>>80753017For now, here's how I'm thinking of handling this.
"No" = the column marked with -1
"Indifferent" = the column marked with 0
"Yes" = the column marked with 1
"Hell yes" = the column marked with 2
Score 1 (for making the roster altogether) = "Hell yes" * 2 + "Yes" * 1 - "No" * 1
Score 2 (for deciding their role in the roster) = "Hell yes" * 3 + "Yes" * 1 - "Indifferent" * 1 - "No" * 2
These are the standings for making the roster altogether (Score 1), with the red line being the cutoff point for the roster (23 slots). Anyone who's at least green is basically confirmed, and anyone who's red is out.
As you can see, there are a lot of players in contention for the final 4 roster spots, hence why it's so hard for me to figure out the fairest way to score them. At the very least, not making the roster is not the end of the world: not only can they get another chance the next time around, but they can also be referenced in some other way: in the stadium, on the kits and so on.
>>80754829Yeah, my main cup team does what I did here, but my co-manager is asleep and I didn't get the chance to ask him how he does the rankings. It's tough. It doesn't help that, as good as Cryptpad is ensuring anonymous results with no duplicates, it's awful at giving you anything resembling concise, easy-to-look-at data.
