PNFL experience committee

[Mitch-Oilers]

Reading the posts in the salary cap thread made me think about other discussions we have had around the "experience" of being a coach in the PNFL.

Maybe we should have a small committee review our current rules and make some recommendations for increasing the "coach's experience". The committee could focus on a few key themes like:

- Simplifying rules while keeping league integrity
- Onboarding and keeping new coaches (ex. mentors for newbies)
- Creating more engagement and fun between coaches

This idea is just that, an idea. Maybe it could help us move forward in a more united way.

[Justin-Chicago]

If we want it to be all about the coaching experience, every team could simply have the exact same players. No salary cap, no draft, no trades, no aging, no retirements. Then it's 100% about the coaching.

But I sense that if we never had an offseason alot of owners wouldn't stay around. It's the offseason that seems to ignite people's passion.

Personally, I like the GM experience the league offers, but the "wild west" trading days were not at all conducive to parity.

The current setup is conducive to parity. You can never make a trade and pretty much keep up with the best of the best. At least you won't miss out on much. It's a good blend of GM experience and coach experience.

[Rich-League Officer]

Mitch, this league is filled with experienced coaches
It would be quicker to name the coaches who are not experienced.

[Mitch-Oilers]

I believe my idea is getting lost in semantics.

Instead of coach, let's use owner.

Instead of experience, let's use engagement.

[tmurph-Jets]

Justin, my suggestion would not eliminate the offseason.
The free agency period would be identical and just as lousy as it is today.
The draft takes place as usual.
The only difference is, no chains on coaches building their vision.

You mention parity, we have parity of rosters but not parity of outcomes.
So how does the "bad" coach ever find an edge?
He gets higher draft picks in theory.
Should we add the ability for teams to trade their picks but protect their pick if its a top 5?
But this promise of free agency is a myth.
The facts prove it.

The rules in place, due in part to pressure we all place on Rich are designed for all of us to keep our teams intact.
Teams have too many points stockpiled, there are too many talented players for 18 teams and there is not much that can be done.
All teams can easily hold their top stars till they age and retire or get a large chunk of their careers.
Nothing in the system stops this.
I would argue this system, which I am fine with actually hurts bad coaches, bad GMs and new coaches who join.
It also further complicates the learning curve when you add in our plan and profile rules.
I just feel we should strive for more simplicity to attract new coaches.

You are right, coaches begin to wake up this time of season and they get reinvigorated for a new year.
I think we ought to strive for a little more passion for the 19 weeks we play games.
And this system is designed to put coaches to sleep for that time. And what's worse is, we the coaches asked for it.
I think it was a big mistake.

[tmurph-Jets]

Mitch, I apologize for hijacking the thread.
This probably belongs in the salary cap thread.

[Dean-Atlanta]

I think such a committee is a great idea. I would envision charging it with the task of suggesting changes in the rules t simplify and improve things without compromising what makes the league as good as it is, etc. Maybe the way to do this is for Rich and Charlie and Jerry to appoint three team owners as such a comittee, give them a certain amount of time to examine things and submit a reports with ideas and suggested rules changes, which then Rich and Charlie and Jerry can then recommend to all of us what changes should be made.

I know we have discussions about rule changes and other ideas every off-season, and it's easy to get cynical and think we aren't going to make any changes. But I sense a different mood in our discussions this off-season, and a more urgent awareness of where we are with four open teams and maybe 1-2 teams owners that might not be fully committed to sticking around, as well as the challenges of recruiting a few new team owners and those of us fully committed to sticking with this are very much wanting to see the PNFL continue to survive and be successful despite working with this nearly 25 year old games with all of its bugs and quirks and features.

I have played through 18 losing seasons out of 19 to have a winning season for only the second times, so I want to continue this and keep working on getting better and winning is more fun than losing but the challenge is there either way. Let's make it happen and keep this going as long as we all want to keep playing this game.

[Steve-LA Chargers]

I wouldn't want to be on the committee. My ideas just get scorned because they suck. I'm done giving ideas. You're welcome. Plus I doubt it will make a difference because people always find a way in FBPRO to manipulate the system to their advantage.

And I think our draft doesn't really help 'bad coaches' at all. It really just helps 'good owners.' Case in point, both NFC Champions are in the top 5 picks of this draft to continue building their stacked teams and continue to steamroll over the league. This isn't the first time this has happened either. Anyone who knowingly trades their high 1st rounders to the known 'good owners who also happen to be good coaches' in this league are just making things worse for the rest of the league at this point. They just keep enabling them to stockpile talent. Sorry if this annoys anyone, but had to be said. I realize I have the 1st overall pick, but I earned it by being a 'bad coach' in 2039. I'm a fluke. Any other season in the past, one of these 'good owners who also made the playoffs [again]'' usually would have obtained this pick already from a 'bad owner.'