szkocjasid

To me what's worse is the inconsistency, Pedersen rode on an average that was 12 years old. Woffinden, Lidsey, Kasprzak & Jakobsen kept the same averages. Janowski's was lowered, but Pawlicki & Milik's were increased.

Being positive means I'm hoping Brummies will win half their home matches, being negative would be me thinking they'll score 40 at home each week & 30 away each week. Still think they'll finish bottom.

I would assume so, most clubs have built / look likely to build teams well below the points limit, you don't do that if winning is your main objective. So why would they pay over the agreed pay structures if just wanting to develop riders?

Trying to be positive for Brummies I'll suggest, Worrall not far behind Iversen & Tungate. Brennan not far behind B.Cook & Ellis. Lampart could be stronger than Blodorn, Rew, Palm-Toft & Howarth. But even if these prove true, still expecting Brummies to finish bottom.

If true I hope Workington stick to their ground, while Vissing would be a great signing, don't risk the clubs future, please.

You could argue by signing Tarasenko Glasgow built to a higher points limit than everyone else, the rules were stupid, but you can't blame Glasgow for that. Imo any team winning with Tarasenko on a 5.00 would be a hollow victory.

But Poole signed Zach before the Australian season, so they can't have planned to use him as a second string based on pre-season form. Even if Poole went for Rowe & Newman instead of Brennan & Thomsen, Zach could still have ridden at number 4 anyway.

I don't think that's in doubt, but Masters was asked to be a number one for Wolves, at Leicester as a 3rd heat leader, sounds a very good signing.

I'd put Kemp in the bottom half of the number 6s, but that shouldn't be an issue as the teams strength is their top 5.

But these same promotions voted for a higher points limit. If they were so worried one team will be too weak & hurt their crowds, have a lower limit to share the riders out more?

Can't disagree with any of those points

Now all the teams are complete my predictions are: 1st - Ipswich. Fantastic top 2 is what makes them favourites for me. Dan T has been an impressive RS, with an injury free season, should be one of the better ones. Ellis & Rew have room for improvement, but I think there a top team even if they don't. 2nd - Oxford. Good number one then 4 3rd heat leaders / top second strings & the best reserve in the league. Weak RS, but shouldn't hinder them too much. 3rd - Leicester. Very good top 5, like Wolves last year, but with a stronger number 1. Possibly have the weakest reserve pairing, which means a play-off spot is not a certainty. 4th - King's Lynn. Good number one & a solid top 4. Possibly the best reserve duo in the league. 5th - Sheffield. Great top 2. Solid 3&4. But weaker at reserve (especially number 6). 6th - Belle Vue. A lot depends on Bewley as he could turn a solid top 2/3 into a great top 2/3. Don't see so much improvement in their second strings & don't look great at reserve either. 7th - Birmingham. None of the riders they've signed are particularly bad signings, most can probably up their averages. It's just a team that would look like Champions in a 36 point league, but they're racing in a 40 point league. In conclusion, I think Ipswich are a cut above the rest. There's very little between 2nd to 5th. Belle Vue slightly behind & Brummies favourites for the wooden spoon.

How can this show "the depths Birmingham have stopped to" they didn't decide the riders averages, that was the BSPL (management committee maybe). I merely pointed out it could suit the Brummies.

It actually suits Birmingham for their riders to be on these averages rather than Pawlicki (7.32), Milk (5.67) & Lampart (5.00) as it means if anyone is missing they'll be able to use stronger guests or r/r. Plus Z.Cook at reserve could be a real trump card. However I don't understand how they can increase the averages of Pawlicki & Milik, but decrease Janowski's, while Pedersen, Kasprzak & Woffinden returned on their old averages. Should rules not be consistent for all?

Probably not, but Zach Cook & Leon Flint could get a 5-1 over Sheffield's reserves in heat 2.

Well they could have a strict "development" pay structure & still allow Clegg & Morley to race. If they're happy to be a rider / coach for expenses only great, if not - that's fine too, but at least it's their choice.

Absolutely not, but the new rules mean riders like Luke Crang or Tom Woolley can ride forever in the development league for fun, but riders like Max Clegg & Ben Morley can't. I actually think the Morley's & Clegg's are needed more, to let the top developing riders know they are ready to step up into the Champ. If you can beat them, you're ready to move up.

Great point

I really hope there isn't a double change, if Workington are struggling for a 7th rider, just sign the best available. If they're under the limit they can still give all their riders 6 meetings before the league starts to prove themselves before considering strengthening up. Will take a long time for any averages to change, so if below the limit, the spare points won't disappear any time soon.

I'm certainly not very excited about the NL this year. When I look at the teams I don't see a lot of riders & think to myself, wow that's a team with lots of potential, I more think, there's a bunch of riders who aren't good enough / haven't improved enough / will never make it into the Champ. Having riders racing for a hobby, or Career NL second strings / reserves actually never bothered me in previous years, really when they kinda screamed it's a DEVELOPMENT league to us this year, I see all the flaws of their plan. To me it just looks a very weak league. Obviously Max Perry not getting a team spot greatly annoys me, a 16 year old in his first Champ season is exactly the sort of rider the NL should be designed for imo. After two seasons in the NL, it's sink or swim for him in the Champ. I mostly blame Leicester for this, signing Joe T over Perry goes against the new "ethos" of the league imo.

So far Leicester look streets above the rest imo. Oxford ahead of Belle Vue.

Really? Can't say I remember Ipswich fans being unhappy with the Doyle signing.

A riders worth should be based solely on how much money is coming into a club. Doesn't really matter how much any rider wants to spend on equipment / mechanics / vans etc. Clubs should only pay out what comes in.

Using that logic, which I fully agre with. Luke will develop less on this year's NDL than last year's? With a weaker league he may just win all his heats from the gate. Obviously track time is vital at that age, but I wonder would the likes of Luke learn more from racing against the Clegg's & Morley's of the world?

Of course everyone has their own opinion, but it seems to me you've listed the absolute worse case scenario possible with every rider & declared that's what will happen!