My Issue with the VHLM

[Horcrux 322]

As a new member to the Victory Hockey League I have been doing a lot of reading, and a lot of watching. Nothing in life is flawless, nothing is perfect. I wholeheartedly believe the Victory Hockey League is the best simulation game for hockey, even better than EA . With that said I also feel I need to give my opinion as my mother used to always say “you know there is a problem unless you tell someone” so this is me telling you what i have been noticing. 
 

Let me preface this with: the statements in this Media Spot are my OPINION and that only, this is not intended to call out any General Managers, Commissioners, Players, or league Staff this is simply me pointing out what I think to be a problem. I love this site and just want it to be perfect (which is always impossible)
 

The VHLM is a joke, if the purpose is to Retain and Train new members how to update, play, and get them ready for the VHL then it has failed on a few levels, if it is about winning Championships, awards, and padding your resume then its succeeding on an astounding level. Let me explain. I know that the sim “affects things, and can be random” that's not what I am debating, it's more so about how the VHLM works. Let's start out with a glaring TPE breakdown for each team. 

2 Ottawa Lynx (60 - 10 - 2) 3122 TPE (3 players at 200 TPE)
1  Yukon Rush (64 - 7 - 1) 2766 TPE ( 7 players at 200 TPE)
3 Minnesota Storm (54 - 12 - 6)  2528 TPE (8 players at 200 TPE)
6 Philadelphia Reapers (36 - 34 - 2) 2326 TPE
4 Houston Bulls (38 - 28 - 6) 2064 TPE (3 players at 200 TPE)
5 Halifax 21st (36 - 30 - 6) 1876 TPE (2 Players at 200 TPE)
9 Mexico City Kings (27 - 36 - 9) 1414 TPE (1 Player at 200 TPE)
10 San Diego Marlins (29 - 40 - 3) 1260 TPE
8 Miami Marauders (32 - 39 - 1) 902 TPE 
11 Saskatoon Wild (15 - 54 - 3) 731 TPE
7 Las Vegas Aces (32 - 36 - 4) 357 TPE
12 Mississauga Hounds (9 - 57 - 6) 285 TPE
 

Looking at that list, which is in order from TPE, the first number is where they finished overall in the VHLM in season 80. The top 5 teams have over 2000 TPE as a team and 21 players at 200 with more banked. These players for the most part are recreated from existing members, some who have Jobs, or steady TPE. nothing wrong with that as long as they follow the same rule of a certain amount of capped as everyone else. We want to be fair. 
 

Aside from Mexico, any team with at least 1 player with 200 TPE finished above .500 so then I see this as a new player and think in the draft okay...I don't want to play for anyone under this threshold. If the plan is to win, get cups, and get stats. Every other team finished well under. The top 4 teams based on TPE (Ottawa, Yukon, Minnesota, Philadelphia) have more TPE combined then the bottom 7 teams in the league (Halifax, Mexico, San Diego, Miami, Saskatoon, Las Vegas, Mississauga) 
 

Now I know to some there might be a “well the player chooses who they sign with” or other comments along those lines and that's true and fair. My point is as a new member who is coming into this fresh, what incentive is there for me to join the other 7 teams? If Gm’s stack their rosters with a locker room full of players who know what they are doing it is kind of pointless. There should be 1 or two re-created per team required in my opinion, that way when a new player signs with a team they have someone they can ask questions to who can help them. Kind of like bringing a Veteran in on a young team in the NHL

 

Maybe a TPE cap per team could also help with Parity and management. Kind of like a Salary cap but a TPE cap. If this line upset you, then you need to rethink your motivations. I keep being told the VHLM is about Retention and helping members, yet I had to actively reach out to people not on my team or league to help me out because my Locker Room is dead. I learned most of what I had to by reading and messing about because it was hard to connect and actually reach anyone which is a problem.

Had I not met @fishy, @thadthrasher, @Peace, @Brewins15, @Moon_50, @Alex_J32 I would not be here right now. I would have left. These 6 have been amazing and have helped me understand the nuance and need to know stuff about the league and the VHL. something that should have been done the second I joined. 
 

