Ideas for Madden 12

Alright guys I made a lot of progress on the website yesterday...still a ways to go but I wanted to hit you guys up and see what kind of ideas you had for Madden 12. This could be features on the website or rules or anything else. Here's a sneak peek at the website right now: www.theuflonline.com/ufl3.php

Check it out and let me know what you guys are thinking!! We're getting close to game time!!

- Commish Sway

One idea that I was thinking of was having a trade committee to vote on trades.

For example:

Say we have three owners (active veterans) who vote to approve trades. 2 votes would mean the trade was approved. This would take some pressure of Sway to be constantly approving trades in the offseason.

Just a thought.

Nice job Sway - love the owners section, with history, awards, etc. SICK!

The voting should be three out of a committee of five...

So if a trade gets one vote no, one vote yes, there should be a tie breaker...

More eyes looking at the deal and this would curve the fantasy football trades more...

fresh

Looks real good so far ... I like that idea Jack.

Site looks GREAT. This isn't a new a idea just one I'd like to bring back up the matter of owners ranking like...


Platinum

Gold

Silver

Bronze

Copper

I think the rankings should change every season depending on Activeness, and content. Each ranking would give the ability to do other things like lets say Copper owners can't trade but once you become a Bronze owner you get 1 trade Silver gets two gold 3 Platinum 4. Another example, would be trading draft picks and like Jack's idea maybe only Platinum owners can be on the trade committee. A suggestion would be if you move down in rank you lose your spot on the trade committee.

This will promote activeness from everybody. Active vets will want to retain there rank, up and coming owners will be motivated to do content so they will have the ability to make more moves in the off season. Limitations will obviously be put on all trades and they can be denied but just using rankings as a motivational tool I find a great idea.

I think Jersey has some very good ideas here. I also like idea of a commitee for trade approval, 5 members would be good. I had written a list of a couple of things I wanted to suggest, I'll post it up when I get home tomorrow.

And wonderful work on the website Sway! I really, really like the owners section. I think it is well arranged and has all the info needed. Good work man!

When I first started in this league and people proposed limiting noobs ability to trade, i thought is was a bad idea. Having gone through two and a half seasons in the UFL, I understand the point. Noobs come and noobs go, not everyone is as active or as in to the league as I am. I'm still not a big fan of it as some new owners that will be active may be turned off from the different treatment. If the point is to eliminate franchise player trades, then I say we go with Sways suggestion of not allowing franchise players to be traded. This would allow the integrity of the team to be maintained if someone quits or gets booted. The other option is the trade tribunal that was suggested above. As long as it doesn't take an excessive amount of time for a ruling, then it would work as well.

There is my 2 cents.

The idea of having tiered rankings for trades I think is not a good one. Every team in the league should have the same amount trades...It wouldnt be fair to allow trades for one team and not allow for another.

The problem isnt amount of trades, the problem is the trades that are being approved. The history of teams being gutted needs to stop and a committee would help that to a point. Having a list of franchise players per team preferably one on each side of the ball would help teams from being gutted their top players. Limiting the amount of trade pieces per trade would help. So there shouldnt be any 4 pieces for 5 pieces trades. Lastly, 1st rd rookies shouldnt be allowed to be trade until their 3rd offseason..

Again, you say a Trade committee can solve the problem.. I personally have been in leagues with trade committees and u can ask PR n Wright it can take FOREVER to get people to post where they approve or not. ( which can be HELL trying to move picks before the draft ) So it becomes a man hunt once you post a trade people go hunting for the committee which becomes crazy and sway alone much respect to him he gets it approved or denied with in a day but now add lets say 4 other guys with there own lives. Not saying it won't work** Just saying you need the RIGHT people and we all have to come in understanding this will slow down down off season.

Agree with the trade planning committee.

I to have been involved with a league that implemented a trade committee and it worked. The only issue was when a trade was denied, there would be an uproar of why it was vetoed.. If a trade cant get three people out of five to approve, it probably isnt a fair/legit trade...

As far as tracking down people to approve or not approve, I think we know which owners have been continuously active over the past two years of madden and those owners will likely get a nod as a committee member. So having a non-active committee member i think is not an issue and at some point a member needs to be replaced, that shouldnt be a problem either...

I think Jack can't be more right. It's not the amount of trade but it's the trades itself getting approved. Franchisr players would probably work in that case. And as Jack said, people forming the trade commitee would need to be choose wisely to make sure the process goes smoothly.

Not against a trade committee, we kind of already have one though with me, gcg, and frank. We don't vote on the trades but if it seems questionable we consult with each other before coming to a decision. I think for the most part the only "wild" trades of the past two years have been trades between veteran owners. Most of them would've been null and void with the new "untouchable" system we're going with.

A committee would require votes.

I think the thing you have with GCG and Frank is just an understanding, but not required. Im assuming there were some trades that one ore the other did not see which was approved based on the "they will think it is fair" assumption..

I'm digging the new site for sure! It looks good and organized. I also like the new owners page... a nice touch!