On 2025-02-07 14:48, milivella wrote:

[The rules of this thread are simple: write what you want, reply if you
want, ignore if you have to.]

---

Justin Kluivert, my *worst* 5th cycle pick, just won the Premier League Player of the Month Award after scoring 5 goals and getting 2 assists in
4 matches in January.

How is he your worst pick if over half of the 20 have zero points so far ?

And yet I have 0% chances of even getting into the podium. I. Don't. Understand.

--
Cheers
milivella

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 2025-02-13 01:10, milivella wrote:

MH:

On 2025-02-07 14:48, milivella wrote:

[The rules of this thread are simple: write what you want, reply if you
want, ignore if you have to.]

---

Justin Kluivert, my *worst* 5th cycle pick, just won the Premier
League Player of the Month Award after scoring 5 goals and getting 2
assists in 4 matches in January.

How is he your worst pick if over half of the 20 have zero points so
far ?

Because all of them would deserve even more points than Kluivert (who deserves roughly 54 points by my calculations).

How would people feel about a rule that increases the cost of a player
by another 20 points if he never earns a cap in his career ?

Duh.

--
Cheers
milivella

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Thu, 13 Feb 2025 16:00:25 +0000, MH wrote:

How would people feel about a rule that increases the cost of a player
by another 20 points if he never earns a cap in his career ?

Hmm... that would give a strong incentive to pick players who are on the
verge of their first international call-up, at the expense of promising teenagers who are still a few years away from the NT. This strategy has
worked well for some of us, but I'm not sure everyone would like it.

On the other hand, it it ends up hurting milivella's score I'm in favor
of applying it retroactively!

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)