Next issue I noticed, for Las Vegas for example who has 3 players. 3, why would anyone want to join Las Vegas? So does Mississauga. What as a new player makes me think I should join them? Nothing. (i'm not blaming the GMS) some teams have No Goalies, no Defenders. 1 defender while other teams have 6 or 7.  Some teams have 2 goalies over 100 TPE who could go to other teams and be a starter, get minutes, maybe be motivated to stick around. 
 

I think the Rosters need to be looked at and evened out this is where the TPE Cap could come in handy or even a Recreate cap. If the idea is about retention and teaching then GM’s and AGM’s need to be available to answer the questions their players may have. I've seen a few locker rooms where players are not encouraged to interact or Gms are MIA in the locker rooms. 
 

I want to have fun, I want to be able to talk to my Teammates and feel like i'm on a team. But when i'm on a team with 1 Defense, and 1 goalie who is our top earner, where no one talks...that's not going to encourage me or any new member to stick around. 

I didn't make this article to Attack anyone, I made it to start a dialogue, I want the VHL in every aspect to succeed. I love this site and some of the members. I have had a blast on every aspect that ISN'T hockey related. I think a few changes to make the league more about learning, more Parity, I think a lot of new players would stick around. 

1104 words, claiming weeks ending Nov 7, 14

Edited October 28, 2021 by Horcrux

[samx 1,095]

We have spoken about this in Dms but Ill say here what I said there. Hearing from new user is one of the best things because it gives you fresh perspective on what is happening in the league and how it is run. Thank you for sharing your experience so far in the VHLM.

[Spartan 3,993]

12 minutes ago, Horcrux said:

The VHLM is a joke

Agreed. At least in specific regards to its purpose compared to what it actually is. For a bit of context, the VHLM TPE Cap was reduced to 200 from 250, because the VHLE started operations as a middle league, from 201 TPE to 400 TPE. In order to try and make the VHLM more developmental, the cap was reduced to reduce player skill a little and therefore, attempting to disincentivize teams from trying to load up on capped players because the parity between the average member and a capped 200 TPE player wouldn't be that profound.

 

However, it's basically just reinforced the cyclical nature of the VHLM, where if you're not going all out to compete, you're tanking to hell. If you're competing, you make moves to look like Yukon, Ottawa or Minnesota. Very few future draft picks, or you signed all the recreates in that season's waiver class. Teams like Mississauga and Houston sold their players when they could, effectively blowing up their teams and looking forward to the future. The real solution here is to eliminate the ability to have these extremes, and I know plenty of people have made suggestions on how to do this. Not going to address them.

 

18 minutes ago, Horcrux said:

what incentive is there for me to join the other 7 teams?

So the most important factor for this question is when you created in the VHL. If you create before the trade deadline, you have a choice between playing a lot of minutes for a team outside playoffs, decent minutes for a fringe playoff team, or very little minutes on a playoff lock. You seem to have joined on 10/21, a week ago - after the trade deadline I believe. You simply had the worst luck in that there were maybe 10-12 games left in the season, so wherever you joined wasn't going to really make a large impact on your stats. All you could do was try and select a team based on the ones who offered. Most of the time, they won't be those top teams because Minnesota had 14 skaters, Ottawa with 19 skaters, and Yukon with 18 skaters. Those top teams are basically set because of all the signings and trades they made earlier in the season. While there is the argument against allowing a handful of teams to get so overloaded with talent in any given season, I think it is important to understand the context at the time. In this case, you were mostly unlucky since every team basically knew their fate. You either get good minutes for 10 games, or no minutes and a shot at playoffs.

 

25 minutes ago, Horcrux said:

If Gm’s stack their rosters with a locker room full of players who know what they are doing it is kind of pointless. There should be 1 or two re-created per team required in my opinion, that way when a new player signs with a team they have someone they can ask questions to who can help them. Kind of like bringing a Veteran in on a young team in the NHL

Recreates have always been a point of contention. The teams that don't get them as waivers call for rule changes to limit recreates as you've said. However, it's a different team every season, or a different combination of teams every season. Minnesota has 5 recreates in 16 players, 2 of whom joined as waivers (after the trade deadline last week). Ottawa has 7 recreates out of 21, 2 of whom were waivers as well. Yukon has 10 recreates out of 20 skaters, 4 of whom were waivers. Maybe Yukon is just the most imbalanced one, but there will always be one team each season that has more recreates. It could be a team with a lot of high draft picks, or a team that drafted a couple recreates and were able to sign their friends later in the season.

