AFL Fantasy 2013 Rule Changes Review


We’ve seen some big changes to AFL Dream Team this year. From two trades per week to a new bye set up with a new team structure, we’re playing a different game. Here’s your chance to have a say on the changes. What has worked, what hasn’t… what would you like to see in the future. Get yourself involved in the polls and discussion in the comments.


The most controversial change has been doing away with limited trades and opening it up to two per week, every week. With 44 trades available to us this year, do you think it has been a success? Have you enjoyed the new strategy it brings? Were you a hater and swung around or were you a hater and still a hater?

Are you a fan of 44 trades?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...


We haven’t heard a bad word about the new 6 defenders, 8 midfielders, 2 rucks and 6 forwards structure. It has brought a lot of different midfielders into the game. What do you think?

Has the new 6-8-2-6 structure been a winner?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...


Instead of having to try to field 22 players this year, we were able to just take our best 18 players each week of the byes. Apparently we might have two sets of these bye rounds next year. Is this a good solution? Did you cope alright with them? Maybe we need three trades per week of the bye rounds? Discuss more in the comments.

Was taking the Best 18 the right call in the bye rounds?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...


SuperCoach (and other fantasy games) are using a rolling lockout this year. Would you like AFL Fantasy Dream Team to go that way? How has your experience been with the rolling lockout?

Would you like DT to have a rolling lockout?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...


Which other games are you playing this year? Have you made a choice between some games? Do you play both DT and SC or have you chosen between the two? Discuss what you play in the comments. Make sure you choose all the games you play in the poll.

What AFL fantasy games are you playing this year?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

This post is a forum for you to air your views on AFL Fantasy and the future of Dream Team. Who knows, someone might be listening!


  • 44 trades takes away too much of the strategy involved when making a Premiership DreamTeam. Lets face it any half decent dream teamer can build a great side with two trades every week. At the moment (not meaning to sound like I’m boasting but it’s true) I have at least 23 players who have scored 100+ at different times this year, that would have been un heard of before this as you couldn’t just get every gun player you had to play smart DT. For example if Birchall, Barlow and SJ miss no worries I have Buddy, Mitchell and Terlich on my bench and if need be I can go and burn two trades and turn them into a Gibbs and Cloke (I only say Cloke because I have everyone else worth considering). In the past more strategy and consideration would be applied in this situation. As for the Analyser well that is just making it way too easy again, pay and you can cheat… Whatever happened to checking the AFL website for the ins and outs on a Friday arvo, scouring FanFooty for the break evens, or just showing some skill and doing your own research? I have also noticed many of the articles have dried up that used to appear on this awesome site, is that because of a lack of demand these types of articles? Analyser does it all for us maybe? If you ask me DT has lost a lot of its flavour. I say bring back 2007 (the year I started DT). PS also I think you guys should have a show on TV, been following you for ages and you are easily the most informative going around.

  • What about a system where you can cash in your weekly trades? $25k each…?

    • I’ve always liked the thought of the idea but $25k would be too cheap. Try more like $100-150k. Trades are very valuable!

    • great idea, but have to keep the value relative, maybe a rolling avg that is simalar to the magic number in some ways, relate it to how much cash you could make on a trade, max proj $inc = 80k make the trade 60k ???

  • …another rule idea: if you trade a player out you can’t trade them back in at a later time?

    • good idea, or maybe a time limit on how long until you can trade them back in

  • Unlimited trades each round :)

  • Playing with points structures, cash for trades, interest on cash, changing DPPs or any other gimmicky option just plain won’t happen.

    The people that profit from this game need it to be played by the masses and the majority which, as much as you might not like it, is not the people that frequent this site, it’s the other 200,000 people.

    The game needs to be simple and easy to play. My mates fall into the masses category and I can tell you they are a lot more interested this year compared to last, and will continue to be interested long after they would have burnt through their trades last year.

    I was a fan of the 24 trades as I had the self control to save 5/6 for finals, but those days are gone. I have adapted and with the new rules still outrank all my friends (298th) because the decent dreamteamers will always find a way to use their knowledge to create an edge.

