Skip to main content
Topic: 2024 Rule Changes (Read 502 times) previous topic - next topic

2024 Rule Changes

We're getting really close to finalizing rule changes for 2024. I don't believe you're going to notice any drastic changes, which is a good thing! Everyone knows by now I hate Arbitration with a passion. But passion doesn't equate to having a good plan for replacing it, so we've decided to table that discussion for at least another year.

In the meantime I do want to run something past the league as a whole.

Historically MSB has operated with a format of 4 divisions, 2 conferences. After expansion we tried to geolocate the divisions to try to build some natural rivalries, but that didn't turn out the way we hoped. For one - for me personally I don't have any geological partners since I live in SoDak :) And after a few teams have come and gone the whole geolocation kind of went out the window anyway. But for multiple years in a row there was a team in the Frick who ended up with a very good record but missed out on the playoffs since they just happened to be in a stacked division. The first couple years this happened we thought it would be cyclical or it was a fluke. But it seemed to happen year after year. So we made the decision to scrap the divisions and just go with 2 conferences. This isn't 'breaking news' for people who have been around awhile!

However, it happened again. This past year the teams with the 5th and 7th best overall records were again ineligible for the playoffs.

So the question is - are we ok with that? Should the playoffs be about representation of the best teams or the best teams respective to their conference? I have no illusion of grandeur, my Dogs were not better than any of the teams that qualified for the playoffs. Especially after my deadline deals! But you can make a very good argument that with the 5th best overall record at the time of the trades I should have been a buyer, not a seller.

Also of extreme note - last season had the playoffs been seeded by overall record, not records within the conference, our eventual World Series winner (shout out Brian and his Rougarou) would actually not have qualified for the post-season. So a very good counter argument can be that regular season records are not always a predictor of playoff success.

Long story short:
There are 3 ways we can approach this "problem".

Option 1 - this isn't a problem and make no change.
Option 2 - ditch the conferences, make one giant conference with a 152 game balanced schedule (4 game home and away series vs every other team) with the top 8 teams advancing to the playoffs
Option 3 - go back to 5 team divisions and not worry about geolocating the teams to try to balance the divisions.

All of these options have some pros and cons. Option 3 is most like MLB, but no matter how we structure the divisions it's really hard to account for the swings in standings. It wasn't that long ago that the Bums were, well bums. But through some shrewd trades and good drafting they have been a perennial playoff team the past couple years. Option 2 is the most "democratic" but would be the biggest deviation from real-life.

So what does the league want to do? Please chime in.
Rod
Scurvy Dogs

Re: 2024 Rule Changes

Reply #1
Hello folks

Keep things the same (preferred) or go to one mega conference with all 20 teams.    No micro divisions like actual NFL or MLB has.   In fact can I cast a negative vote against that option ?      Four or five team divisions will lead to a much higher possibility of a losing record team making the playoffs.   Then commish Goodell or Manfred stand there at the podium with their mouth's hanging open catching flies wondering what happened.  
Bob Miller
The Great Auk

Re: 2024 Rule Changes

Reply #2
I have not voted yet - I have no problem with the current format, and I can easily live with any of the proposed alternatives. SO - my proposal to the COs is this: I will vote for whichever format YOU direct, IF you will fix the #@!% forum!! It took me half an hour just to log on and and find out how to post his msg. There is no way in hell I can actually participate and manage a team with it like this. I would prefer that we make this the #1 priority, and THEN it will be so much easier to plan for any needed changes. I don't know how widespread this problem with the site is - but for me it is nearly fatal to my enjoyment of MSB.
bob h - Robots

Re: 2024 Rule Changes

Reply #3
I made the switch to firefox (thanks whoever told me) and no longer have an issue with the forum. You may want to consider that for now.
Craig
Ann Arbor Landlubbers

Re: 2024 Rule Changes

Reply #4
It was weird.
I sent the email, closed my browser (Edge), logged back in, and everything was totally fine. For me.

But David is looking into this as we do admit it’s a problem.
Rod
Scurvy Dogs

Re: 2024 Rule Changes

Reply #5
It is funky for me in Chrome, Edge, and Brave, so who knows ...