 

Waivers in the VHLM are about the only time in a recreate's playing career where they can choose where to play, and who to play with. It's long been an argument of why we shouldn't be limiting recreate waivers, because they're generally only for the last 10-12 games of the regular season and then playoffs. They go back into the draft afterwards. You can't stop people from wanting to play with their friends for part of a season, but you can definitely limit how many get drafted to a team. I know a proposed solution to parity issues as you initially mentioned has been to stop draft pick trading. It'd remove a lot of the cyclical nature of the M, and keep teams a bit more balanced. Does it basically eliminate any actual "management" portion of the M and turn M GM's into just mentors? Yeah, just about. Is it necessary? Maybe not to that extent, but a limit is needed for sure.

 

Also specifically to the "have people on the team to ask questions," most M teams don't remove alumni. I know quite a few people who are in multiple M LR's, myself included. We stay in there for various purposes, scouting is my main reason. But I am happy to answer questions if people have them. I was asked if you could even post this article today and be able to claim it next week . Small stuff, us veterans do try and hang around first-gens to help out.

 

33 minutes ago, Horcrux said:

GM’s and AGM’s need to be available

So part of what we realized in this pandemic era is that people had a lot more free time than before. COVID restrictions being lifted, and school/work going back to in person/hybrid systems mean that people don't have as much time to keep an eye on their LR or DM's as they might have before. I know a few M GM's have been hit hard with this, as they now have school, after school activities, and even various sports practices that now take up most of their time. I think we also need to be a bit flexible with our team management, acknowledging that people have their own lives and will try their best to make time for their teams. If they're not around, then hopefully there are other people in the LR (alumni/guests) who you can ask questions to. 

 

36 minutes ago, Horcrux said:

I've seen a few locker rooms where players are not encouraged to interact

If there is a situation where players are actually actively encouraged not to interact in a LR, I'd report that to @diamond_ace  or @McWolf  immediately. That's unacceptable.

 

37 minutes ago, Horcrux said:

I didn't make this article to Attack anyone, I made it to start a dialogue, I want the VHL in every aspect to succeed. I love this site and some of the members. I have had a blast on every aspect that ISN'T hockey related. I think a few changes to make the league more about learning, more Parity, I think a lot of new players would stick around. 

Love having open dialogue's, nicely written article! It's always nice to see new members' perspectives, especially so soon after creation. No two experiences are the same, and it's important to have these discussions when things are working as smoothly as they could. Retention is the #1 priority of the minor league and anyone affiliated with it. It's great to get back to those roots and shine a light on the issues surrounding it. 10/10 article

[samx 1,095]

10 minutes ago, Spartan said:

Agreed. At least in specific regards to its purpose compared to what it actually is. For a bit of context, the VHLM TPE Cap was reduced to 200 from 250, because the VHLE started operations as a middle league, from 201 TPE to 400 TPE. In order to try and make the VHLM more developmental, the cap was reduced to reduce player skill a little and therefore, attempting to disincentivize teams from trying to load up on capped players because the parity between the average member and a capped 200 TPE player wouldn't be that profound.

 

However, it's basically just reinforced the cyclical nature of the VHLM, where if you're not going all out to compete, you're tanking to hell. If you're competing, you make moves to look like Yukon, Ottawa or Minnesota. Very few future draft picks, or you signed all the recreates in that season's waiver class. Teams like Mississauga and Houston sold their players when they could, effectively blowing up their teams and looking forward to the future. The real solution here is to eliminate the ability to have these extremes, and I know plenty of people have made suggestions on how to do this. Not going to address them.

 

So the most important factor for this question is when you created in the VHL. If you create before the trade deadline, you have a choice between playing a lot of minutes for a team outside playoffs, decent minutes for a fringe playoff team, or very little minutes on a playoff lock. You seem to have joined on 10/21, a week ago - after the trade deadline I believe. You simply had the worst luck in that there were maybe 10-12 games left in the season, so wherever you joined wasn't going to really make a large impact on your stats. All you could do was try and select a team based on the ones who offered. Most of the time, they won't be those top teams because Minnesota had 14 skaters, Ottawa with 19 skaters, and Yukon with 18 skaters. Those top teams are basically set because of all the signings and trades they made earlier in the season. While there is the argument against allowing a handful of teams to get so overloaded with talent in any given season, I think it is important to understand the context at the time. In this case, you were mostly unlucky since every team basically knew their fate. You either get good minutes for 10 games, or no minutes and a shot at playoffs.

