region set to replace them isn't as good as the incumbent team.



Why do people care? The EEPL would get a chance in your scenario every year. Who cares if all their teams would suck in WPL (which they probably would)? If they don't want to always be a laughing stock maybe they should get better teams and have them make it to WPL. I like that it encourages teams to get better rather than to be content to be good enough to get a top 5 seed in a region like OPL/EEPL and then make a playoff run. Gotta make sure you're as good as you possibly can be.


Gotta be handy with the steel if you know what I mean, earn your keep!

WPL:


***Official*** Footballguys
Anchorage Penguins
Cincinnati Shockers
Cincinnati Owls
Cincinnati Who Dey
Dallas Vaqueros
Extreme Pipe Layers
Green Bay Maulers
Margaritaville Fins
Richmond Rebel Yell
San Francisco Fire
San Francisco Montanas
Washington Wolfpack

Originally posted by chronoaug
Originally posted by Mercaptopropyl


I think everyone's biggest problem right now is that they think the World League will break if a team doesn't make the playoffs, and the new conference champion for their region set to replace them isn't as good as the incumbent team.



Why do people care? The EEPL would get a chance in your scenario every year. Who cares if all their teams would suck in WPL (which they probably would)? If they don't want to always be a laughing stock maybe they should get better teams and have them make it to WPL. I like that it encourages teams to get better rather than to be content to be good enough to get a top 5 seed in a region like OPL/EEPL and then make a playoff run. Gotta make sure you're as good as you possibly can be.


Gotta be handy with the steel if you know what I mean, earn your keep!

I agree. Plus, when stronger regions have more teams in the World League, it should make their Pro League a little weaker, and having almost all of their region's teams in their league should help weaker Pro Leagues be more on par with the stronger competition in the long run.