Subject: Suggestions

I actually came here to ask about something similar. Even if we accept clean sheets as primary thing to sort them by (I didn't really think about it before so I don't have an opinion on that at the moment), having number of saves as the first tie breaker doesn't make much sense to me. Take these two goalies from my league for example:

Rnk Name Team MP GA SV Sv% CS Str LStr
2 Finland Aarne Sorjonen Croatia Steppenwolves 41 38 81 68% 19 132 292
3 Croatia Ivo Penkala Croatia New Bukovac Uni 36 29 76 72% 19 1180 1180

Does the first one really look like he has better statistics? (Sorry if it looks bad just copy/pasted.) If we're going with number of saves I think it should at least be saves per number of matches played, but better would be the GAA you mentioned or saves percentage, since number of clean sheets already takes care of goalies with low number of games played placing higher than they should. I know that in case of tie breakers it's only a small difference in the reward, but still.

Suggestion

Line-ups in live transmission.

Suggestion

Put a limit on number of certain staff... ie, max 5 coaches, 5 sporting directors, 5 managers,...

Why?

You can assign head and assistant coach, and lets say you have two "youngsters" in training, when H&A gets to retirement. You dont need 71 employees of the same type, do you?

Some managers train stuff for sale. Is this wrong? I think not. Same is with the players.

There is nothing wrong with selling, I see problem in "trafficking".

I don't agree

You could easily find out many teams which have tens of sporting directors. Why? They are training their staff to sell later and collect some millions. Problem?

I see.. by players we have this:

"Due to employing more than 30 players in our team, we have to pay a daily fee to the football association."

I think by stuff we don`t have this. Right? If not, I agree this should be also by stuff. I just not agree with limit.

As I said, trafficking.

I don't think there is any staff-fee. Limit is debatable, I just showed it as an example.

A while ago, someone suggested, that overcrowded rosters/facilities should result in lower training, I'd consider things in that direction too.

Could we add to the guide for training camp that if it's started on day 112 it will be counted for old season? everytime at the end of a season come same questions over and over...

why lower training? If so, who would spend SO MUCH MONEY to upgrade the training facility?

Yzerman point is based on reality. When we train to much players the efficiency and professionalism of the training falls. logical. Imagine 100 players on the pitch But this is just an idea.

Players-fee is ok for now and to much players mean more possibility of injuries. So.. stuff-fee.. yes.. should be.. at least this..

If you remember, pro and junior players don't train at the same pitch