 

Recreates have always been a point of contention. The teams that don't get them as waivers call for rule changes to limit recreates as you've said. However, it's a different team every season, or a different combination of teams every season. Minnesota has 5 recreates in 16 players, 2 of whom joined as waivers (after the trade deadline last week). Ottawa has 7 recreates out of 21, 2 of whom were waivers as well. Yukon has 10 recreates out of 20 skaters, 4 of whom were waivers. Maybe Yukon is just the most imbalanced one, but there will always be one team each season that has more recreates. It could be a team with a lot of high draft picks, or a team that drafted a couple recreates and were able to sign their friends later in the season.

 

Waivers in the VHLM are about the only time in a recreate's playing career where they can choose where to play, and who to play with. It's long been an argument of why we shouldn't be limiting recreate waivers, because they're generally only for the last 10-12 games of the regular season and then playoffs. They go back into the draft afterwards. You can't stop people from wanting to play with their friends for part of a season, but you can definitely limit how many get drafted to a team. I know a proposed solution to parity issues as you initially mentioned has been to stop draft pick trading. It'd remove a lot of the cyclical nature of the M, and keep teams a bit more balanced. Does it basically eliminate any actual "management" portion of the M and turn M GM's into just mentors? Yeah, just about. Is it necessary? Maybe not to that extent, but a limit is needed for sure.

 

Also specifically to the "have people on the team to ask questions," most M teams don't remove alumni. I know quite a few people who are in multiple M LR's, myself included. We stay in there for various purposes, scouting is my main reason. But I am happy to answer questions if people have them. I was asked if you could even post this article today and be able to claim it next week . Small stuff, us veterans do try and hang around first-gens to help out.

 

So part of what we realized in this pandemic era is that people had a lot more free time than before. COVID restrictions being lifted, and school/work going back to in person/hybrid systems mean that people don't have as much time to keep an eye on their LR or DM's as they might have before. I know a few M GM's have been hit hard with this, as they now have school, after school activities, and even various sports practices that now take up most of their time. I think we also need to be a bit flexible with our team management, acknowledging that people have their own lives and will try their best to make time for their teams. If they're not around, then hopefully there are other people in the LR (alumni/guests) who you can ask questions to. 

 

If there is a situation where players are actually actively encouraged not to interact in a LR, I'd report that to @diamond_ace  or @McWolf  immediately. That's unacceptable.

 

Love having open dialogue's, nicely written article! It's always nice to see new members' perspectives, especially so soon after creation. No two experiences are the same, and it's important to have these discussions when things are working as smoothly as they could. Retention is the #1 priority of the minor league and anyone affiliated with it. It's great to get back to those roots and shine a light on the issues surrounding it. 10/10 article

spartan over here writing a whole new media spot

[Spartan 3,993]

Just now, Brewins15 said:

spartan over here writing a whole new media spot

1,062 words, will be claiming it as a review for 1 tpe.

[Horcrux 322]

4 minutes ago, Spartan said:

So the most important factor for this question is when you created in the VHL. If you create before the trade deadline, you have a choice between playing a lot of minutes for a team outside playoffs, decent minutes for a fringe playoff team, or very little minutes on a playoff lock. You seem to have joined on 10/21, a week ago - after the trade deadline I believe. You simply had the worst luck in that there were maybe 10-12 games left in the season, so wherever you joined wasn't going to really make a large impact on your stats. All you could do was try and select a team based on the ones who offered. Most of the time, they won't be those top teams because Minnesota had 14 skaters, Ottawa with 19 skaters, and Yukon with 18 skaters. Those top teams are basically set because of all the signings and trades they made earlier in the season. While there is the argument against allowing a handful of teams to get so overloaded with talent in any given season, I think it is important to understand the context at the time. In this case, you were mostly unlucky since every team basically knew their fate. You either get good minutes for 10 games, or no minutes and a shot at playoffs.

i didn't really word this right an i am sorry for that. I meant in regards tp being drafted to one of those teams that have been blown up or what not. I see your point. 

