BuzzerBeater Forums

this is not a farm system. You dont own the team you are sending him to. You can send him to another country. It is for lower teams to get better players and help them with out paying their whole salary and you get your 18 year ols 2nd round pick aa chance to play and prove his worth to you before you decide to sell him. This idea works even better if there is a cap on how many players your team can own.

ok, after this will be done I will send a money to 5 people which will train for me my players, thank you:)

Last edited by Iordanou at 3/15/2008 1:30:02 PM

So I guess what you're saying is (select any number of responses listed below):

(a)You want to train more players for less effort on your part
(b) You want to train more players for less expenditure of money
(c) It makes perfect sense for teams in lower divisions to train a player from another team and in return gain no long-term benefit from said players training
(d) Teams in lower leagues do not have draft picks of their own to train
(e) Teams in lower leagues cannot afford trainees and so instead should do higher league teams a big favour

I don't think player loans will improve the game. It's a system far too open to abuse.

First of all it helps the lower division teams as they get a player that can help them win now. Teams all over Europe do this now. Secondly the player is on their team so they get to choose how to train the player which might be good or bad for me depending on what they are doing. Third they might have a poor trainer which will make it harder for my player to get better faster, and as for the money I am still paying his salary. The team loaning the player does not get a long term investment but if they can’t afford players on the transfer list then this is the next best thing. It also will slow down day trading as lower teams will gladly take a loaner for the season instead of killing themselves financially. The system can’t be abused so much unless you have two teams you’re controlling and you use the second one only to benefit your loaned players. Now think of this for a team in division 4 or 5. They don’t sell out and get loads of money for selling players. Now they can bring in a solid player or a star for that league to help them get to the next level and save their money to get involved in the transfer bidding.

This will never happen - the cheating potential is too great.

You failed to address any of the points I raised. And you even acknowledge one of the ways in which this loan system is guaranteed to be abused by unscrupulous owners in the higher divisions:

The system can’t be abused so much unless you have two teams you’re controlling and you use the second one only to benefit your loaned players.

You also fail to realise - or are ignoring - the two-part purpose of training: to improve your team by improving its players, and to improve your team by selling players you have trained and using this money to buy better players. The loan system would cause teams to use up valuable (financially valuable) training minutes for absolutely no gain.

IIn real life, yes it can be very good for both teams. But this is not real life. A loan system in a game of this sort only ever benefits the owners of players being trained by others.

i answered all of your points. Yes their is a way that it can be a problem the sae way the teansfer list is now and i have seen teams abuse it already. You can make sure it cant be abuse by only allowing teams to loan players to other coountries. Since you cant sign up in a different country that already cuts out some of the problems. My team i take care of except the players on loan. I cant teain them if they are not with me. The point of loaning a player is not to then sell him it is to get him ready to be in my rotation either because i have an aging star or or see more upside with him than a urrent player. There are pplayers who are not always going to be ready and need time to devolop. why should i always sell them and then buy someone else when i am ready. Why cant i keep him and let someone else train him on my money. How is that abusing the game.

The point of loaning a player is not to then sell him it is to get him ready to be in my rotation either because i have an aging star or or see more upside with him than a urrent player. There are pplayers who are not always going to be ready and need time to devolop. why should i always sell them and then buy someone else when i am ready. Why cant i keep him and let someone else train him on my money.

I think this sums up your position nicely. You want someone else to assume all the early risk of training up your unwanted, unplayable young players for you, so you can profit from them, rather than focusing on training players they own to benefit their team.

How delightfully selfish.

that`s what I said (=

However, to contribute in a positive fashion, I think I can add a few modifiers to the original proposal making it fairer for the team receiving the player

1. A team may only loan 1 player per season
2. A team may only recruit 1 player on loan per season
3. A team may not recruit a loan player from another team in the same country (good point, OP)
4. A player can only be on loan for one season in his entire career. The minimum and maximum loan length is one season
5. The teams involved in the loan must agree terms under which the loaned player plays, ie. minutes per week, positions played, skills trained.
6. The team making the loan pays a fee, eg. $250,000, to the team receiving the player in return for services rendered. This fee is held in trust for the duration of the loan and is payable when the loaned player returns to his original club if the playing terms have been met.
7. The team who own the loan player must pay the player's wages
8. If the loan player is sold at any time after the loan period ends, 33% of the proceeds is paid to the team who took the player on loan.

Opinions?