The Dugout Discussion – Tuesday

first

I like both of those ideas. 0-0s and 1-0s will always be an issues using a stats-based model, as practically nothing happens that differentiates any of the players.

They awarded 7 people bonus G , it's like confetti at a weeding.
For me it's diluting what should be sacred ie 3 people only
3
2
1
End of
The man in the stand should award on who the best players / contributors to the game are and using stats also to give a combined result .
To simplify :
Man in the stand + stats = Bonus. 3/2/1

Completely agree. Penalising all shots "off target" is simply ridiculous. The threshold idea is a clever solution to what happened last night.

Bring back man in the stands!!!!!!!

I like both of those.

Another way could be to limit it to three players and use a priority system for tie-breaks on the BPS. e.g. in the event of a tie, goals are most important, followed by assists, followed by clearances etc etc

I enjoy the new system - they literally are "bonus" points now to give people more of a chance at scoring points and keeping the game a bit more interesting 🙂

From what I can gather one of the main points of the new BPS is that it generates more points. More points pleases more managers and therefore helps the game attract more interest and keep existing managers interested. Last night if anything was a victory for the BPS in that lots of managers got lots of points. Its a rare event that seven will tie on the same amount.

They could tweak it to give more points as in 1) but the same anomoly could occur. They could raise shots on target for example and all could by coincidence have the same shots on target.

On point 2) I If in a game like last night no one reaches it well then no one is deserving of bonus...but that's a big call to say sorry guys no bonus today, even though Sky have given a man of the match. Can't see that going down well.

So what you are saying is never reward defenders as they very rarely get above 9pts without attacking points. Well thats just silly, I want a system that rewards the unrewarded players. Personally I think they should take goals and assists out of the bonus points stats as players already get enough points for those anyway.

I like the new system better than the old one, i'm not sure why the award of multiple baps causes such concern, the more the merrier for me.... I would give BAPS when any player reaches a certain threshold...so for arguments sake...1 BAP for 6BPS...2 BAPS when a player reaches 8BPS and the 3BAPS when they reach 10BPS..so in effect rewarding any player who plays well, and if that means the entire team when they win six nil then so be it. Under the old system the rewards for poor play in a poor game were exactly the same as the rewards for open exciting football, that was just rubbish. Of course defensive BPS would need to be carefully thought out but i'm sure that would be easy enough.

I don't mind it how it is, apart from the possibility of 15 BPs in one game, which is a bit daft. I think the combination of BPS and ESP would be better, so if the BPS are tied then go to EPS as a tie-breaker. This would mean the vast majority of games should have a simple 3-2-1 split, but on the odd occasion that you can't separate players, then you don't have to.

If the BPs were based on the OPTA stats that Metro used for all it's points last night,

The Bonus would have been

Collins 3
Gabbidon 2
Chamakh 1
Delaney 1

This would make sense.

Have some sort of system, where the best defender gets a point, best midfielder gets a point and best attacker gets a point. Along with the man of the match, picking up an extra point or two?

The only problem i have with BP system is that my team does not seem to be getting many 🙂 ..

i always prefered old bonus system

top 3 players gets 3,2,1 and and that's all

this stats bps is a joke and very unfair

bps should reward best players on pitch

Looking at bps potential is now a tactic when buying a player, it's the equivalent of getting an assist

I love this generous system, nothing wrong here.
This season defender and keeper will get bonus points slight easily.
Last season keepers hardly gets any bonuspoints even if they already save penos!

Coming from non-palace owner

how about no bonus points

or a team decides

1st best palyer - 5bps
2nd best player - 4ps
and do on

It's not perfect, but it's way better than last season & it's transparent. Last night's bps were uncommon. If anything, they should reduce bps for assists and goals as they are already rewarded quite handsomely. More often than not, a goal in a 1-0 results in 4+3 for the scorer, so a goal is often effectively 7pts. I like the system today. But then I had Gabbidon 😉

The threshold is a great idea. Some games just don't merit that many bps being awarded

Definitely 1.

If players are tied, like they were in this game, how do you decide which of the tied players gets the points first, and who missed out (i.e. there has to be some kind of ranking involved).

Or, maybe if you have a cap (let's say 9 as suggested), then if allocating the points to tied players would result in the total exceeding the threshold, then none are awarded. So for this game, only Chamakh would've got bonus points (3), the others would have totally missed out because another 12 points would have to allocated, taking it over the threshold.

Tbh, this doesn't happen very often and it's a little reactionary to suggest a change is needed just because because of one game.
Jonty's makes a good point that more bps makes the game more attractive and I think we are all for that.
Keep the baps as they are but select your defenders wisely.

If we're sticking with BPS, how about bonus points are awarded based on BPS thresholds?

Anyone scoring over 8 BPS gets 1 bonus point
Anyone scoring over 15 BPS gets 2 bonus points
Anyone scoring over 20 BPS gets 3 bonus points

(Or similar)

To be honest I'm not sure I'd like that but it occurred to me as an alternative method so I thought I'd throw it out there for debate.

I wanted to comment on this too. How come Ward got BP, my rival has him. This is outrageous. 15BP. More than CS, Assist or goal. No way all the defenders deserved that

arhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

9BPS a threshold is a good proposition.

City win 7-0 ----- 7 bonus points are awarded

Palace win 1-0 ----- 15 bonus points are awarded.

If people can't see a problem here, then they're not looking hard enough

I think the best option is 1. Add a few more stats to the mix or make it easier for players to get BPS, then as Granville said, there will be fewer ties.

At the moment you get 1 BPS for every 8 clearances. If this was 1 BPS for every 3 clearances for example, two players on 9 clearances and 15 clearances would then get 3 and 5 BPS respectively. Instead of just 1BPS each under the old system.

I like the idea of using a tie-breaking system such as ESP so that each match is only awarded one 3 BPs, one 2 BPs and one 1 BP. I also like Wakey's idea of awarding BPs according to BPS thresholds.

I used to feel very strongly (and said so a number of times in the past) that it was ridiculous that the most boring matches were the ones that got awarded the greatest number of bonus points. But another way of looking at it is that this does at least reward defenders, who used to be get too few points for their efforts in the past.

definitely agree with you on idea 1. 6 way ties are just ludicrous

Threshold is a good idea, a bonus should only be given for good performances.

Bringing back the man in the stands, as some people here suggests, is a terrible idea. That takes us back 4-5 seasons when the bonus points were so predictable, they were just added incentive to get certain players, which reflected in their price.

missed this post originally but i do want throw my support behind the man-in-the-stands bonus.

MAX POINTS GO TO THE MAN OF THE MATCH. period.

Not man of the stats.
Not man most likely to.
Not man who shoulda coulda.
Not most clearances.

Man of the match.

Now make it happen FPL. You've got too many cooks in the kitchen.