 

Quote

So part of what we realized in this pandemic era is that people had a lot more free time than before. COVID restrictions being lifted, and school/work going back to in person/hybrid systems mean that people don't have as much time to keep an eye on their LR or DM's as they might have before. I know a few M GM's have been hit hard with this, as they now have school, after school activities, and even various sports practices that now take up most of their time. I think we also need to be a bit flexible with our team management, acknowledging that people have their own lives and will try their best to make time for their teams. If they're not around, then hopefully there are other people in the LR (alumni/guests) who you can ask questions to. 

of course Covid was a massive thing and i get with things opening back up availability will change. its more so that and maybe its just me, I dont want to have to hint down someone who can answer it when the GM or AGM could easily answer it especially if they are online.

 

Quote

Recreates have always been a point of contention. The teams that don't get them as waivers call for rule changes to limit recreates as you've said. However, it's a different team every season, or a different combination of teams every season. Minnesota has 5 recreates in 16 players, 2 of whom joined as waivers (after the trade deadline last week). Ottawa has 7 recreates out of 21, 2 of whom were waivers as well. Yukon has 10 recreates out of 20 skaters, 4 of whom were waivers. Maybe Yukon is just the most imbalanced one, but there will always be one team each season that has more recreates. It could be a team with a lot of high draft picks, or a team that drafted a couple recreates and were able to sign their friends later in the season.

 

Waivers in the VHLM are about the only time in a recreate's playing career where they can choose where to play, and who to play with. It's long been an argument of why we shouldn't be limiting recreate waivers, because they're generally only for the last 10-12 games of the regular season and then playoffs. They go back into the draft afterwards. You can't stop people from wanting to play with their friends for part of a season, but you can definitely limit how many get drafted to a team. I know a proposed solution to parity issues as you initially mentioned has been to stop draft pick trading. It'd remove a lot of the cyclical nature of the M, and keep teams a bit more balanced. Does it basically eliminate any actual "management" portion of the M and turn M GM's into just mentors? Yeah, just about. Is it necessary? Maybe not to that extent, but a limit is needed for sure.

 

Also specifically to the "have people on the team to ask questions," most M teams don't remove alumni. I know quite a few people who are in multiple M LR's, myself included. We stay in there for various purposes, scouting is my main reason. But I am happy to answer questions if people have them. I was asked if you could even post this article today and be able to claim it next week . Small stuff, us veterans do try and hang around first-gens to help out.

this is another one to an extent i understand. however as a new player if i was say Drafted to Las Vegas and left on a team with 3 players i would want out FAST. I dont want to punish smart GMs for taking recreates they are a sure thing, hedge your bets. I just think it looks bad, especially if other teams for example dont have a Golie or defencman. its one of those weird double edge sword things

i wanna thank you for your thorough and Honest, polite response 

[samx 1,095]

2 minutes ago, Spartan said:

1,062 words, will be claiming it as a review for 1 tpe.

you didnt give it a ranking out of 10 denied.

[Horcrux 322]

3 minutes ago, Spartan said:

1,062 words, will be claiming it as a review for 1 tpe.

he backpacked and inception'd my Media Spot lol. 

but i get 6

[Spartan 3,993]

1 minute ago, Brewins15 said:

you didnt give it a ranking out of 10 denied.

 

12 minutes ago, Spartan said:

Love having open dialogue's, nicely written article! It's always nice to see new members' perspectives, especially so soon after creation. No two experiences are the same, and it's important to have these discussions when things are working as smoothly as they could. Retention is the #1 priority of the minor league and anyone affiliated with it. It's great to get back to those roots and shine a light on the issues surrounding it. 10/10 article

 

bum

 

[samx 1,095]

1 minute ago, Spartan said:

 

 

bum

 

sam moment

[Spartan 3,993]

6 minutes ago, Horcrux said:

i didn't really word this right an i am sorry for that. I meant in regards tp being drafted to one of those teams that have been blown up or what not. I see your point. 