    As for my preferences. I have a young family so rolling lockout is not an option. Already get into trouble enough looking at DT locked out! The frustration of having a late out will be quickly usurped by the frustration of your league opponent altering their team mid round when you are busy or unable to do the same.

    Two suggestions I will make:

    – Stated a fair bit, more than one DPP switch during a trade. Should not be hard for VS to handle.

    – If you have a player on your field that cops the green vest, you get the highest score out of that player and your selected emg on that line. To bigger points discrepancy between a rookie and a rookie who only plays a quarter.

    • Then tell me why we have gone from more than 300000 DTers down to about 230000 in the past four years? How come the other fantasy game has more than 300000 with limited trades this year. If the rule changes are good for DT it’s not showing.

      • SuperCoach has lost about 100,000 users this year.

      • My feeling is that numbers are down for a couple of reasons, and neither has to do with the quality/fun/attention-retaining of Dream Team itself.

        1. There has been an explosion in similar games this year, an explosion in prize-money for those other games and an explosion in the advertising, and thus awareness, of those other games.

        2. Those other games will pull some players away from DT/SC in the first instance. They will also stop a lot of people from creating multiple teams in DT/SC as they’ve got other platforms to spend their time on instead. We may have a lot less ‘teams’ in DT/SC this year but I’d be very interested to see if it’s actually a lot less IP addresses/people or if it’s just less teams.

        • Fair points made

          • Those are probably the main reasons, I can also only assume the drop off in interest the last 3 or 4 years is due to the players being vested rule and all the multi byes. Can be super frustrating.
            Agree with the idea that if a bench player outscores someone on field (due to vesting or injury) their score should count and the crap score dropped.

        • 100% agree.

          Also, with DT dropping approx 70K users and SC 90K users, I think people are choosing between the two games as well. But I think this could be a 50/50 split with where people are going (judging by those numbers).

  • Not sure how this could work but what about a ‘skins’ bonus point system?

    the head to head match ups on the Uniques for each team, whoever has the most h2h wins gets a bonus point? In event of a tie split the point?

    That way even if you have no hope of winning the week in your league if it is close in the skins you would still cheer on your last couple of players vs your opponents?

    could keep more people interested over the whole weekend?

  • My recommendations for next year’s AFL Dream Team:

    Add in: spoils = 2 points
    clearences = 3 points
    running bounces = 2 points
    legal shepard = 4 points
    specky mark = 5 points
    free kicks for = 3 points

    -3 trades for each bye rounds
    -more salary cap money
    -rolling lockout so that you can make any late changes to starting 22
    -A suitable amount of Blockbuster Matches for Fantasy Matchday in each round with Premiership Points played (can be twice with same team)
    -Assistant Coach for free!

    • nearly all of these suggestions are terrible, each to there own i suppose, if your that keen on it then maybe you should apply for the job at champion data cos i couldn’t be F****** scoring all that shit.

    • NO NO NO

      We dont need more money, ppl are complaining now that its to easy to build a good team

      the admin make their $$ from the ass coach setup, if you cant shell up $20 for a whole year then your not serious at winning it anyway, seriously $20 for a whole year is nothing

  • Don’t like the 44 trades. But having said that, it is now a different game so I have no worries with that. All the fantasy games are different. Personally, I now prefer SC, but I play and enjoy DT to.

  • What about two competitions. A standard Dream Team with 44 trades which keep the masses happy and a “Premium” competition that has a restriction of 24 trades. Players could enter both and have prizes for each. In theory, this would cater for everyone. Sponsors and players would both be happy.

  • Sorry Warnie – thanks for the discussion point!!

  • Personally think they should make points for clearances and spoils to reward players that work hard and currently aren’t rewarded. Might make it actually possible to select a full back who does 10 or so spoils and game and adding points for clearances would mean Ablett, Swan, Jobe etc would score heaps more and then times 2 for captains

  • If we had rolling lockout, I’d use it to the nth degree, as I do in my Ultimate Footy leagues. My concern is that it creates a bigger gap between players like me and my casual mates, who may lose interest more easily. I like Mark Mellow’s quote from above:

    “The frustration of having a late out will be quickly usurped by the frustration of your league opponent altering their team mid round when you are busy or unable to do the same.”

