Term Limits for DSFL GMs

[IsaStarcrossed]

Okay so this is something I've been thinking about for a long while. I've brought it up a few times, but I've always shelved it and never really pushed it because I felt like it was controversial or might get completely overlooked. Given the recent events though, I feel like now is a good time for me to take another look at this and get a feel about how the community at large would feel about it. I realize that this may be an unpopular opinion or idea for a certain portion of our community, but hear me out.

The most important part of the DSFL is quite literally in the name. The D here stands for Developmental. The Developmental Sim Football League. This is a league meant to develop and groom young users in our community and I don't think it should be limited to just their players. We often talk about experience in this league and I will be the first to admit as a former GM that you often look at experience when considering future GMs, coGMs, and even war room members. That isn't to say people with no experience have no chance, but it would be silly to say no one considers experience for these roles at the ISFL level.

Where better for players to get experience as GMs than the league's developmental league? The place where players are supposed to learn about the league? We shouldn't only be teaching and grooming new players in this league, but we should also be using this as a tool to give users in our league a chance to grow, explore, and gain experience in the behind the scenes of this league.

With our current system, players have a tendency to get into these GM roles and they latch on until an opening comes at the next level. The issue with this is that it leads to some DSFL GMs holding onto this position for 4-6 seasons with nothing else to learn purely because they refuse to step down until they can GM elsewhere. I don't believe this is productive and with such a limit on GM positions in this league at large, I don't feel like it is quite fair to younger players who want a shot to learn either.

My proposal would be to limit GM terms to 2 or 3 seasons. This is long enough that aspiring GMs can learn the ropes and understand what is expected of them at the next level. They get the much needed experience that people tend to lean towards or value in this league. It is also long enough that we should constantly have a fresh pool of potential GMs. It is also short enough that we'll constantly see new players moving into these roles and getting their own experience with running a team.

We like to talk about the DSFL and how it is supposed to be about the new user experience. It is supposed to be where users learn and grow. We should make sure it is an open environment where new players can continue to come in and see their goals and get a taste of all the league has to offer if that is what they so desire.

[slothfacekilla]

I understand the desire to get people gm'ing experience (especially with HO's reluctance to give expansion jobs to people without GM jobs), but I think it could be risky forcing turnover on DSFL GM's. Stability is good for new players and if inexperienced people get a hold of jobs it could be awful for the retention rate of a team if they don't know what they're doing.

Maybe some sort of forced rotating war room participation (GM internship program?) or something like that but it feels a bit extreme to force out good gm's to get others experience, but just my two cents. I know Tijuana has done a great job integrating new users into our war room, and now both of our GM's are first gen players getting the chance, so it isn't impossible. I also seem to see plenty of DSFL jobs opening up in offseasons (at least it seems like it, both Royals Gm's just stepped down, Tijuana has a new gm or co ever season I've been back, etc) so I worry the potential harm will outweigh the on the job experience a small handful of people will still get. Just a thought and I could be way off!

[manicmav36]

Two seasons is barely enough time to full understand the role.
If we're pushing people out just because, especially if there aren't any quality candidates to replace them, this could backfire spectacularly, killing entire DSFL teams and losing out on many possible active members.

[PMoney]

While developing experience of GM'ing would be good for some people, DSFL GM's have in my opinion a more important role than ISFL GM's in terms of user retention and early experiences in the league. While I'm confident there are plenty of great candidates who would want GM at the DSFL level, I think it's still risky to force turnover. Encouraging real war room participation and collaboration with GMs can still provide experience for people even if you don't get your name on the door.

[Jay_Doctor]

I personally don't feel like a term limit is necessary. By the time I left, I was pretty much the most experienced DSFL GM at 3 seasons and I fully planned to step down going into that final year. Most DSFL GMs have stepped down within that 3 season mark allowing new people to continually come through.

[Thor]

My view would tend to agree with most of what others have posted above, along with the fact that sometimes GMs have longer term plans for a team that involve staying on for more than a few seasons. In Myrtle Beach we have one "management intern" per season who gets to see and be involved in most of the processes that the GMs perform to help them decide if they want to become GMs, and prepare them for that eventuality in the future.

