Candidate Questions

[hoopie44641]

Hoopie...


I understand what you're saying, but at the same time, we need to protect the league. We want GM's that take some time to know the rules and have a plan in place....

How can a gm have a plan in place when we have no idea what team we get?

I have been over the rules at least 50 times but nothing will sink in until i get to gm a team.

[Nathan S.]

Troy said he will get the teams out sometime this week, just be patient. He's got a real job as well and doesn't always have time everyday to fix around with the league.

[Shagg]

My candidate is the one who is the most active. Whoever that may be would be my choice. Hope that helps

[Strategist]

Hoopie every GM in the NFL is held to a standard. No GM can lose and lose and lose and still expect to have a job. What has been thrown around here is something that would be very achievable like an average of 5 or 6 wins a season over the span of 3 or 4 seasons. If you couldn't maintain that should you really be running a team?

[Shagg]

Hoopie every GM in the NFL is held to a standard. No GM can lose and lose and lose and still expect to have a job. What has been thrown around here is something that would be very achievable like an average of 5 or 6 wins a season over the span of 3 or 4 seasons. If you couldn't maintain that should you really be running a team?

if the person is active and making an honest effort I see no reason to dismiss them from a team. Lose a QB for a season and goodbye season. It's not easy to find a Franchise QB to keep you afloat in this league. Backup's just don't get the stats to make a difference in this league. I disagree with dumping active GM's. If they aren't active then fine.

[Goodell]

I think this thread probably has a mix of different ideas from the initial just asking for possible questions to ask new GMs then it morphing into more accountability for existing GMs perhaps.

Ideas had been discussed before about making GMs accountable. Like many things we discuss there is probably a big group on one side and a big group on the opposite. I didn't get into it too much this off-season in formal polls because my initial thinking was if we were going to introduce that at all (at least for now) it would be in the AFFL where we've tried to set that up as a place new GMs could be promoted into. So that would probably be something we'd possible first discuss amongst AFFL GMs to see how those effected would feel. As I don't see it being applied to all leagues (at least for now) wouldn't want lots of other league votes getting into something directly effecting AFFL possibly directly.

I think I mentioned within those discussions about accountability I could see it being applied to some leagues (such as AFFL for starters if most in there wanted it) but don't think it would be good overall for expansion plans or even it ended up new leagues had some kind of payment involved to start a new league. I think a hierarchy will probably develop where we have new leagues as proving grounds and for new players to jump into, and a path for the best players to move up into more exclusive leagues possibly with higher standards and "firing a GM" accountability. If the top leagues only promoted the very best, though, might not need much additional accountability if the very best players eventually landed there anyway.

Some are real high on that, others not. I'm probably not quite as high on it and more interested in expansion of lots of new players once I get more time possibly later this summer. I'm probably not as much for kicking people out entire except in cases we already do if bad behavior or inactivity and we need to have an active GM in place prior to important off-season events.

But I could see the interest in accountability and think that could even help with the realism goals, but at least for now I think we'd just explore that in one league if most of those in that league wanted it and then go from there later.

[hoopie44641]

I like that idea using Affl league to set a standard for other leagues to follow that way if all leagues are set the same then things would be a little smoother that way all leagues would be equal. they way people wont have to leave teams they worked so hard on just to go to Affl because its better.

I JUST WANT TO THANK EVERYONE FOR ALLOWING ME TO BE PART OF SOMETHING GREAT

[Jared A]

One thing I think the core GM's need to do is be ready to take teams over as expansion begins. I honestly believe (and I hope for Troy's sake) this could be a huge form of fantasy football. To the extent that he could make some money at it.

So, if he has a bunch of GM's that will manage to the best of their ability to fill spots and then give those spots up to new GM's who are willing to maybe even pay for that team... it could be great.

There's guys here that are willing to donate their time to help. We need to get to the point where if a GM has interest, he can take a team over immediately.

[dinkatoid]

I like Goddell's idea about some leagues having the ability to fire a GM, where others wouldn't. I might even take that a step farther and suggest 2 sets of leagues. One set, like we currently have, could be for learning the ropes, holding onto a team long term and building what you want.

We could then have a competitive league. For starters, make it one league. To get into this league, you have to be voted in from others in the affl/cffl type thing. This would be like real football - if you go 0-16, you are probably getting fired. If you then take over a 0-16 team, you have 3 years to get the team back to respectability (we could vote on the number of wins that requires - maybe something like you have to get to a winning season in 3 years or have to get a combined 14 wins in the 3 years) to keep the team. This would cause it to be pretty real, with injuries and failed draft picks causing gms to get fired, others to promoted in.

Once you get fired, you can just put your name back at the bottom of the list, and then some desperate team a year or two later can hire you on again. This way those who wanted to could have the high stakes game, but we all had the more casual one to fall back to if we got fired.

[Ben C.]

I prefer to have the AFFL be the "competitive league" with the possibility of being removed for poor performance. But we need to have a simple and objective system for people to be evaluated under. The idea I've floated in the past is a requirement of at least 10 wins over 3 seasons - so a GM must beat an average of 3.33 wins a year. This would keep most people in the league and only eliminate the worst of the worst - probably only those that are legitimately bad instead of just unlucky.

I envision the CFFL, DFFL, and future leagues becoming a proving ground where GMs can practice their skills. I also would like some of those GMs to take on scouting roles or assistant GM roles with teams in the AFFL. People with scouting experience in the AFFL and experience as a GM in the "minor" leagues would be first in line to be hired as new GMs in the AFFL when openings come up.

Summary: make the AFFL like the NFL with performance requirements and multi-person front offices.