So...
about Sumo system © demars ( :D )
- For the very beginning, I think the salarial mass is the most objective way.
- Then, at the end of first season, we take the X best for next S2 League1, and the others for S2 League2
So in this example/model - which has already been copyright protected I noticed - I guess at least for the first season would play on the same level, otherwise it wouldn't be possible to determine that? :D One thing that I still don't necessarily understand well enough is how this so called sumo system would differ from a regular league system in terms of relegation, playoffs structure, etc.? So far it all seems to me as a regular, all play all schedule...
One thing that has been mentioned before (and which wouldn't be problem if salaries would be used as a ranking method) is that if and when new teams join the league, it'd need to be established how they would be "rated" - they do not have such "rating" based on last season success (unlike all other teams). One option could be to make everyone joining later to start at the lowest possible level (division 1 in this example, if there are league and division - I have never cared for BBs' way to have "Top League" and then II-division; where's the first division? So that's why I always refer second highest league tier division 1, like in real life). However, that could make very uneven series (if some team decides to join when they are more or less at their prime, while others at the imaginary first division are at the lower skill level), and would take away any chances of winning for the low skill level teams which might (or might not?) affect their motivation. But again, success is something you determine yourself, it's not something that needs to be strictly understood/determined "the traditional way", for instance that "only proper success is winning championships", etc.
- 2 divs, if there are too few teams is not a good thing because we'll have to play against the same teams twice or more, and because we won't play against all teams.
Yes, probably not a good thing. Just a wild thought though: in BB leagues we play once against other group and twice against our own group teams - perhaps it could create an interesting place for first division teams for huge upsets, if one match would be played against each top league team. That would create a chance for so called Kinboshi, a gold star victory (known from sumo wrestling) if we want to keep on the Sumo theme here in the reply - precious victories, of which we could keep a record. I'm not suggesting that we do this, but this was just an intuitive stream of thought that I seemed to want to write down... :P Maybe my writings would make someone willing to share their own ideas, so I see no harm in sharing them.
- there are 14 weeks. If we are 12, we can play against all teams (11 games) + semi-finals + finals -> 13 weeks (or keeping the 2-3 weeks for tie-breakers).
This is one way to do it, but few questions came into mind. That example seems to suggest that only 4 teams would advance to playoffs, or did you just forgot to mention the quarter final stage? And I suppose you mentioned tie-breakers, suggesting playoffs being played in best of 3 format? It's a matter of taste, but I personally love the NCAA way of doing things regarding playoffs - it makes so called Cinderella stories (huge underdog going all the way, or proceeding far longer in the playoff tournament than initially expected) more probable when every game can be your last - you lose, you're out.
- 1 div / 2 divs ?
It all depends of how many teams will play.
Personnaly, I think that we shoudn't put Utopia & Main teams in the same League. They should play apart.
I'm absolutely on the same page with you on this one. Utopian teams should play in their own Utopian Home Grown-league, if there are enough interested Utopian homegrown teams to get such league started.