While it's not a formal position and proposals to establish that have been knocked back in the past, I believe having a stable long term GM on a DSFL team can allow them to act as a mentor for a co-GM and intern, along with creating good war room members.

Personally, I have no current intent to GM at an ISFL level, does that mean my GM role is being wasted? I don't believe so, retaining the players comes first and foremost, narrowly followed by mentoring them to find success in their career through whichever means they decide to apply themselves.

I can understand people expressing desire to gain experience as GMs, however when advertising for MBs co-GM position we only received 4 applicants, none of whom are the users that applied for (and did not receive) an expansion team. I would encourage users to step outside of the bubble of the team they play(ed) for and consider the available GM jobs wherever they come up if they desire to follow that path in their ISFL career.

[mithrandir]

I think the best GMs are very aware of the developmental mandate of the DSFL, and as such train up people to take over their jobs, often after three seasons. Two is not enough imo though

[gucci]

I suggested a 3 season term limit to HO after the MB scandal. Never heard back from them, but they did establish a DSFL specific HO, so that's at least a positive step in fixing the DSFL. The deeper we let people get invested into DSFL teams, the more toxic it seems to get.

[Amidships]

I personally don't feel like a term limit is necessary. By the time I left, I was pretty much the most experienced DSFL GM at 3 seasons and I fully planned to step down going into that final year. Most DSFL GMs have stepped down within that 3 season mark allowing new people to continually come through.

Yeah, while I agree these positions shouldn't be held for super long, I'm not sure it has been a common issue. Would be interesting to see some data on the issue.

[The_Kidd]

Here are my cheap two cents on the issue about integrating new people into more experienced roles, at least on the DSFL level:

The DSFL has certain advantages over the ISFL - not as much pressure to win, teams are expected to work with limitations, most players are happy with that new car(league?) smell ---- but the challenge is keeping players engaged and not letting toxicity or a mundane experience manifest.

I think for the DSFL, to take advantage of the "mid-major" environment, there should still be a Head GM, with no term limit, who understands the ins and outs of the league and its duties. The Head GM would oversee his base of operations and ensure his team is running smoothly and have final call on all executive decisions.

Where I would change it, is establishing a mandatory rule for a 2-Co-GM structure under the Head GM. We all know that there are so many issues that make it difficult to be connected with everyone on a regular basis, so this would help mitigate that issue. You could have one Co work the Offense, the other the defense. One could be in charge of scouting/recruiting/roster management while the other monitors the status of the team. Responsibilities can be rationed out and delegated enough to give a healthy, but limited sample of all the duties a full GM must understand.

Even then, the Co-GM's could also be tasked with putting together the War Room, heeding suggestions from the Head GM. Within the War Room, smaller tasks can be further delegated to those selected team members --- it doesn't have to be strictly sim testing, it could be other items such as: ensuring update pages are correct, offering advice and data for player builds, making sure everyone does their transactions, does their point tasks, has a way to generate money, and so forth.

The way I see it, you create a hierarchy for novice players to ascend over the course of a couple of seasons. The responsibilities they undertake not only preps them for an eventual GM role, but it helps them actively learn their way throughout the league and how to navigate the various avenues and channels of the ISFL forum and discord. Likewise, they are also gaining knowledge for possible job opportunities which of course gives them money and decreases burnout risk. And the main positive is that you keep multiple people engaged and reduce the day-to-day responsibilities for the top dog(s), in the event they get overwhelmed and forget something, they have their own support staff built in to keep them stable.

I know you've all seen it, but I've seen players miss out on TPE because they didnt have a reminder ping them, I've seen people miss updates because they forgot their login info, I've seen people ready to quit because they thought their player was being shafted, but didnt have access to the sim files, and did not check the index that often either. I've seen people just ready to throw away their season because they didnt know the rulebook about height/weight changes and TPE redistribution. Myself, have given advice to new players on positions to select based on wanting playing time, draft status, or awards by cycling through rosters, contracts, and TPE regression cycles coupled with past indices to deduce a substantiated hypothesis about what position you should choose if you want A, B, or C.

There's a lot a too learn for new people, but it doesnt have to be a lot if it parsed out appropriately and timely enough so they aren't 7- months in wondering how much of an impact they can really have in the future.