    44 trades – love it! Takes out frustration of injuries/suspensions quite a lot, keeps everyone involved longer. I’ll be interested if there’s still a drop off in traffic to sites like DTT, and whether it’s less than normal.

    DPP – let us have maximum subbing players around when we make a trade. If I sell Thurlow, I should be able to sub Staker from Fwd to Def, sub Dwyer from Mid to Fwd, sub Blicavs from Ruck to Mid & then buy a ruckman. One trade. Doesn’t seem to be changing the game in any way, it’s just a programming issue for VS.

    Prize-money – a lot of top players are unhappy with the weekly prizes and the eliminator prize. They’re practically nothing. Prize-money in all the betting syndicate fantasy comps is far better and in the long run it could draw institutional players away.

    • Surely the game should reward players who put more time and effort into researching fixtures/teams/matchups etc etc?

    • i totally agree that you should be able to use ANY substitution available when making a trade, brings another dimension to building your team if you can find a cash cow in a different position and be able to use that cash – that would bring some of the smarts back into it!!

  • I love the 44 trades, I’ve always been able to keep trades up the sleeve for finals but it gets boring when you’re restricting yourself and can’t trade for a week or two. This keeps the interest level at 100% every week.

    People still make different choices, some will double upgrade, double downgrade, some will miss out on the good rookies and trade in guns who turn into potatoes, some will make good choices, some will chase high scores from known duds, some will have a lot of luck or a lot of bad luck… the possibilities are enormous.
    In the past the best teams always end up much the same so the 2 trades a week makes no difference there, but there’s still a sizable variation in the rest of the 95% and now those teams are continually changing as they continue taking risks on up and comers or continue sideways trading before upgrading… they can keep doing this all year now instead of becoming ghost teams towards the end of the season.
    I have about 6 changes I want to make this week and I can only do 2. Cash limits me to upgrade/downgrade or sideways on injured or suspended types. I imagine most teams have a similar dilemma and there’s no way everyone will be making the same choices, so variation in teams grows again.

    I love the best 18 for the byes, it made them bearable. I planned to have a balance of 18 each week with not too many good players from each round missing. It didn’t pay off that great with the late withdrawals etc but I still made back a few thousand spots and sit around 2500. No chance of overall but look forward to trying for huge weekly scores as my team comes together.

    I don’t want rolling lockouts for each game. I like the field structure this year.
    I don’t play any other fantasy game.

    2 sets of byes next year would be disappointing as I’m looking forward to trading in any player from any team without concern for a future bye. But I could probably live with it if they keep the best 18 thing going. And it is a good way to jump the rankings.

  • Doing a SWOT analysis for Dream Team/AFL Fantasy is quite fun:

    Strengths: Large customer base with a lot of brand loyalty; Well known & respected brand; Direct AFL backing; Easy scoring system; Scoring system readily available in real time; Free to play; Better access to marketing/survey data due to volume of participants.

    Weaknesses: Low prize-money (exception of first prize which is solid) & lower relative % chance of winning any of it; No specific product brand backing it (aside from portions of the general AFL) (eg no betting agency, no major newspaper chain etc); casual gamer confusion during the bye rounds.

    Opportunities: Copy new formats (eg draft leagues – FT Elite is a good first step but needs a lot more flexibility like Ultimate Footy) using existing loyalty base to retain market share; Use direct AFL backing to increase market share/brand loyalty (eg new draft comps with players like Dangerfield/Jack etc in them); Make ‘AFL Fantasy/AFL Dream Team’ synonymous with AFL footy itself; Marketing opportunities related to the simple, real time scoring system.

    Threats: New competitors such as the plethora of betting agencies; new game formats created by competitors (eg draft formats like Ultimate Footy, high prize-money formats such as betting agency comps, open-ended comps like Stadium etc); TV/print/radio/online media requiring funding to advertise fantasy game points from an increasingly flooded market – no longer just giving the AFL-backed DT points for free.

