It's not about clan size, it can be left at 16, it's making sure clans have enough players to complete fixtures, site numbers are dropping so the best way is to drop the format, I might be wrong but is there only 2 clans with 16 ?, with the changes these 2 will still have enough fixtures to keep their players happy.

I would be willing to captain a clan next season.. Would prefer these 5 v 5 fixture proposal to go ahead.. I currently dont have a team, have captained in the past mind..

Good Luck to ya, I think you'll be a very good Captain.

i agree. no point to carry on like this and make a face like we have hundreds and hundreds of players here. Its not fun being a cap of a clan if u constantly have to find subs and do swaps and send default info away.
Its not enjoyable, simple as.
I understand where faust and ash are coming from tho.

I do think that reducing the number of games per set and increasing the number of games released is a good way to try and increase interest in clans again. I would not look to reduce clan numbers I have been one for seasons that does not like restricting numbers either way, but at least with far less games per set clans should have a better chance to get them done. We would have to advise on a sensible minimum number for a clan to be allowed entry as if clans don't have enough numbers to allow for inactivity / deactivating etc we will be no better off than this season.

Example:

FCL 4 v 4 everyone plays all other clans twice, 4 fixtures per set is 16 games which is exactly the same as 2 games with 8 currently. Bonus reduced to 10 points for a win with half the games.

FBL 4 v 4 1 x US8, 1 x US9, 1 x UK8, 1 x Straight. With short format I would like to consider a killer game as well between teams? 4 games released per set as per above.

SL 4 v 4 Exact same format of 2 per type. 4 games released per set as above or if players want less and quicker turn around you could shelf it altogether.

Totally agree , it also means that maybe a few more clans might start appearing . With the smaller fixtures, small teams of friends who know each other are reliable, even entering only one league for a bit of fun and a challenge if they wanted, without the pressure of knowing they have loads of fixtures to play, or players going awol. It should also help those teams that are talking about folding due to player inactivity etc , it would be a shame to lose any teams let alone the well known names.

I do think the change is needed if clan players want to see the leagues carry on,think we would all rather have smaller fixtures, some smaller teams ,and hopefully more of them, it may even even bring new players onto funky & the leagues.

In this example, Pro's could just pick dvz, beenjammin, miss_harriet and tinie every single fixture. Ash would pick legend_pot, _fresh_, hoolahoop and baumers every fixture. It would be monumentally boring and painful for the vast majority of other clans.

If this was to happen , surely the other players would leave the clan, either boosting another clan or making their own , which is more competition for all either way ?

I don't think that doing these changes will improve interest in clans, numbers are going to keep declining with this site going down (although we all don't want another rant about that again now do we )

I agree with those above, less fixture per round and keeping the team sizes the way they are is a great idea, you'll have the cover then.

I'm just thinking a 5v5 fixture will suit well, but the rules about how long you have to be available for should be shortened/scrapped, I have seen a lot of clans disband after a short space of time, and the clans that we have at the moment are mostly run by leaders that have previously had clans, or are bringing back legends, so they hire players that have been around a while. If we shorten/scrap the time it takes for someone to play, then them new players won't; A) feel a bit disheartened waiting for game time and B) Won't lose interest.

I see why there is a wait to play, but it would be beneficial to alter this rule. It would also help with the fixtures, as like an emergency sub, that way there would be less defaults.

Competition for who? If the 4 best players play every fixture - there IS no competition. At least with fixtures of 8 there is usually a few less dominant players involved that can create an interesting fixture.

Well, there would be a plan implemented to stop this happening, you send in your whole team, and it's random, there are plenty of generators out there.

The match up you post here is more likely to produce an upset than the current 8v8 as there is no doubt that pros strength in depth is better than fearless knights when the number of games increase. If both teams kept playing the same players in most games I would imagine that a few players would move clans which would be for the better for all teams.

The top clans will always look to oppose anything that may upset the status quo. The leagues are in decline and something needs to be done to try and get interest and enjoyment back in them.

Even this season professionals would have either folded or incomplete several games that would have had a huge impact on the league if rules had not been relaxed. When a team who has the pick of the players on here struggles it is clear that there is an issue and how the smaller teams are meant to survive it is a miracle that we have not had more fold, it is probably just down to a few players that have moved clans to firefight the gaps which again is a relaxation on the rules to prevent bigger issues.

I'm maybe not as astute at predicting results as you, but the 4 team example of Pro's I've given - in a 15 frame format would go unbeaten the entire season.

As for the status quo, I'm really not precious about being a perennial runner up. My opinion certainly isn't motivated by that.

In my humble opinion, having been away for a few years before returning, there are too many competitions on the go at once. FCL has always been the main one but the subsidiary ones if you like aren't entirely necessary. The amount of opponents that a player has to liaise with is what I believe to be the biggest problem. Having to play 6 or 7 different games in a 3 week time frame with limited time for most players as it is, is never going to be any easy task. 8v8 still seems to be completed for the most part so I don't think that should necessarily be changed unless you are seeing 1 to 2 defaults in each fixture in which case you can adjust accordingly. All in all I think something like the Super League should give way for the more favoured competitions.

I think a lot would agree , funky is on the decline, the leagues prob keep quite a few on here, but atm quite a few teams have struggled/are struggling . Why not try the change ? if it doesn't work then the following season revert back . Teams have got bigger over the seasons , as has the amount of games. Why not take it back to basics when it worked, and people actually enjoyed it ?

And now i will be quiet

Well ever one seems to relalize that there is a big decline in Clans today.But just try and start one and all you get is rubbish posted on your new thread by Clans that are established is just crazy.Like Ash posting on are thread for know reason at all.
But if i say one harsh word about him all i get is crap from other players who do not even play for him.
But we will either make it are we wont,id like to say sure we will make it but tbh im not sure.
But i will give it my level best,if ever one will just stay off are thread as it looks bad to new players.

And yes i agree with nike.

Clans were struggling to complete 8v8 fixtures this season, including your clan, captains asking clans for subs and being told we don't have any, we need a format that can be completed with less players, without this change clans will fold, looks like 2 clans are folding after this season, with less players needed there's a chance we could save them clans and possibly see new clans created eventually, it's near impossible to put a clan of 16 together from scratch now and it puts people off, where with smaller numbers needed it might encourage people.

true but rich isn't like that, if i know him he will spread games and i will help him out too

When I started playing clans there was always at least a couple of clans that struggled to complete fixtures. Underdogs and Fighting Eagles for example. Back then, as it is now - the reason was not because there wasn't players available to recruit.

How about a friendly wager? I bet you £100 that after these changes, clan participation numbers do not increase beyond the level we started this season with? OR I bet you that I can set up a brand new clan with 16 players, without taking any from Uprising? I would take either bet with supreme confidence.