I may receive some criticism for the statements I make here today, but I will make them proudly. Winning the Season 38 Super Cup is not a priority for me. Yes, I would like to win, but I care more about fostering activity. This tournament isn't meant to be super fun, not super competitive.
Once every three seasons, we have the World Cup, where the nations, or regions, put together their best team possible in search of a gold medal. When the frequency of the World Cup was reduced, the Board of Governors did so while introducing a new off-season tournament that would also take place once every three years (not on the same year, of course). This was the Super Cup, which, according to Devise (a member of the BoG), was created with the idea of promoting and rewarding activity. That is why I sought to draft a team of players who might actively participate and enjoy the fun of the tournament.
No, not every player is going to get 20-plus minutes a game. Some of the lesser players on the team will only get 10 to 15. They might not be able to make a contribution every game. But that doesn't stop them from being a part of the team. A perfect example of this is Kyrie. Kyrie's player is Gunnar Skovsgard. He is the backup goalie for The Arceholes. He doesn't have much for TPE, as he is a new player. He's probably under the assumption that he won't receive any playing time during the tournament. But he has been incredibly active with the team. To my surprise, he changed his username to Arcehole#1. Since then, several players have followed his lead and changed theirs as well. We are having fun with this tournament, and I drafted players who might potentially be able to join in that fun.
No, not every player on a team will actively post in the locker room or elsewhere; but there are players who should have been given a shot, even if they are players who just joined and haven't yet earned any points. Why draft these players when they haven't proven themselves? They might be just as inactive as others, right? Yeah, that's true. But certain members are known to have been inactive for months. The new guys could very well be interested in being a part of a team. No, they won't be able to contribute much if their attributes are 40's across the board, but the atmosphere of being in a locker room, celebrating wins, and having a team to defend could bring out more Kyries.
It was with that spirit in mind that I went through with my draft. I wish I could say the same for my fellow general managers, but that was not entirely the case. During the first fourteen rounds of the draft, teams were only allowed to make selections from a list of 'active' players. Active, here, meant that the member had posted within the past month. So, for fourteen rounds, the general managers did that. Come round fifteen, the draft pool opened up to include 'inactive' players. Of course, the first player drafted in round fifteen was James Lefevre, followed by Nikita Lebedev and Willie Weber.
With the exception of my own, every pick in the final two rounds was an inactive player. I will pardon Sterling, who had to leave and, if I recall correctly, asked Mike to draft for him the best active player available. Instead, Super Cup Commissioner Mike gave him Matteo Gallo and Jamie Shetler. (Sterling might have been around when Gallo was picked, so he might not be entirely innocent, but I can't say for sure.) This seems like a great time, considering I've mentioned his name, to segue into my disapproval of Mike in all of this.
Mike was told to make sure that the inactive players were not taken before active players. I guess perhaps his only fault may have been misinterpreting what the Board of Governors actually wanted, and this resulted in his making of the rule that inactive players could not be taken before the fifteenth round. This rule that Mike created only meant that the general managers who didn't want to take any inactive players (which turned out to be only me, and possibly Sterling) would be left with a worse team. This is because the other teams may have spent earlier picks on inactive players, allowing those who aren't going after inactive players to select better active players. A better rule would have been to only allow two inactive players per team, but not putting restrictions on when they were drafted. What bothers me about this, though, isn't so much that I was left with a slightly worse team than what I would have otherwise had, but just that the rule contradicts what it is supposed to be promoting. The best rule that could have been made would have resulted in none of the inactive players being drafted.
As I said in my opening, there may be people out there who aren't pleased with what I have to say, but that's fine. That's just the way things are. I can say that a lot of us here in the VHL can be arseholes sometimes, but there are few of us who can proudly say that we are Arceholes.
.png.ed69a7260a477fcf4feead7a0e4b7506.png)
This article says nothing to the contrary, either.