  • I love the new system and the field spread, but hate the bye rounds. Why not start head to heads in round 1 and get rid of rounds 11 and 13 and just play the one bye.
    I have an idea for another side game, ‘Dreamteam Duel’. Where you can search and then send a challenge invite to any registered team in DT. Allow it to have its own match centre where you can play 1-3 head to heads from those that you challenged or challenged you. What a way to settle scores with your mates or maybe just challenge a random see if they accept.
    We should have private messaging between coaches as well.
    Also a tipping comp for another side game in DT, where you tip the games from the league your playing in.

    • I like your tipping idea. I already do a weekly preview where I tip the most closely matched up teams in my league but tipping the league matches sounds great (or maybe I just love DT too much!!!)

    • in NRL dreamteam they have a h2h bye for the biggest bye rounds (although there are 9 bye rounds in a row due to state of origin in nrl), this could work well here with no h2h but anyone going for outright win must plan accordingly for the bye rounds, keep it at 22 scorers, casual players aren’t discouraged from losing a h2h game but serious players must keep their plan in tact

  • I have only played fantasy footy footy for 3 years, have only played Dreamteam and have never been interested in super coach.
    I will never be a fan of a rolling lockout, love the fact that once lockout starts, it’s all just set and forget. Whether it’s 44 trades or 30 trades doesn’t bother me but I reckon if Dreamteam ends up becoming a weekly Rolling lockout in the future then probably would probably just not play all together…. Hate the thought of Dreamteam becoming a rolling lockout like super coach

  • I also play epl fantasy and i think a few things they have in their game could be interesting. Like this year your get your 2 trades each week but then say you really need a 3rd trade you could cop say a negative 30 points or something like that in order to get an extra trade…..not saying it would be popular but i think its something to look at, also i think the DPP needs to be adjusted so during a trade you can move these DPP players around as much as you need to make the trade, its screwed me over a few times and i don’t really understand why its like that, the plays are DPP for a reason. Rolling lockouts would take some of the fun out of the captains choice this week so personally i don’t like that idea. unless say there was a way to over ride say your captain gets injured 10 minutes in but thats a whole different story

  • why are the byes hard at all? they should be a non event. instead they’re the lynch pin of our game. its stoopid i reckon. it should be as easy to fill a team during the bye rounds as any other. and i shouldnt have to plan for it, at all, when selecting my starting team. best 18 is good best 15 would be better. or lower.
    In the AFL its a relaxing affair and in our game its a living hell.
    Jimmy Bartel went to the NBA finals for F sake! any of us had a holiday over the last three weeks? This bye monster has taken over our game.
    How many casual players just quit this past 3 weeks? after copping countless zero’s? because the bye rules are set up to make a mountain out of a mole hill?
    For those who like the edge the bye rnds give you i say bad luck. you will just have to go back to the crazy days of three years ago, pre byes, when the object of the game was to have a better team than the other guy.
    wow what a fun and much simpler game that would be. more fun than “AFL Bye Team” which is what we play now. SLAY THE BYE BEAST!!!

  • Having a rolling lockout can have only positive impacts on the game. It provides no downside at all, as players aren’t penalised/losing anything. Players that aren’t active enough to care wont make changes anyway.

    • I care, but should that mean I have to give up weekend sport and buy a smartphone to monitor for any late changes? Those who have a weekend life ARE effectively being penalised, because other people are being advantaged.

  • I was eliminated from the Eliminator in round 11 by a team that I think I would’ve destroyed most other weeks. The difference was, he had 20 players playing, I only had 18. Add to that the JJK late withdrawal and I had a donut compared to his 19. I could tell from his team that I would’ve smashed him in round 12 and 13.

    What I’m trying to say is that Eliminator should be started 3 weeks earlier (you wouldn’t need to have the strongest team yet because you’d be playing against crappy teams for the first 2-3 weeks anyway) then skip the bye rounds and commence again in round 14.

