Again, this brings colour to the game. Just make sure that the penalties and gains are not too significant as once the rivals are set up, they will no doubt move about in the leagues thus some teams may end up with a league full of rivals and loose players through suspension from having to play excessive levels of hardness.

I suggest teams are paired with a different divisional rival each season to keep things balanced.

 There should be some "permanency" to some rivals, and some measure of movement with other rivals. Use Major League Baseball as an example... The Red Sox and Yankees have been permanent rivals for YEARS. However, in the past couple years, as the Yankees have been crappy, and the Tampa Bay Rays have been up and coming, the Red Sox and Rays have been slowly building up a pretty good rivalry.

I am going to make the following suggestion:

• Each team has 3 rivals
• The managers choose their first rival - this rivalry becomes permanent and never changes unless the opposing 'rival' manager leaves the game.
• The commissioner chooses the 2nd rival. This rivalry will be semi-permanent. As long as the teams face each other once per season, the rivalry continues.
• The league votes the final rival. This rivalry is completely non-permanent and only serves to start off the "shifting" rivalry. This 3rd spot will evolve into a rivalry between the team and the opponent it has most commonly faced. This will allow rivalries to grow between teams that square off most frequently. As an example - in MSWL, I added Graham McDermott's BFC squad to my list of rivals last season as BOS had faced BFC far more than any other team, so it seemed like a rivalry could grow there.

Once again Excellent proposals Rob

You should be a Commissioner (Oh I forgot you are TMBL)

I'm new and have yet to play a match, but I really like this rival aspect of the league.  I look forward to seeing in action.

So when do we start this Rivalry then?

An interesting concept that could be a great (and fun) addition to the league.

Well, Vale are Stoke's rival.

A good way to emulate rivalries is to give each team 3 to 5 free points to allocate as they will in their rivalry match, but there would have to be a centralized rivalry-determination process somehow...

How about one random generation of rivalries determined by the computer?

How about a system where C-Ball is everyone's rival and each team has to play 10 hardness every time they play C-Ball?

I'm just sayin'...

who needs a "system" for that?! That's "standard operating procedure" for anytime the Argyles see the Imps on the schedule.

can we code the system so that if you are playing C-Ball and you use 10 hardness, there is zero percentage chance of a PK?

The rivals are going to all be in the same division?  Seems as though the primary should at the very least.  BHA and LEE play each other twice this same week.  That seems like a rivalry plus the teams are roughly the same value and the team owners know each other.  Although I know PLY and LIN, my team just wouldn't be up for a rivalry with those upper division teams, especially if I do not even play them.

I believe Trevor pretty much alluded to making the rivalry divisional.  I can see where there could be examples of intra-divisional say a SWI-NOT or SWA-CRE... maybe some are record based in terms of compatibility/qualifying but not actually determining.  Abrupt end to conversation here... got to go.

ï»I'd like to see at least one rival be the local 'real' rivally not dependent on being on the same division as John said above - Port Vale and Stoke, although as we don't have Stoke Crewe would be next in line. Swansea and Cardiff could be rivals though.

ï»I'm not sure abouting asking Al to add any more coding in for hardness/an added home 'rival' advantage though, I'd just be happy with a nominated added Rival or two on the team home page. Leaving the hardness played up to the individual managers  

I would like to petition to be rivals with Southend United, please.

I was just reading back through this thread, and I was quite shocked to come across so much anti C-Ball sentiment.  I guess nice guys really do finish last.  +15 HARD for all you buggers next time you come to LIN!

I had to leave abruptly while making my least entry so I'll continue where I left off.  The other Rob's idea is pretty much the method I think is the best.  If someone wants to make region-based rivalries one of them, I suppose.  Port Vale doesn't mean anything to me, well didn't until this upcoming weekend.  In TMBL, we just pick our 3 rivals and I believe the thinking there is that you'll pick either (a) your "enemy" (someone you know very well and hope to beat every time), (b) a team that does play you hard each time, surprises your team or flat out beats you each time or (c) just a team that gets under your skin for one reason or another.  The likelihood that one of these teams will be in your same division is pretty high.  In TMBL, I believe I started with Providence (C-Ball as you guys know him), Boston (Rob) and Philadelphia (Brent Hermack) but as I played more seasons I was compelled to make Quaggy River Cats a rival for the sheer fact I "abandoned" that team to acquire a new one.  Managers/team owners will more than likely make a good choice for their rivals so we can probably skip producing code that has to generate a rival.

As for this league in this season, I would have started with SWA, BHA and LEE but it looks like next season will be BHA (regardless of which division) and probably two different teams.

Will rivals ever be added to this beautiful game...?