Thu Jan 11, 2018 1:58 am
Wow, glad you posted this as have been thinking about how fun it would be to have a long-term, relatively large league on here with some added facets and your idea is great. I wondered about trying to start a league by having managers 'sign-up' for 1/4 or 1/8 groups (probably made up of 3 people each) to oversee certain aspects of the league, allowing for a much more in-depth league than the standard leagues offer. Looking through the boards I know some of you guys have similar leagues going here or elsewhere but I haven't been involved with one of those in quite some time and most definitely miss it.
Back in the day, we'd have a group to oversee the commissioner position, a group that focused on the contracts and financials, another that would oversee the scheduling and logistics (we bid on players each yr with money we earned from attendance which was based upon how good your team and the team you were playing were at the time you played each other) and a final group focused on statistics, reporting and the all-star/end of season voting/awards we gave out. I really enjoyed the carryover aspect of the league and the budgeting of the money/different styles associated with that. We even traded/sold draft picks each year in both the regular and rookie drafts and had different expansion drafts on two occasions when we added teams.
The most important aspect seemed to be increasing the players' salaries. In the beginning, we upped the price 10% for ever year of service a player had with a team but by the end we had multi-year contracts with free agency rules (if the player outperformed his card he'd increase more than if he hadn't lived up to expectations/ if a player's team was winning, the player might be willing to sacrifice some salary and wouldn't increase as much, etc) that seemed to help offset any problems we had in regards to doling out money and teams becoming powerhouses. It was strange that a player was often signing with a new team for less money than he made the previous season but easy to overlook since it worked on cycling teams from the cellar upwards once a stud could no longer be afforded by his current team. It also incentivized trading studs "before the trade deadline" that were going to be free agents since the new team could sometimes trade for a player and pay the increased salary cost (salaries only started over when they were bid on again) much cheaper than they could acquire the player had he gone to free agency and been rebid on. Especially when the original team drafted the player for a great deal the first time around.
Probably sounds like a nightmare to track but actually not bad since we had broken up the different responsibilities letting guys do what they enjoyed doing and didn't put it all on one guy's shoulders.
Would there be any interest in doing something like you're saying and potentially starting out in a given year in the past (maybe 1920?, 1950?) and then playing a season for every 5 years (1925, 1930, etc). It could be more or less but also could be decreased to every year or every other year once we get to the 1970's or 1980's? If players were able to play for an extended period of time before they were forced to retire (when they were 45 years old or something) then we could even have players playing with guys they never could in the real world and could build some really stellar teams (after the first season or two).
Anyways, sorry to ramble and hopefully am on the same page as you and am definitely in for anything should you have the room and be able to deal with my wordiness.
)