    I think it makes the teams that are still in Eliminator during the byes this year slightly weaker in the long run too because they will all have a fairly even distribution of bye players, and everyone knows that the best midfielders and defenders this year had round 13 byes. The teams that have a very even mix will have fewer of these players and will most likely be weaker for the majority of the rest of the season because of it.

  • This game will never be perfect, as there will always be people that don’t like certain aspects of it. Yet as an overall package they have done a pretty good job of covering most bases in my opinion.

    Also there were a lot of people complaining that the 44 trades would make it easier. I tend to like it, as there have been certain weeks I could have used more than 2 trades for certain weeks (injuries & suspensions). You will still make good & bad trades during the season, which I have done plenty of both. So in the end it will come down to who makes the least mistakes over the whole season.

    The bye rounds have certainly been interesting, especially if you didn’t plan a few weeks ahead & have some luck on your side as well. I was lucky enough to have at least 18 play each week, with 19 players for one week.

    Eliminator doesn’t really concern me as it is so random & something you can’t plan for. Still happy to be in it, won’t concern me much if I am eliminated.

  • I think DT has catered for everyone this season, from the casual DTer to those more serious. I believe any further rule changes such as the rolling lockout would make it too complex, which may result in a decrease in users next season. The current format is still challenging enough for the more die-hard DTers.

    One change that may make things slightly more interesting though, is selling trades for cash, as another user has suggested, or vice versa. This could mean that a player could sell a trade for $25-50k, or buy another for $50-75k.

    In addition to this, the idea suggested by another user of a 5% weekly interest on remaining salary cap could be beneficial.

    These changes would not necessarily make the competition more complex or difficult for the casual DTer, while also adding another aspect for those die-hard players.

  • My biggest frustration this season is knowing I’ll be unable to recover from a bad start. The changes this year have made it absolutely vital to nail your starting squad and if you don’t then you’re gone for the year. A lot of those 50/50 calls on Karnezis, Monfries, Moloney, Hartlett, Wright, Zorko etc became all the more important than in previous years and those who got it right will no doubt be the ones at the pointy end of the rankings.

    In years gone by we knew that we could still make up ground by saving trades but there’s no chance of making ground in the second half of the year when everyone has the same number of trades and are looking to upgrade to the same super premos. Having had such a poor start, there’s not much there to keep me interested for the 2nd half of the season knowing my ranking is now pretty much set for the rest of the year.

  • I think in summary-

    44 trades is actually turning out to be a great idea – looks like it will keep the interest up amongst most users for the whole year

    dpp – would be nice if could use more than one dpp per trade

    RLO – no. too many of us have real lives on the weekend and this would spoil it

    best 21 – means one score doesnt kill your weekend, (either that or if an emergency outscores a field player they auto sub in??)

    Please dont change the simple scoring system, it works well. (Even though i still think if you kick it out on the full it should be a -3 to go with the +3 for the kick.)

    ps when a tackler gets pinged for “in the back” do we currently give him +4 for the tackle as well as -3 for the free against?

    all in all its pretty damn good and lets not change too much

    • Think you have summed up the majority of peoples thoughts.

      One that i dont agree with is the “if an emergency outscores a field player they auto sub in”. This would just force us to have extra premiums on every single line.

      I mentioned earlier about the emergency replacing a Green Vested player if the emergency scores more. I would leave it as that. Low scores from injuries, Red Vests and general birchallness stands.

      Of course the top 21 out or 22 players some people have suggested also takes care of the Green Vest problem (unless there are multiple), not opposed to that rule coming in.

  • I’ve liked the changes this year but I think that DT should be a bit like the stock market so a way to keep the punters interested all year long is to give everyone unlimited trades but you are limited by your team value each week.
    This way you would avoid all carnage but you still have to play smart and increase your team’s value so that you can put the best team on the park week in, week out.
    It would also encourage more interesting choices with player selection and you would need to keep an eye on breakevens so you weren’t losing too much money.
    I also would like to see a “cost” involved in trading so that you would have to pay a fee out of your team value in order to change players around. This would make people think twice about mass changes to your team as it will diminish your ability to get the players you want later into your team.