No worries, I see what you mean as well now. There have been a lot of discussions on how to fix the issue with draft picks. Some teams have like 2 picks in the 4th and 5th round, while other teams have like 6 picks in the first 2 rounds. There's even been some circumventing of 1st and 2nd round pick limits that commissioners need to fix. Yukon and Houston are two teams that have taken advantage of the loophole brilliantly in the past few seasons. It does need to get fixed. To prevent teams from being so disproportionately loaded, draft pick trading needs to be severely limited. I don't have a proposed solution, but I know any solution will have to involve limiting how many picks can be traded. 

 

9 minutes ago, Horcrux said:

its more so that and maybe its just me, I dont want to have to hint down someone who can answer it when the GM or AGM could easily answer it especially if they are online.

If they're online, yes, hopefully they get some time to respond. I think it's more of a concern if there are days between responses without any heads up. If they're online and active on discord, then it's expected they answer. I hope that no one gets ignored, and if there is intentional avoidance of a player, it's another situation to alert commies of. I don't think any M GM or AGM would do it intentionally though (hopefully)!

 

12 minutes ago, Horcrux said:

i wanna thank you for your thorough and Honest, polite response 

[Beaviss 4,949]

Getting in early with this

[BarzalGoat 728]

This is amazing critique to get and I love when new members come in with great perspectives we didn't have previously. I was a VHLM GM during the first "great growth" period 3 years ago, before we even HAD discord, and again today. Seeing someone who joined a week ago write a double media spot on why the VHLM sucks is actually great, and I know I have been pushing for changes pretty much since I was given this position. 

 

The problem with activity in the discords is that we are all real people with real lives on the outside, and it's difficult for us to be around 24/7 to answer questions. If I get a discord ping or a mention I'm almost always there within minutes, but in general I only periodically check the discord maybe a dozen times a day. I have no answers, only perspective and more questions, I just wanted to say I love and support your cause.

[Dom 1,440]

Without calling out any name, there is curently teams that offered to under 5 waivers during the whole season and all of them are recreates. Bottom and top teams…

Edited October 28, 2021 by Domg5

[Spartan 3,993]

4 minutes ago, Domg5 said:

Without calling out any name, there is curently teams that offered to under 5 waivers during the whole season and all of them are recreates. Bottom and top teams…

There have been penalties levvied before for teams not properly pitching waivers. I fully hope, and expect to see punishments this offseason as well.

[Alex 2,869]

16 minutes ago, Spartan said:

No worries, I see what you mean as well now. There have been a lot of discussions on how to fix the issue with draft picks. Some teams have like 2 picks in the 4th and 5th round, while other teams have like 6 picks in the first 2 rounds. There's even been some circumventing of 1st and 2nd round pick limits that commissioners need to fix. Yukon and Houston are two teams that have taken advantage of the loophole brilliantly in the past few seasons. It does need to get fixed. To prevent teams from being so disproportionately loaded, draft pick trading needs to be severely limited. I don't have a proposed solution, but I know any solution will have to involve limiting how many picks can be traded. 

I do think that this hits the right note with draft pick trading. My personal opinion is that removing draft pick trading could be a step to far. However, there should be some stricter limitations on the draft picks you can have.

Ie: decreasing the number of firsts a team can have to 2 or set a cap of the number of first round picks on a roster from the previous draft.

 

Also to help with keeping things competitive setting a minimum number of draft picks could go a long way (4 in the first 5 rounds).

[Beaviss 4,949]

Limit draft pick trading to singular seasons (avoids ruining teams for multiple seasons) and promotes less boom bust tactics.

[Horcrux 322]

2 minutes ago, Beaviss said:

Limit draft pick trading to singular seasons (avoids ruining teams for multiple seasons) and promotes less boom bust tactics.

This

[BarzalGoat 728]

8 minutes ago, Horcrux said:

This

The onlyyyyyy problem if and only if this is the only change made is that we're going to end up with 12 boring discords instead of 6 interesting discords and 6 boring discords. UNLESS your strategy makes retention more effective, but in my experience players are already gone once they sign their first contract. I have had new players sign a contract and not accept a discord invite or ever claim TPE.... but they could be the outliers ? 

