05-12-2024, 03:52 PM
(This post was last modified: 05-12-2024, 04:10 PM by nunccoepi. Edited 1 time in total.)
10. Through a random lottery drawing, you have been named the league's new commissioner for a day. Congrats! What improvements would you make to the league if you had the power to do whatever you wanted?
Ok, well this one isn't that hard to imagine because I have actually been the commissioner for a day. For a lot of days actually, although it was for the DSFL and not the ISFL. Despite being there for so long, there are still some changes that I kind of felt I left on the table because we only had some much time and political willpower to make things work. For me, I always tended to approach issues from the top down, working first at the level of policy and institutionalism and then tailoring down as the rules, traditions, and circumstances allowed to come out with a fair result. If that sounds heady, its because it is, and that is a reason we never got to the changes I'm about to describe. Generally, the changes involve checks on Head Office power which, incidentally, isn't really as much of a factor in terms of barrier to enactment as the average person might think. Head Office members are generally happy enough to surrender decision making responsibility once they've been around long enough to see a thing or two. Ok, so the change I would enact would be to limit Head Office power to three general realms: enforcement of the rulebook provisions through monitoring compliance, levying fair punishments for violations of the league rules, and administrative tasks. The reason I would limit it to just those three areas, as astute readers might notice, is that it limits HO's ability to make up new rules out of whole cloth. This is an ongoing temptation for HO members because it is often the quickest way to get to what seems like a fair result. But it also is the quickest way to run afoul of procedural mechanisms or fair notice that make the league a more equitable and enjoyable place for all. HO is still free to add new rules through the usual rules summit process, of course, and HO is free to clarify ambiguous rules and add rules to the rulebook that have always (or nearly always) been in place but should have been added. But each of those situations are different from HO choosing to make up a new rule or way of doing something--absent pure procedure--that would otherwise obviate the need for a rules summit and tample upon the rights of the GMs and other voters at the rules summit.
14. Expansion Expansion Expansion! Tell us why you think the league should expand / not expand or include any ideas (in words) for team branding ideas you have or team locations.
Expansion, the ever exciting and ever controversial topic. I can tell you with a unique perspective as a member of Head Office that this is not an easy topic to discuss and one that gives a lot of anxiety to leadership. Of course, contraction does that too and my time in Head Office saw more contraction discussions towards the end than expansion. But many of the same principles apply to WHETHER to expand as to whether to contract, and that goes to the heart of this prompt. I'm not very aware of the current league numbers regarding engagement and roster size and recreate percentage and average length of career and recruitment access and avenues, but I can assure you those are some of the basic topics that must be addressed--and more. That being said, from my stance as a now casual observer, it seems like things have held pretty steady in the last few seasons. The last r/NFL recruitment was good but not mind blowing. And DSFL rosters seem only half full with actives. In my mind, those are two reasons that we should not be expanding right now. Doing so would further deplete the DSFL roster and would almost certainly lead to the contraction of at least two of those teams. I don't know any HO members that are close to entertaining the possibility of expansion. That being said, its always fun to think about. I've always been an advocate for an expansion team in Michigan. It doesn't have to be in Detroit, but as a Michigan native myself I know that the residents there are loyal and battle tested. Its also a state with so much uniqueness. At this point I've thrown out ideas for Detroit teams and team generally related to the great lakes. But for this one I will propose one related to the Upper Peninsula. In Michigan, everything north of basically Pontiac, and certainly Saginaw, is known as "Up North" and the Upper Peninsula is known as just the "U.P." so those are both good location names. I would go with simply "U.P." There are a lot of things that could serve as mascots for the team's identity, but the first that will come to mind for many is the cold and snow as the UP tends to get more than even the northeast because it is surrounded by lakes. Thus, I would call the team the U.P. Blizzard. And I would choose green, white, and silver as the primary colors because of the snow, heavy forestry, and shining lakes.
Ok, well this one isn't that hard to imagine because I have actually been the commissioner for a day. For a lot of days actually, although it was for the DSFL and not the ISFL. Despite being there for so long, there are still some changes that I kind of felt I left on the table because we only had some much time and political willpower to make things work. For me, I always tended to approach issues from the top down, working first at the level of policy and institutionalism and then tailoring down as the rules, traditions, and circumstances allowed to come out with a fair result. If that sounds heady, its because it is, and that is a reason we never got to the changes I'm about to describe. Generally, the changes involve checks on Head Office power which, incidentally, isn't really as much of a factor in terms of barrier to enactment as the average person might think. Head Office members are generally happy enough to surrender decision making responsibility once they've been around long enough to see a thing or two. Ok, so the change I would enact would be to limit Head Office power to three general realms: enforcement of the rulebook provisions through monitoring compliance, levying fair punishments for violations of the league rules, and administrative tasks. The reason I would limit it to just those three areas, as astute readers might notice, is that it limits HO's ability to make up new rules out of whole cloth. This is an ongoing temptation for HO members because it is often the quickest way to get to what seems like a fair result. But it also is the quickest way to run afoul of procedural mechanisms or fair notice that make the league a more equitable and enjoyable place for all. HO is still free to add new rules through the usual rules summit process, of course, and HO is free to clarify ambiguous rules and add rules to the rulebook that have always (or nearly always) been in place but should have been added. But each of those situations are different from HO choosing to make up a new rule or way of doing something--absent pure procedure--that would otherwise obviate the need for a rules summit and tample upon the rights of the GMs and other voters at the rules summit.
14. Expansion Expansion Expansion! Tell us why you think the league should expand / not expand or include any ideas (in words) for team branding ideas you have or team locations.
Expansion, the ever exciting and ever controversial topic. I can tell you with a unique perspective as a member of Head Office that this is not an easy topic to discuss and one that gives a lot of anxiety to leadership. Of course, contraction does that too and my time in Head Office saw more contraction discussions towards the end than expansion. But many of the same principles apply to WHETHER to expand as to whether to contract, and that goes to the heart of this prompt. I'm not very aware of the current league numbers regarding engagement and roster size and recreate percentage and average length of career and recruitment access and avenues, but I can assure you those are some of the basic topics that must be addressed--and more. That being said, from my stance as a now casual observer, it seems like things have held pretty steady in the last few seasons. The last r/NFL recruitment was good but not mind blowing. And DSFL rosters seem only half full with actives. In my mind, those are two reasons that we should not be expanding right now. Doing so would further deplete the DSFL roster and would almost certainly lead to the contraction of at least two of those teams. I don't know any HO members that are close to entertaining the possibility of expansion. That being said, its always fun to think about. I've always been an advocate for an expansion team in Michigan. It doesn't have to be in Detroit, but as a Michigan native myself I know that the residents there are loyal and battle tested. Its also a state with so much uniqueness. At this point I've thrown out ideas for Detroit teams and team generally related to the great lakes. But for this one I will propose one related to the Upper Peninsula. In Michigan, everything north of basically Pontiac, and certainly Saginaw, is known as "Up North" and the Upper Peninsula is known as just the "U.P." so those are both good location names. I would go with simply "U.P." There are a lot of things that could serve as mascots for the team's identity, but the first that will come to mind for many is the cold and snow as the UP tends to get more than even the northeast because it is surrounded by lakes. Thus, I would call the team the U.P. Blizzard. And I would choose green, white, and silver as the primary colors because of the snow, heavy forestry, and shining lakes.