Good topic Al.

The scenario you mention is an excellent illustration of why the auction might need to be slightly modified. I like the idea of front loading the auctions with younger players. That being said, if nothing changes, I will not be disappointed. Does that make sense?

The point is for Ian to vacuum up some I/8 Sws at bargain basement prices.

I don't actually think anything is wrong, though. It's been a part of the game's ecosystem since season 3 and it's worked fine - the market prices these players lower naturally, with the most expensive auctions going 1, 3, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 in order (people forget about preseason 2, it seems?).

If you were to trial a change, instead of 8 auctions of 8 players, I might try 7 auctions of 9. Only removes one auction player from the game and cuts things off nicely right as the youth cup starts.

I always find it a challenge to think critically about something I take for granted, but equally I'm always happy to share my ramblings...

Like others, I don't see a major problem with the current arrangements.  

If you can pick up a dirt cheap age 1 player who can be coached to Level 14 that seems like a win to me - in fact it's probably more than you deserve if your development policy involves waiting until the final auction in the hope the right player comes along.

I'm not a fan of seeing older players snaffled up just to be sold to the NL a few sessions later, but I don't feel it's a big deal and it's nice to see plucky little teams like Tranmere and Preston do well out of it. Perhaps if these players were better (increasing skills level in later auctions perhaps) there would be more reason to keep them for longer?

If we're going to change anything, my preference would be to find a way to incentivise more inter-team trades.  The interaction with other managers is what makes this game special but most deals currently seem to be just BRB-related.

That's a good point on the inter-team trades. It feels like there are fewer here than in other games I play. Having said that, I often reject bids because they aren't attractive enought to me.

I also like the idea of having, on average, stronger players later in the Auction, where there will be less time to train them up the levels. A little more strategy - and jeopardy - around transfer and auction dealings.

I 100% agree with Roger - one thing I'd suggest is a way to promote more inter-team trades. I see a couple ways to do that...

* try 1 fewer auction?

* try not having an auction every week

* perhaps put a "minimum weeks" on a roster requirement to stave off the comments about players being flipped to NL. (our min auction price should be slightly higher than NL sales, if they aren't already)

Quite agree that managers could make more use of the trade between teams option. It does seem hard to make happen sometimes as I often think other managers are reluctant to do trades in case they are being conned and when dealing with Lewes they probably are!

If it ain't broke, let's give Al something to do...