I like the current format, and would be most against going to the tiny divisions. I think the fact the Rougarou snuck in and then made a run is a positive, not a negative, in that it promoted action and trades all the way to the deadline. And helped my trade partners build their squads as well. More investment = a stronger league IMO.
Brian Barnes - Rougarou

World Series Champions
MSB - 2023 (Rougarou); LOB - 2022 (Zeros); ATB - XVII (Zeros); CDBL - 2002, 2001 (Fishbiscuits); CJPL - 2017 (Zeros); NVL - 2010 (Rougarou)

Pennant Winner
ATB - XIV (Fishbiscuits); FGD NL - 2016 (Zeros), TOTBL - 2022 (Yankees)

Re: 2024 Rule Changes

Reply #6
I like the current system of two divisions top 4 in each go to the playoffs. no system is perfect but this already allows 8 teams into the playoffs and seems a good system

mark

We're getting really close to finalizing rule changes for 2024. I don't believe you're going to notice any drastic changes, which is a good thing! Everyone knows by now I hate Arbitration with a passion. But passion doesn't equate to having a good plan for replacing it, so we've decided to table that discussion for at least another year.

In the meantime I do want to run something past the league as a whole.

Historically MSB has operated with a format of 4 divisions, 2 conferences. After expansion we tried to geolocate the divisions to try to build some natural rivalries, but that didn't turn out the way we hoped. For one - for me personally I don't have any geological partners since I live in SoDak :) And after a few teams have come and gone the whole geolocation kind of went out the window anyway. But for multiple years in a row there was a team in the Frick who ended up with a very good record but missed out on the playoffs since they just happened to be in a stacked division. The first couple years this happened we thought it would be cyclical or it was a fluke. But it seemed to happen year after year. So we made the decision to scrap the divisions and just go with 2 conferences. This isn't 'breaking news' for people who have been around awhile!

However, it happened again. This past year the teams with the 5th and 7th best overall records were again ineligible for the playoffs.

So the question is - are we ok with that? Should the playoffs be about representation of the best teams or the best teams respective to their conference? I have no illusion of grandeur, my Dogs were not better than any of the teams that qualified for the playoffs. Especially after my deadline deals! But you can make a very good argument that with the 5th best overall record at the time of the trades I should have been a buyer, not a seller.

Also of extreme note - last season had the playoffs been seeded by overall record, not records within the conference, our eventual World Series winner (shout out Brian and his Rougarou) would actually not have qualified for the post-season. So a very good counter argument can be that regular season records are not always a predictor of playoff success.

Long story short:
There are 3 ways we can approach this "problem".

Option 1 - this isn't a problem and make no change.
Option 2 - ditch the conferences, make one giant conference with a 152 game balanced schedule (4 game home and away series vs every other team) with the top 8 teams advancing to the playoffs
Option 3 - go back to 5 team divisions and not worry about geolocating the teams to try to balance the divisions.

All of these options have some pros and cons. Option 3 is most like MLB, but no matter how we structure the divisions it's really hard to account for the swings in standings. It wasn't that long ago that the Bums were, well bums. But through some shrewd trades and good drafting they have been a perennial playoff team the past couple years. Option 2 is the most "democratic" but would be the biggest deviation from real-life.

So what does the league want to do? Please chime in.

Re: 2024 Rule Changes

Reply #7
I'd be 100%  in favor of option 1, IF we could go to a fully balanced schedule. 8 games against every team. 152-game schedule. PTL set at 100%.

