Should we expand U21 beyond 32?

[Zooka7]

On a separate note, Z are we looking for 2 additional owners to expand?

[BLAUGRANA]

Regarding expansion, despite my post above, let me just be clear that a small expansion of even one spot would be welcome by me. That said, I think we’re at an impasse and with free agency about to start some here might want and definitely deserve a breather. Perhaps ironing out some specifics as to what expansion might look like prior to polling would make more sense in a year. Anyway, I appreciate the discussion and Z’s willingness to take this under consideration.

15866 wrote:

As a reminder, a 3/4ths majority is needed for polled rule changes. That means no more than 4 against. We are now at 4 against.

What I’ll say is this.

We’ve talked about it and debated the pros and cons before.

We are currently maybe 10 days from the opening of free agency. And I know that all of us have a list of players we are after, as we do virtually every free agent window. For every roster spot you add beyond 32 and think may add something of value down the road, just add 13 more because for every 1 for you there’s 13 for everyone else. Go ahead and slash potentially 14 guys from your list right now. And re-think the free agency window in potentially 10 days. If we add 2 U21 players, then do the same with 28 players.

I think there’s a misconception that more bids and more spots means fewer targets missed. I know that some of you have been scarred by missing out on players you really wanted. I’m also saying that about myself, haha. I swear the last two things Luigi did here was outbid me for Fabio Miretti and Giorgio Scalvini. But I don’t think just having the spots available means that you’d miss fewer targets. I think the more spots available to fill and the higher the roster number, period, will mean you’ll miss more targets, not less. That’s my opinion but that’s how I see it, always looking at the bigger picture here.

And don’t get me wrong, I often pine to Xavi over text about how I wished that I had 1 or 2 more spots on my U21 team. I do because I scout that much and watch that much footy and read about it and study it and obsess about it like the majority of you. But it would come at a high cost, frankly. And some of us that have been doing it a while are notably (see above) against expanding for that reason and others.

I appreciate the fervor everyone has for collecting players and assembling teams. I think the lack of additional spaces makes the decisions harder, which is a positive of the league’s. And I think it creates a healthy free agent market at Senior and Youth levels, which create exciting transfer windows, which is another positive for the league.

And I ultimately don’t think waiting on or potentially missing on a 16 year old is worth jeopardizing that by expanding any more. In fact, if we found 2 additional owners to expand to 16 teams, I would strongly recommend downsizing rosters at U21 at least back to 30, if not smaller. And the same with Senior teams. Wouldn’t that be a bitch.

OK fine. So will you trade me Szoboszlai then? Actually forget it. I can’t be bothered to look that up every time I have to spell it out.

In all seriousness, what I find troubling about this post is that Xavi has your phone number.

[BLAUGRANA]

Zooka7 wrote:

On a separate note, Z are we looking for 2 additional owners to expand?

LOL. Just imagine the rules we’d need for an expansion draft. Besides mate, I think you have enough trade partners already. 😉

[Zizou]

BLAUGRANA wrote:

In all seriousness, what I find troubling about this post is that Xavi has your phone number.

He’s not the only one that does but he used it last night to call me and we talked about some of you clowns extensively. 😉

Zooka7 wrote:

On a separate note, Z are we looking for 2 additional owners to expand?

We’re not “looking” but it is something we can take up if we had them ready, willing and committed. I know some GMs know of interested parties on the off-chance that someone wraps their time here, but there’s a difference between having that and having someone that is 100%. So, if we had two 100%s ready to go, yeah, I’d consider it, for sure. But believe me, this would lead to an expansion draft in which all of you would not be able to protect your full roster, as well as a decrease in U21 roster size, and potentially Sr. team roster sizes, too.

BLAUGRANA wrote:

Zooka7 wrote:

On a separate note, Z are we looking for 2 additional owners to expand?

LOL. Just imagine the rules we’d need for an expansion draft. Besides mate, I think you have enough trade partners already. 😉

Ok I laughed.

