Vote for game reset

Yes or no I guess.

Yes

yes

Yes

Don't really see another option at this stage

We'd need committed managers though, and we're 3 short at the moment!

Yeah I was gonna say the three Managers is the most important thing. League doesn't survive without those

Yes.

I guess this gives us options as we can post the league on the Tigers/Falcons page etc.

I'd suggest a message to previous managers about the reset. May lead to some interest.

I would move to agree with the reset. However, as is the obvious point we are missing three managers.

Is there any scope to do it with the managers we have? Might even out the teams a bit too

Assume the existing 9 would all be interested, could we run the league with 10? Would just mean a custom schedule rather than following the AP but its feasible

It would be much easier with a full complement, or close to it.

Worth advertising first maybe?

Definitely

we might be able to tempt Pete back if he could be Irish?!

Any other old boys who might be keen? Driver?

Also, think we need a system of how teams are picked?

Happy to let anyone with a particular affinity to a club take first pick of that club

ie Pete with Irish, CJ with Quins, Prop with Glos ... Pooly with Falcons

agreed

I support Saracens Bam.

I've stuck something up on the club section https://www.606v2.com/t66463-new-ap-fantasy-rugby-game-606-based

thought you might

BamBam wrote: thought you might

Yea, always have. Bloody love them I do. Plus, it keeps Beshocked out of the game!!

Sgt_Pooly wrote:I support Saracens Bam.

I've stuck something up on the club section https://www.606v2.com/t66463-new-ap-fantasy-rugby-game-606-based

Worth saying how many managers we've got at the moment?

I would absolutely love beshocked to take over Saracens

I thought I'd just throw it out there first and see what we get back. If people see we only 3 it might put them off.

We could do with some standby options too.

BamBam wrote:I would absolutely love beshocked to take over Saracens

He's been in one of the games before....he was an absolute nightmare. He kept kicking off because people didn't rate his players as highly as he did (odd that...)

I am interested in continuing seeing as I've somehow done this since Jan 2010!

However; I'm heading into the 3rd year of my part-time masters so it's dissertation time meaning I won't have a lot of time to commit, if people are happy with that and essentially me being awol at times then all good.

Would it be worth trying to get it all set and running for the turn around in a.p fixtures? Meaning we play each other once at neutral venues?? Just a thought.

It would be easier to just hit the ground running from where the league is at the time. 

We have done a new league where there is just one game, though we aren't as deep into the season as that scenario.

Maybe one of us a day day we're in to keep the thread up?

Is it worth having a stab at budgets?

go for it mate, then we can all comment and come to an agreement.
personally I would say Worcester have lowest, not being biased as an irish fan, but on paper we have better players like franks, cowan, marshall, van der merwe, lewington, nalaga. Worcester only really have Te'o of note.

I'd throw Falcons in the lower end too tbh. Some good players but few Ints/EQ.

have it roughly as:

1. Saracens - 20m
1.5. Wasps - 35m
2. Bath - 45m
3. Leicester 50m
4. Quins - 60m
5. Saints - 60m
7. Exeter - 60m
8. Gloucester - 80m
9. Sale - 100m
10. Falcons - 100m
11. Worcester - 140m
12. Irish - 130m

that sounds about right to me.

I'd give Sarries 0 tbh

I know mate but you look at their backline and it's not star studded. Wasps have much better options.

But their pack is a lot stronger than any other side, and is more or less full internationals throughout

I'd be tempted to start Sarries at 0/10m, and almost force the manager there to make deals to get backs in

Then give Wasps 20-30m and follow the rest of your sliding scale

I just think it's a bit boring if you don't get to make at least 1 signing. See what you mean know though, I did raise other budgets to compensate Sarries.

Rest look Good? Are the bottom teams enough? Middle teams too much?

agree Saracens should have budget to make one signing, maybe not a top marquee player though, then they would have to sell to raise funds or do swaps to improve their backline. don't want it just to be guaranteed that sarries will win!

I'd have Exeter a bit lower. although they don't have stacks of WC players, a lot of the players are underated and are starting to gain more recognition ie Simmonds, woodburn, Williams, yeandle.

You're close Pooly, would need a little tweak, but more or less there.

How we doing for numbers?

Only extra is Driver at the minute. May need a little bump on the advert

What about this griff fella? And has anyone asked ozzy pete?

Luke, SJE, Arry?

I would be happy to run again but would want there to be at least 11 managers. 

Where are we at? I make it:

Pooly
Fluxy
Bam
Steve
CJ
Nick
Prop
Pull
CJB

Driver?

Driver said he'd be in, not sure for how long.

That would be my concern...

I'd rather run it with 9 reliable managers tbh

I think the league needs 12. It leaves teams behind which makes them less attractive. Less deals to be done. Games against managerless teams are softer games. Schedule becomes a factor thwn

I was thinking keep it at 9 teams and create our own custom schedule rather than following the AP, and just add Euro games

Could leave out the outlier teams - ie Saracens by far the strongest, most agree Irish and Worcester are the weakest

A league of the following looks pretty competitive to start with, and the two weakest teams in Sale and Falcons can be propped up with budget

Bath
Wasps
Saints
Tigers
Quins
Sale
Falcons
Gloucester
Exeter

Just a thought

Genuinely would prefer to keep 12 teams. Just to keep the amount of work to create a new setup to the minimum.

Yeah there is also the worry that when it becomes a fantasy leave it tends not to survive, so keeping it as realistic as possible is the best way