    • Interesting idea Big Feller. I kind of like it, though VS would have to make sure the fee wasn’t too steep, because it would detract from interest. We all know, the Preseason and trading are the funnest parts of DT.

    • i think if that was introduced as a side game, dt exchange or something?? maybe,

      but the general theme should not change to radically

  • What do people think of the idea of having 2 trades per week, but every week you have the opportunity to pass on a trade and ‘bank’ it for later. Of course there would have to be a limit on how many trades you can ‘bank’ at once, probably one or two.

    Also, this has just occurred to me as well, what about the ability to buy trades? It would have to cost a lot, but say you had $500K in the bank, you could buy another trade. I don’t think it would work too well, but it’s just an idea I thought of.

    • I think something like this needs to be looked at.
      In the past teams in line for overall could be run down in the second half if they traded too aggressively in the first half and ran out of trades in the second half.
      This year I suspect that the top teams won’t change too dramatically.
      Take Stevie J for instance – in the past you would probably need to hold on to him for his 2 week suspension. Now you move him on for Bartel, bring him back in 2 weeks and you haven’t missed a beat!

    • I like the idea of 2 trades with one carry over trade
      if not used, with a maximum of 3 trades in any given week.
      Would help during byes also.

    • I think it would be awesome, imagine say, banking a trade after Round 1. You could then use 3 trades next round to grab rookies you’ve missed.

    • i love the idea of banking trades, but have a maximum of 4 trades used in any 1 week, combine that with h2h byes for the bye round would mean serious players going for outright would have to factor another equation into their year long plan

  • An injury sub would be nice. You have an extra sub that sits on its own and can be swung in to action for a last minute out, or an injury during game time (you get whichever score is higher). That and everyone gets ice cream no matter how badly their team goes.

  • 1) 2 Trades a week is a winner. 44 trades total is kind of too many to build a team – so it is possible there may be 2 downsides. Firstly teams might be more similar than previously, and secondly laggards mightl be less able to catch up than previously. Both these things were issues last year – we won’t know if they are worse this year till the end of the year.

    I am sure there is more variation in teams than at this time last year. I look at the most popular trades every week, and these are less concentrated than last year. Everyone is not doing the same trades now. Moving to a 6-8-2-6 structure allowed more variation in teams for DT relevant players – when I was pushing for this last year I think it allowed about 60,000 more combinations of DT relevant players.

    Similarly capping at 2 trades a week makes more variation in trades than giving users the choice of how many trades they make each week. For example a lot of coaches will miss Daniher because they have other problems for their 2 trades. So it is important to keep this cap if you are worried about keeping variety. If you don’t know why this encourages variety revise your combination theory in your high school maths.

    The other thing to encourage variety is to keep advantages for having the best squad (i.e. best 30). I am against the idea that you have best 21 on the ground. Firstly because if I have the best 22 players, I would be pissed at losing to someone with a donut or a very low score for their #22 player. Why should I lose? It seems like saying to Brisbane great finish and goal after the siren, but Geelong wins because they were in front at 25 minute mark. Or deciding the Melbourne Cup based on who was in front 3 lengths before the finish line. It’s unAustralian!

    Best 18 works in the byes because less players are available, and availability is uneven over the rounds, and this is not the fault of the coach. But in other rounds if you have a late out without cover, it is the coach’s fault and you should lose. 44 trades means you aren’t locked into problems, but you still should lose the week you have a worse team and low scores. League games are going to be a lot closer and many games will be decided by lowest 4 players and emergencies. With 44 trades there is no justification for making things easier for coaches who can’t get a full side onto field with cover during non-bye periods.

    Vestings, injuries, late outs, low scores are all part of the game – no need for any extra assistance in that week.

    2) The byes worked well I think. Good players got a benefit, no-one was too stressed, and gameplay for the rest of the year was not compromised by how we handled the byes.

    Even if we went to 2 blocks MBRs we could continue as is – 44 trades is still enough for this.