[james]

Zizou wrote:

BLAUGRANA wrote:

In all seriousness, what I find troubling about this post is that Xavi has your phone number.

He’s not the only one that does but he used it last night to call me and we talked about some of you clowns extensively. 😉{quote}

I was wondering why my ears were burning.

[james]

I used to always be in favor of roster expansions because it was so hard to make decisions regarding rosters. fwiw, I voted no because the current limits force me to make decisions as a real world owner/gm/manager might (well, sort of). Also, we already have enough players who never even see the bench. no need to add more.

the expansion of rosters is recent, I don’t see the need to make a change so soon after.

[Kawai]

Yeah what James said

[Zooka7]

After the perspective shared by Z and Gooner im actually in agreement that we should keep it the same

And regarding new owners, I’m just looking for more people to enrich with self-sabotaging trades rooted in addiction

[evilo]

About the supermajority, regardless of this discussion, as I said I feel it is not fair (obviously no question about well intentioned).
You can’t have 4 GMs blocking 12 GMs.

Anyway thing Is settled.

[Zizou]

evilo wrote:

About the supermajority, regardless of this discussion, as I said I feel it is not fair (obviously no question about well intentioned).
You can’t have 4 GMs blocking 12 GMs.

Anyway thing Is settled.

As a correction, a 12-4 vote would be approved, not blocked. And 12-4 is far from the vote split here.

While I appreciate your perspective on majority vs supermajority, it is not really the main obstacle to U21 roster expansion as currently, the vote is 4 in favor and 7 against. Xavi is busy on Spring Break but the last time he voted, his vote was also against, which would give no the majority unless he’s changed his mind. So, IMO unless GMs changed their minds in favor, the topic of U21 roster expansion would die on the vine with less than 50% support.

[Xavi4life]

Just to confirm, “NAY”. Sorry, Evilo, I get it, but I think we’re good as we are. I’m going to have to cut players I have at U21 to make room for new recruits.

[james]

There’s only 14 of us. 12 + 4 = 16 .

[Zizou]

james wrote:

There’s only 14 of us. 12 + 4 = 16 .

That’s what I get for responding early in the morning.

Don’t mind me, just fantasizing about 16 GMs & even smaller roster sizes.

[BLAUGRANA]

I would say that if expansion is an idea that’s being floated it should require some serious thought as to how that would work. The overall concept is easy to imagine, but the details are where it would get tricky. And with 3 new GMs in the span of 2 years I would think it’s not something that should be taken lightly.

Also, while I wouldn’t mind a few extra roster spaces, again, I’m fine with where we’re at. However, consider me dead set against any sort of roster reduction. Current Prem and Ch roster limits are in line with real life and to the current only slightly expanded U21 roster given what it represents and in a league such as ours isn’t too much to ask for.

[evilo]

Zizou wrote:

evilo wrote:

About the supermajority, regardless of this discussion, as I said I feel it is not fair (obviously no question about well intentioned).
You can’t have 4 GMs blocking 12 GMs.

Anyway thing Is settled.

As a correction, a 12-4 vote would be approved, not blocked. And 12-4 is far from the vote split here.

While I appreciate your perspective on majority vs supermajority, it is not really the main obstacle to U21 roster expansion as currently, the vote is 4 in favor and 7 against. Xavi is busy on Spring Break but the last time he voted, his vote was also against, which would give no the majority unless he’s changed his mind. So, IMO unless GMs changed their minds in favor, the topic of U21 roster expansion would die on the vine with less than 50% support.

I agree it’s not the main problem, but I’m really talking about general rules going foward. No rule is going to be changed if a majority of 3/4 is asked.
Again, as I said, the U21 thing is settled. I disagree with some of the arguments, but I don’t feel like engaging in something that is not supported by many.
But the rule change of 3/4 seems completely weird to me. Why should the MAJORITY suffer the decision of the minority? Even a VAST majority.
Seems completely astouding to me.

[Author]

Posts