BuzzerBeater Forums

Suggestions > Idea for relegation

Idea for relegation

Set priority
Show messages by
This Post:
00
102222.10 in reply to 102222.9
Date: 7/23/2009 2:51:50 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
959959
whats the advantage of finishing 5?

This Post:
00
102222.11 in reply to 102222.10
Date: 7/23/2009 3:00:01 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
33
You get to play at home against the #6 team, any you only have to play away against the #7 team.

This Post:
00
102222.12 in reply to 102222.11
Date: 7/23/2009 3:12:37 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
959959
the question is that an advance or an disadvantage ;)

This Post:
00
102222.13 in reply to 102222.12
Date: 7/23/2009 3:51:14 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
33
My round-robin format is designed so that every team is able to get funds from a home game in the playoffs. Isn't that more important than having the #5 team play at home in all of their games, making it almost impossible for them to get relegated?

Last edited by Somebody Important at 7/23/2009 3:52:10 PM

This Post:
00
102222.14 in reply to 102222.13
Date: 7/23/2009 3:56:34 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
959959
actually you could win your away game, and you should have a advance of finishing 5th then 7(ok currently this place is a punishment to, but when we change it don't replace is with an Hobsons choiche).

Maybe the fund problems, could be fixed in dividing the money 50:50 - that won't be bad for the PO team too.

Last edited by CrazyEye at 7/23/2009 3:57:18 PM

This Post:
00
102222.15 in reply to 102222.14
Date: 7/23/2009 4:10:29 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
33
Maybe the fund problems, could be fixed in dividing the money 50:50 - that won't be bad for the PO team too.

I could go with that, but there's no reason that every team that doesn't make the playoffs shouldn't have to fight for their safety. When the playoffs start, everything is back at square 1 - season records don't matter except for homecourt advantage, which doesn't need to be there anyway because of the placement of teams in the playoffs.

From: Kukoc
This Post:
00
102222.16 in reply to 102222.13
Date: 7/23/2009 4:16:51 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
13361336
I think the biggest issue is the problem with incomes not really adding up with league standings.

We can probably all agree that #1 and #2 have it covered. #3 and #4 are a little off balance (#4 prolly earns more than #3 as the income is based on the home team arena. #1 usually has a bigger income than #2), but it adds up with #3 having a better chance to win the game. Usually playoffs end for them in one away game income.

#5 has the biggest problem with no income. Perhaps this should be avoided with both #5's playing eachother with income split and multiplied perhaps with 0.5 (why? because we want their income to be below #4 teams income) or any number that balances it out a little.

I think the the relegation matches should be decided with one game. With #6 playing at home and income divided just like with playoff teams. This income needs to be multiplied with a number, making #6 earn a little less than #5. The second option would include some attendancy penalty for the relegation matches.

#8 should relegate without extra income, with the bonus of getting a high draft pick.

I hope this was understandable.

From: Cuzittt

This Post:
00
102222.17 in reply to 102222.16
Date: 7/23/2009 4:59:10 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
00
While agreeing that there is an issue with the monetary funds... that issue is mostly with the 3 game relegation playoffs. The 6th and 7th placed teams end up profiting more than not only the 5th place team, but likely the 3rd and 4th place teams.

I don't personally see a major problem with the lack of funds for the 5th and 8th place teams. I do see a problem with both teams losing a game for the purposes of training.

Therefore, the only 2 changes I would like to see is:

1) On the Tuesday where the playoffs start, the 5th and 8th place teams play a force scrimmage (B5 vs. G8, G5 vs. B8).
2) Something be done to limit the financial gains of the 6th and 7th placed teams (going to a one game playoff would be fine as they also would not gain the extra games for training... putting all but the top 2 teams in the same training position).

This Post:
00
102222.18 in reply to 102222.17
Date: 7/23/2009 6:06:44 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
959959
I don't personally see a major problem with the lack of funds for the 5th and 8th place teams. I do see a problem with both teams losing a game for the purposes of training.


if you had weekly balanced like my team you see it maybe the opposite, i make last season -900k in the last three wekks with one game in the PO. And this season my salarys raised another 100k, and i think i am going to play relegation instead of PO this season because of the founds(even it hshould be a ahrd fight to reach it^^)

This Post:
00
102222.19 in reply to 102222.18
Date: 7/23/2009 7:14:30 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
00
if you had weekly balanced like my team you see it maybe the opposite, i make last season -900k in the last three wekks with one game in the PO.


Perhaps I would. I certainly understand that upper level teams have a much larger salary they have to absorb over these weeks with income lacking.

However, I think it is a simple fix to make sure every team in the first week of the playoffs to get the 3 games that a team normally get for training. I certainly don't think the 5th place team should be punished for finishing 5th as they are now. [I finished 5th my first season here. It is really difficult on any training plan.]

This Post:
00
102222.20 in reply to 102222.19
Date: 7/23/2009 7:19:36 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
959959
I certainly don't think the 5th place team should be punished for finishing 5th as they are now. [I finished 5th my first season here. It is really difficult on any training plan.]


i like those weeks without competition, else you could train stamina freethrow or your guys out of position which i do most times in this cases(i am such a 4-6 place team^^).

Advertisement