I voted for option 1, but I think that adjustment would be even better.
Kyle - 2008, 2015, 2019 MSB Champion

Re: 2024 Rule Changes

Reply #8
By the way, I just now had the same experience Bob did, and I'm on Safari. I'm not piling on - I know this is time consuming. But we're gonna lose guys if we don't get the forum in top shape. Just the forum. Maybe we can host the stats somewhere else? A good forum shouldn't be too hard to find. Then it takes the work to create the sub-forums. I'm happy to help.
Kyle - 2008, 2015, 2019 MSB Champion

Re: 2024 Rule Changes

Reply #9
I'm for the current system. I understand the idea that the 5th and 7th best records not getting into the playoffs while weaker teams did seems a bit unfair, but we've seen similar things in baseball in the past  (NL West in 1993, the Cardinals not even making the playoffs in the 1981 split-season even though they had the best record in baseball). I'll admit that I don't have a strong opinion on this, but I think the current system is the right balance for the league.
Jason
Ankeny ACLs

"I'm pissed off now, Jobu. Look, I go to you. I stick up for you. You no help me now. I say 'F#@& you Jobu', I do it myself."
-Pedro Cerrano, Major League

Re: 2024 Rule Changes

Reply #10
By the way, I just now had the same experience Bob did, and I'm on Safari. I'm not piling on - I know this is time consuming. But we're gonna lose guys if we don't get the forum in top shape. Just the forum. Maybe we can host the stats somewhere else? A good forum shouldn't be too hard to find. Then it takes the work to create the sub-forums. I'm happy to help.

What do I do with the historical data then?  Just leave it on a separate forum structure?  From what I can tell,  it's not easy to migrate that part of our forum.

I've also tried a couple times to address the forums.  We are currently running 1.1.9 which is the most recent version of ElkArte and when I run the troubleshooter, it identifies no errors.  I believe the issue has to do with https but when I tried updating that with GoDaddy, it killed the forums last year.  I can try again, but it's likely to have the same problem (and I then have to pay for https again).

Also, next time it happens, can you take a screenshot including your URL bar?  I want to see whether you've been forced to an https version of our site or are on http.  The former always causes problems; the latter does not seem to.
David
Phoenix Miners

Re: 2024 Rule Changes

Reply #11
I use chrome and have the issue most times I go to the site. Removing the s temporarily works for me.
Matt
Mother Lode Argonauts

Re: 2024 Rule Changes

Reply #12
By the way, I just now had the same experience Bob did, and I'm on Safari. I'm not piling on - I know this is time consuming. But we're gonna lose guys if we don't get the forum in top shape. Just the forum. Maybe we can host the stats somewhere else? A good forum shouldn't be too hard to find. Then it takes the work to create the sub-forums. I'm happy to help.

What do I do with the historical data then?  Just leave it on a separate forum structure?  From what I can tell,  it's not easy to migrate that part of our forum.

I've also tried a couple times to address the forums.  We are currently running 1.1.9 which is the most recent version of ElkArte and when I run the troubleshooter, it identifies no errors.  I believe the issue has to do with https but when I tried updating that with GoDaddy, it killed the forums last year.  I can try again, but it's likely to have the same problem (and I then have to pay for https again).

Also, next time it happens, can you take a screenshot including your URL bar?  I want to see whether you've been forced to an https version of our site or are on http.  The former always causes problems; the latter does not seem to.
It's actually working perfectly right now, on Chrome. Hasn't worked for me since around September. I'll let you know if it wigs out again.
Kyle - 2008, 2015, 2019 MSB Champion

Re: 2024 Rule Changes

Reply #13
I'd be 100%  in favor of option 1, IF we could go to a fully balanced schedule. 8 games against every team. 152-game schedule. PTL set at 100%.

I voted for option 1, but I think that adjustment would be even better.

Actually Kyle that was exactly the proposal on the table.
4-game home and away schedule (completely balanced) vs the other 19 teams. We would have reduced PTL to 100% across the board (due to less games played) but compensated for real-life injuries and such by expanding rosters to 45 players.

I intentionally didn't bring that up though as I wanted the voting to be about the format of the league, not the rule changes afterwards to accommodate. But your post is EXACTLY what would have happened. And for the record, it might still happen in the future. But based on the league response we'll see how this season plays out and go from there.
Rod
Scurvy Dogs

Re: 2024 Rule Changes

Reply #14
Cool. I don’t dig the injury part (not a surprise to you, as we’ve discussed that), but love the rest.
Kyle - 2008, 2015, 2019 MSB Champion