    I agree with the idea that you should be able to shuffle DPPs without restriction during a trade. Kind of like those tile toys where you keep sliding tiles around to make the picture you want. I think this would be particularly helpful in the byes. Not sure if there is a coding problem with this at VS though.

    3) Hate the idea of rolling lockouts, beyond what we have now when the round is extended beyond timeframe for announcing all the teams together. Also don’t want to loophole captain every week. I think putting a non-playing captain is equivalent to tanking for a priority pick. The game will be better without it.

    Also not having rolling lockout means coaches have to plan cover on their benches. Which is a good thing for team variety.

    4) To give benefit to coaches with better squads, I think VS should change the 2 emergency rule – so if you have 2 nominated E’s on any line the first added is the highest (not lowest). Having 2 Es for cover is a better squad, and you should be rewarded not penalised for having a better squad.

    Also change to only 1 bench spot for ruck and make 3 bench spots for midfield.

    5) I also think it would be good if Assistant Coach stopped providing opposition scores for the current game (& I am an AC subsciber). I think it compromises the fairness of the game with cash prizes etc. if some players can effectively “see” their opponent’s team (including trades & capt choice) by watching the changes to the opposition team total, and others do not get this information.
    – At the very least VS should be telling non-AC subscribers that their totals are being provided to AC subscribers and give them the option of hiding their changes. But better still if the opposition score wasn’t updated for changes during the week.

    • Well said Nix. I think this year has worked rather well with the new trades, structure and bye plans. I had 19 every week of the byes and my team wasn’t particularly remarkable. As someone who has started badly I was initially against the two trades per week, but deep down I know that if I’d been smart with them I could still be doing okay, instead I’m languishing about 35K and playing catch-up. I don’t think VS will change much next year, and why should they. Why mess with a winning formula?

    • 1. Agree totally on 22 on field all scores count, we dont need extra outs

      2. the only possible change with byes i see is to to a h2h bye during bye rounds, points still count for overall win so serious players must still plan ahead, DPP versatility shoud be changed

      3. +1

      4. +1

      5. in the NRL comps the opponents proj score is not updated from the start of the week till lockout, it is very common in the nrl dt to “baulk your opponent by putting lower scoring players on the field and selecting a bad captain to show a “low proj score” then addjusting your team 5 mins b4 lockout, this does backfire though if you miss lockout but that is the gamble you take and i enjoy it

  • this is my 1st serious year at afl dt (played about 6 rounds last year to learn scoring sys)and i am loving it, ive played the nrl comps for years but being a qld’er i have very mates to play afl dt against, i think they have this game 90% right and should only make minor changes after careful thought.

    although the onset of betting agency comps with their high prize money may show the need for some sponsorship and higher prizes (especially weekly)

  • if anything the matchday game skipping weeks in between could be rplaced by something like the stock market idea listed above or just put those resources into a few small changes elsewhere

  • Warnie –

    Cant for the life of me understand why people are in favour of 44 trades. Actually i do. Everyone love clicking the T button. I like clicking the trade button. BUT managing your trades was one of the biggest and most fundamental part of Dreamteam since its inception. Might as well change the scoring while youre at it.

    I dont see why we have to cater for the masses by changing an integral rule. Further more has the 44 even kept people interested?? That is a serious question because that’s the only reason it was brought in. Thats all the AFL wants, more people involved. They dont care about about the game they just want more people involved. Sounds a bit like what they do to the actual footy and try and cater for all the soccer mums. Shits me.

    Back to the 44 and keeping people interested. When I look at Tom Mitchell’s and the amount of opportunity everyone has had to bring him in (3 rounds) … his ownership is 45%. Now that’s ridiculous because if everyone is playing as they should he should be in 100% of teams.
    So lets say 10-15% (generous) of people have some how missed him, too stupid etc to pick him up, that would leave 40-45% of teams that are no longer active. FORTY PERCENT of teams not playing. Obviously you cant say for sure going on Mitchell’s ownership but id say it’s a fair indicator.

    So basically the 44 trades has not worked.