Cricket Web

Cricket Web (http://www.cricketweb.net/forum/)
-   Cricket Web XI Football (http://www.cricketweb.net/forum/cricket-web-xi-football/)
-   -   Should a CW Team be Folded? (http://www.cricketweb.net/forum/cricket-web-xi-football/33667-should-cw-team-folded.html)

Goughy 12-12-2007 02:48 AM

Should a CW Team be Folded?
 
With the pre-season coming up and the draft approaching there is one important question to address.

Should a team be folded and their players distributed across the other 5 teams? That way there are more CW players on each team rather than being spread thin.

The league will consist of 6 teams this season.

After voting please post and choose one of the following options

a) 6 CW Teams as is the current situation

b) 5 CW Teams and a 6th team made up of out of work foreign players added (Nixontown Nomads)

c) 5 CW Teams and an invitational team from another country and league added. Team to change every season.

speirz 12-12-2007 02:55 AM

I'd lock in c).

chaminda_00 12-12-2007 02:59 AM

How many CW players do we have ATM signed in including rookies.

Goughy 12-12-2007 03:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chaminda_00 (Post 1412601)
How many CW players do we have ATM signed in including rookies.


Power (8)
Xavier Rose
Blake Donald
Paddy Gundry
M Reddlapalli
T_Loganathan
David Comley
Travis Demeza
Thamba Mamesh

Fury (5)
David Kearsley
Chris Dwyer
Kingsley Clapham
Ryan Dunn
D Speirs

Dynamo (5)
DK Rai
R Malone
E McNamara
James Malthus
Gaurav Nayak

Stallions (6)
Kyle Wright
Jack McNamara
Daniel Towns
Kexing Su
Rhys Williams
Chaulk

Swell (8)
Kev Gough
Håkon Mørk (new Swell Captain)
Neil Pickup
Liam Camps.
Matt Luff
S Jasotharan
M Hutchinson
Manan Shah

United (9)
G Sriram
Greg Thomas
Dan Smith
DY Dubb-Lynch
ZJ Ritchie
ZE Gelman
Tarick Weber
Dylan Jellett
Mat Mitchell

Rookies (10)
Name: James Griffen
Forum Name: JDenly

Name: Robert Newbery
Forum Name: Olwe

Name: Chris Raftery
Forum Name: cpr

Name: Heath Davis
Forum Name: HeathDavisSpeed

Name:Stephen Young
Forum Name:headhunter

Name: David Pares
Forum Name: davidpares

Name: George Pardoe
Forum Name: 1-9-7-7

Name: Rich Hingston
Forum Name: Langeveldt

Name: Sam C Morris
Forum Name: PhoenixFire

Name: Matt Pitt
Forum Name: Barney Rubble

chaminda_00 12-12-2007 04:33 AM

51 players in total, if all rookies come back isn't that bad. Most likely a couple rookie wont return, but I can see a few guys returning as we get closer. Mind you six teams likes get pretty boring pretty quickly and maybe a option is to bring in a couple sides from other leagues or a couple full overseas sides.

Goughy 12-12-2007 04:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chaminda_00 (Post 1412696)
51 players in total, if all rookies come back isn't that bad. Most likely a couple rookie wont return, but I can see a few guys returning as we get closer. Mind you six teams likes get pretty boring pretty quickly and maybe a option is to bring in a couple sides from other leagues or a couple full overseas sides.

For this season, at least, there will be only 6 teams.

Its been a while since Season 1 so I feel its important to keep things moderately concise and build a foundation that can be expanded upon in the future.

dontcloseyoureyes 12-12-2007 05:26 AM

I think we all know my opinion on this, but for those who haven't heard it, yes, we should fold a team. There's nothing saying we can't re-instate them if this thing takes off properly but if we fold a team, (which, I actually don't know).

Stallions were my first choice but the Dynamo seem to be struggling for numbers (I know the Fury are as well, but you can't fold the champions) so that could be an option. Condensing the player base together into 5 CW teams helps with team spirit and gives teams a stronger long-term CW members player base, which is generally the strength of all the clubs.

If we do fold a team I'm going for option B, feel it gives us a team that will compete but not thrash us ala. Masters XI in CWXI.

Johnners 12-12-2007 06:29 AM

Option B

headhunter 12-12-2007 10:22 AM

Option B

Samuel_Vimes 12-12-2007 10:32 AM

Option b. I initially favoured option c, but inviting one team is just not realistic.

Johnners 12-12-2007 05:18 PM

In the event of 1 CW team being folded, what would happen with the team in Questions players?

Would they be free to sign with any of the teams? Or would they be allocated teams?

oz_fan 13-12-2007 02:29 AM

At this stage yes as we simply don't have the player numbers to maintain 6 CW teams. Always the option of expanding as more people join but 5 CW teams is the way to go at the moment. For a 6th team I'd prefer option C.

Johnners 13-12-2007 03:02 AM

Merging 2 teams could also be an option instead of totally scrapping 1...?

Mister Wright 13-12-2007 07:24 AM

Yeah, like the idea of a merger.

chaminda_00 13-12-2007 09:56 PM

I don't like the idea of mergering teams. I reckon teams who have done the right thing and kept their players, should have the option of signing players from the expanded team. I much rather sign someone who has shown loyalty and stayed around then taking a gamble on rookies, who may or may not hang around.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:24 AM.

Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
Copyright ©2001 - 2011, Cricket Web