no content
AdBlocker active?
It seems you are using software to block advertisements. You could help us if you could switch it off when visiting redzoneaction.org.
The reason is very simple: Advertisements help us running the site, to offer you the game in a good quality for free. So if you like the game, please support us by purchasing a Supporter Account or disabling the AdBlocker on this site.
Thank you very much!
| Main / Suggestions / Thoughts about re-organising the regions Search Forum | |
| Navigation: |< < 1 2 3 14 15 16 > >| | |
| Rating: | |
| Poster | Message |
| posted: 2017-08-16 08:57:16 (ID: 100111695) Report Abuse | |
|
I agree with Lyon Eagles. It is the gap that is frustrating. I believe, concentrating the whole system to have four regions instead of 8 would be helpful. The first leagues would be more competitive and it would be possible to have a promotion/relegation system with the Elite league that is a bit more open.
The way I would propose to do it is to mix always two regions together. My vision on the other regions is not very good. I have not done any kind of study to put forward a concrete proposal but the basic idea could be looking like this example SeaDevils & Fire Dragons & Monarchs Galaxy & Thunder Admirals & Claymore |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
Meitheisman
|
posted: 2017-08-16 08:58:45 (ID: 100111697) Report Abuse |
|
You're not supposed to close the gap by helping managers get better or by making the great managers worse of course. What we could do though, maybe, is find a way to make sure managers play more games against teams of a similar level each season, no?
|
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
gabriel06
|
posted: 2017-08-16 08:59:00 (ID: 100111698) Report Abuse |
|
Is there a league system around the world, IRL, where there isn't a substantial gap between the top and the bottom?
The very nature of leagues means there has to be someone who finishes top and someone who is bottom - and usually, the gap is pretty wide. A new 2.x team coming up into 1.1 cannot expect to suddenly be challenging for 1.1 honours - their expectations must be survival, experience, learn and then either come back stronger or improve the following season. You cant change the game format to placate flaky managers who expect success just for playing the game. This is a long term management game - but like yourself, they cannot compete with managers whom have been here for 20 odd seasons already? Things are already done to help them improve quicker than we got back in the day - but the league system is not at fault for this. The gap between 2.x and 1.1 is not as large as the gap between 1.1 and Elite - but it would be much worse and much wider if Elite was not there. And - this is an American Football game based on the NFL - I don't hear the Buffalo Bills or Dolphins complaining because they are in the same Division as the Patriots - or the Browns because of the Steelers etc etc. They need to learn, improve and close the gap themselves - not just ask for things to be rejigged to allow them to win more. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
Meitheisman
|
posted: 2017-08-16 09:00:21 (ID: 100111699) Report Abuse |
|
noodle wrote:
Meitheisman wrote:
Honestly I do not have the time to dig the data up but I would be interested in knowing how many 1.1 games are competitive games, by that I mean games decided by 1 possession or less. You can even push it to games decided by 10pts or less if you want. I honestly think this is what makes most managers leave. You have 31 guaranteed regular season games per season but most of them are either super easy wins or guaranteed losses, that's what I would like to reduce. i know my team is in dragons 2.2 but this is relevant regarding competitive games i think. I lost to Trnava Saints twice this season, 23-17 and 28-33 (which was my match of the year) in the regular season. Then in the conference championship I beat them 41-17. I changed my tactics against them for the last game but the argument could be had that it was not a competitive match, however i think it was as is the rivalry, at least from my side. The Championship Game wasn't competitive anymore if you won it 41-17. My guess without looking at anything is that you improved more than your opponent during the season, maybe you learned more about the PB, maybe you bought better players or coaches, maybe your opponent sold players etc... Anyway, the point is that it's more fun to play competitive close games than winning (or losing) by 24pts. Would you agree with that statement? |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
Meitheisman
|
posted: 2017-08-16 09:01:49 (ID: 100111701) Report Abuse |
|
gabriel06 wrote:
Is there a league system around the world, IRL, where there isn't a substantial gap between the top and the bottom? The NFL. Anyone can beat anyone on any given Sunday. There is absolutely no way the worst 1.1 team has a chance at beating the best 1.1 team in RZA. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
gabriel06
|
posted: 2017-08-16 09:02:46 (ID: 100111702) Report Abuse |
|
Buziano wrote:
I agree with Lyon Eagles. It is the gap that is frustrating. I believe, concentrating the whole system to have four regions instead of 8 would be helpful. The first leagues would be more competitive and it would be possible to have a promotion/relegation system with the Elite league that is a bit more open. The way I would propose to do it is to mix always two regions together. My vision on the other regions is not very good. I have not done any kind of study to put forward a concrete proposal but the basic idea could be looking like this example SeaDevils & Fire Dragons & Monarchs Galaxy & Thunder Admirals & Claymore this does nothing to change what is being discussed - it only adds more 1.1 teams into the mix and pushes current 1.1 teams into 2.x, making 2,x divisions harder and therefore defeating the objective you are trying to achieve. The only suggestion I can think of here is to create an Elite 1.2 - so a division below Elite but above all 1.1 leagues - 1.1 teams first promote into 1.2 and then into 1.1 - with relegations the other way - and Elite 1.2 having the same format as the current Elite division with how it is populated. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2017-08-16 09:03:04 (ID: 100111703) Report Abuse | |
|
Meitheisman wrote:
The Championship Game wasn't competitive anymore if you won it 41-17. I am sorry, but if you put it this way it is just plain wrong. You would have to dig about the reasons for a loss. Two teams can be competitive even losing high to the other one. Especially teams that are equal in terms of material often try to get advantage over the other by inserting "special lines" in the playbook, or by playing with substitution rules. If such a change weakens the team, the outcome of the game is like that. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2017-08-16 09:04:34 (ID: 100111704) Report Abuse | |
|
gabriel06 wrote:
The only suggestion I can think of here is to create an Elite 1.2 - so a division below Elite but above all 1.1 leagues - 1.1 teams first promote into 1.2 and then into 1.1 - with relegations the other way - and Elite 1.2 having the same format as the current Elite division with how it is populated. Hell, no please! In 10 years we would have "Elite 1.93"...  |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2017-08-16 09:04:54 (ID: 100111705) Report Abuse | |
|
Meitheisman wrote:
Anyway, the point is that it's more fun to play competitive close games than winning (or losing) by 24pts. Would you agree with that statement? I totally agree. Since last Saturday I am kind of scotched to the game as hardly ever before. The Conference Final yesterday was something I would not experience the whole season. 31-30 33 seconds before the end, Kick return to the 38 yd line. FG missed with 4 seconds to go. These are the kind of matches we are living for. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
gabriel06
|
posted: 2017-08-16 09:04:59 (ID: 100111706) Report Abuse |
|
Meitheisman wrote:
gabriel06 wrote:
Is there a league system around the world, IRL, where there isn't a substantial gap between the top and the bottom? The NFL. Anyone can beat anyone on any given Sunday. There is absolutely no way the worst 1.1 team has a chance at beating the best 1.1 team in RZA. Gamecenter - Game ID: 100499285 London Silverbacks vs Chester Ducks - an Admirals 1.1 game played this season - check out ratings, divisional records etc..... |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| reply Mark this thread unread | |
| Navigation: |< < 1 2 3 14 15 16 > >| | |
| Main / Suggestions / Thoughts about re-organising the regions | |