 

edit:
So the reason the 12 boring discords is because i'd imagine there would be about 6 players on every team and then of those 6 like 2-3 are active enough on discord

Edited October 28, 2021 by BarzalGoat
FOR CLARITY

[Horcrux 322]

3 minutes ago, BarzalGoat said:

The onlyyyyyy problem if and only if this is the only change made is that we're going to end up with 12 boring discords instead of 6 interesting discords and 6 boring discords. UNLESS your strategy makes retention more effective, but in my experience players are already gone once they sign their first contract. I have had new players sign a contract and not accept a discord invite or ever claim TPE.... but they could be the outliers ? 

 

edit:
So the reason the 12 boring discords is because i'd imagine there would be about 6 players on every team and then of those 6 like 2-3 are active enough on discord

have you reached out to them on the site DMs? some people may not like discord. 

also you would get more players from waivers so it wouldnt be fully bad

[Garsh 1,079]

One thing that I think is a problem in the M that is directly related to what you are talking about is that the stated purpose/goal of the M and the reason the MGMs are GMing the teams are somewhat in conflict with each other.  The goal of the M is more or less to help new people get acclimated to the league and hopefully help keep them interested while they get going (retention).  The reason I think most of the MGMs are GMing the teams is because they ultimately want to to be a VHL GM.  In theory, one of the ways to prove that you would be good GM material is to win in the M.  Now whether or not the Commissioners actually take that into account is another thing, (I have no idea what they base their decisions on).  I have certainly seen people cite winning in the M as a reason they should get a GM spot though.  That would mean doing some boom or bust or not offering to creates once your team hits a certain composition level, or other such tactics to get ahead.    I know rules have been made to try stop these things, and hopefully iterations can continue to happen to prevent situations where teams only end up with a few people.

 

To be clear, I don't think MGMs are not trying to accomplish the helping/retention goal, I have had great experiences in the M locker rooms I have been in.  But I think not everyone who would make a good VHL GM because they could manage a team well are going to be good candidate for MGMing.  If most GMs are only looking at the M as a stepping stone, I think we will always have issues.

 

[samx 1,095]

25 minutes ago, BarzalGoat said:

The onlyyyyyy problem if and only if this is the only change made is that we're going to end up with 12 boring discords instead of 6 interesting discords and 6 boring discords. UNLESS your strategy makes retention more effective, but in my experience players are already gone once they sign their first contract. I have had new players sign a contract and not accept a discord invite or ever claim TPE.... but they could be the outliers ? 

 

edit:
So the reason the 12 boring discords is because i'd imagine there would be about 6 players on every team and then of those 6 like 2-3 are active enough on discord

I think you may have just gotten outliers because out of the 14 waivers I got this season only one has gone IA and only 1or 2 haven't joined discord.

[Beaviss 4,949]

2 minutes ago, Garsh said:

Now whether or not the Commissioners actually take that into account is another thing

 

I can assure you that when I was with the commishes that VHLM winning record had less than zero impact.

[BarzalGoat 728]

58 minutes ago, Horcrux said:

have you reached out to them on the site DMs? some people may not like discord. 

also you would get more players from waivers so it wouldnt be fully bad

yeah every player i sign i give a forum message to with a discord invite and an invitation to talk.  I'd say it goes unanswered almost always and the discord link gets clicked 75% of the time. I got like 8-10 waiver players this year so it's not a small sample size

[Spartan 3,993]

1 hour ago, BarzalGoat said:

The onlyyyyyy problem if and only if this is the only change made is that we're going to end up with 12 boring discords instead of 6 interesting discords and 6 boring discords. UNLESS your strategy makes retention more effective, but in my experience players are already gone once they sign their first contract. I have had new players sign a contract and not accept a discord invite or ever claim TPE.... but they could be the outliers ? 

 

edit:
So the reason the 12 boring discords is because i'd imagine there would be about 6 players on every team and then of those 6 like 2-3 are active enough on discord

Not contesting, providing numbers because I was curious about how teams would look this season if players were evenly distributed by position.

 

2.25 C

6.25 W

3.5 D

1.6 G

 

All on a per team basis, so about 8 forwards, 3 or 4 defensemen, 1 goalie. Obviously TPE makes it look a lot different, but the roster sizes are pretty decent. 12-13 players per team.