Robin, I was actually thinking of the other managers who don't rely on OTF for their tactics. :-)

If you remember, I inherited this team. This is still my first season in SESL.
Whoever had 'managed' the side before me didn't have the resources in place to let me boost OTF. I started with only 32 CP. That'll be corrected next season.

To go back to the topic at hand.
I still think rewards should consist of cash or CPs and TPs. Not OTF.
The first three are resources to be used as the manager sees fit, or to be traded away.
That's not feasable with OTF. So, it does restrict your choices, so it shouldn't be used as a prize.

Commish said on November 18th:

"Maybe too much cash is on offer, and with concerns over lack of OTF...."


Therefore it seems a move to LESS cash on offer is preferable,
plus a OTF boost due to concerns this is no longer an active feature of sesl teams.


As a compromise, why not give managers the choice?

2 CP or 2 OFT as an award. If a manager really does not like OTF, then he can take the lower value offer of the 2 CP.

Keeps everyone happy and also addresses any issue of lack of interest in OTF lately, that Robin has previously highlighted.

OTF is a managers choice, it is not a problem if it somewhat lower in the league as a whole. But sorry, I was looking at the div 1 and there seems to be plenty of teams with decent OTF, why BC doesn't get played as much as other tactics might have something to do with the half strength GP, rather than the lack of MF's and OTF, but that is a factor also.

But isn't there another thread about OTF?

Not a great fan of awards per se. Winning games brings enough rewards.

I prefer awards which would only be cash (if you have them) for things like dirtiest player, dirtiest team, cleanest team, butter fingers, most minutes played, top goalscorer, penalty meister etc. Rather than just give more cash points etc to the most successful team.

I'm not a big fan of rewards either, but it does make sense to have some.
When you get down to awarding the hairiest ...
...you've gone too far.

Also, leave OTF out of the awards. Teams should be free to spend their resources as they choose.

So, now when I type the word C-H-E-E-R-L-E-A-D-E-R, a appears?

Kind of glad you typed .
It could have been a lot worse for hairiest award.

I guess most now know my opposition to this seasons awards.

Basically I feel they are simply too high. 500k for top goalscorer is a lot of wedge and gives a team that are probably doing well enough too much of an advantage.

Bu for this season they must be awarded as the rules dictate (I've never asked for the amounts for this season to be altered).

Moving on I like the idea of a pot of cash being split between the top 3 golden booters. Someone mentioned it on the blog and it seemed fair enough. 300k for 1st 200k for 2nd and 100k for third.

Similiar structure could be given for other awards.

I would also not be adverse to cash prizes for winning cups and leagues.

I'm not real worked up about this issue, but generally I think the awards put too much new money into circulation. It tends to have an inflationary impact on resources, and you've all heard me say before that the inflationary pressure pushes SL to a point that the system will eventually no longer handle. Believe me, you don't want to get to a point where a team has to be retired (HIBS, the early years) because they are untouchable or worse, the game has to be completely retired because the top teams are so entrenched (MSWL, the first era).

Oh, and that banana smilee--there's something about him that's just plain wrong!

The current awards add up to a total of 2100k as I mentioned earlier in the topic.
Is this too much money? Which is basically what the commish was asking.

Here's some info.
As of the previous session, with 4 matches still to be played, each Division had earned the following totals. And this is purely match revenue. No press awards, or trading acumen taken into these figures.

Division 1
62,319k

Division 2
46, 469k

Division 3
41, 054k

So, for Division 1 this equates to just over 3% of total match revenue.

For Div 2 and Div 3, this works out closer to 5% of total match revenue.

The total value of the awards is not too high.

The only time that the awards might cause a slight imbalance is if one team wins all of them.

Therefore, for next season, we should look at a way to avoid one team having the chance of winning them all.

I've already pointed out some ways to achieve this, in a previous post.
If any of the other managers have some suggestions, then we could put together a Divisional award package that maintains the same cash total, but avoids the chance of one manager walking off with the lot.

Some managers may still be thinking about giving the top teams in each division a nominal award in recognition of their achievement.
Steve from DEV already pointed out that the better teams are already rewarded in the terms that their superior morale already gives them a higher income.
Also, teams that go on a Cup run get more cash from the extra matches they play.

I do not think we need to award teams who are already getting extra income.

Hearts have earned 4,796k from match revenue this season and have 4 more matches worth of income to go into their coffers.
The poorest team in Div 1 have only earned 3275k.
Hearts have already earned over 1500k more than Inverness. Is there truly any need to give them some more cash?
No, not really.

Div 2
Livingston 3,830k
Berwick 2,349k
The difference is 1,481k
There's your reward for having a successful season right there.

Div 3
Deveronvale 3,226k
Airdrie 1,993k
1,233k of a difference.

Do not award any more money for league placings. The teams who are winning are doing fine.
End of season awards. Leave the amount the same, but seek a way to avoid having one team win them all.
Do not award OTF as a prize. It is not a resource.

Top league finishes equate to strong morale, so there's some revenue reward as is.

Bishop COW manager
Posted: November 24, 2007 01:41 pm




Excuse me Alan !
Are you not the same COW Manager who spent Hours posting your Mid season Awards on the Journal ? Very enjoyable read they were too!
But now you are opposed to End of season awards?
Not because you didn't win any is it ?

Mine were simply for fun.

Maybe the end of season awards should be for fun too? Had they been we wouldnae be debating this now!!!

Anyway, I like the awards, just disagree with the levels!