BuzzerBeater Forums

Yeah, that means that everyteam will receive 35000 everyweek from the TV, and not all that cash those 3 games only.

It looks like this change does away with the differential TV game revenues for division levels. I guess this will now be represented by the season ticket holder revenues.

Is it just me or do the new changes pretty much eliminate most of the advantage of promoting to a higher league?

It just seems a bit inconsistent with statements previously made about the game. I thought there was supposed to be benefits from promoting to higher leagues, and from statements previously made it seemed as though that was a very conscious decision.

The changes seem like a complete reversal of philosophy.

...also...40% of gate AND a salary? So much for improving my team. Based on previous gate and my salaries I just went to a break even income.

I might actually now be better off tanking a season or two for high draft picks since the money will be similar either way. I might even make more money winning in div 2 or 3 than being an average team in div 1.

Maybe I'm wrong again, but we seem to have returned to the issue of limited options, since now the only way to get ahead financially seems to be ont he player market. Training players for personal use must now be secondary to training players to sell.

If I sound a bit like sour grapes that is not my intention, I am just curious as to why the change in philosophy.


BTW...I certainly understand closing duplicate threads, but it would be nice if the posts could be forwarded to the new thread so they don't simply get ignored. Thanks.

I think these changes (with the exception of the $35,000 weekly) suck! Trying to appease a bunch of people who complain that they can't get to the NBBA in one season is stupid. It's funny to me because most of the people doing the complaining are not even supporters (Yes, I have been a supporter since the day I started playing the game).

I have been playing for two seasons. I started in Division 4, promoted to Division 3, and I am number one in my league now and I think I will win my league. Next season, I hope to be in Division 2. No, I can't compete with NBBA teams right now, but it doesn't mean that I won't be able to kick King Drive Ballers in the a-sugar-sugar one day!

I have never been in the red; I have trained and sold players effectively; and I enjoy the game the way it is. People need to put in the work and stop expecting everything to be handed to them.

I fear that this game is going to become like 6 year old sports. "Everyone is winner, no one is a loser. Everyone is great!"

Last edited by Winning! at 7/28/2008 10:13:27 PM

Yep, I hate these announced changes. It will make me seriously consider staying down this season instead of trying to advance.

It will also make me seriously consider leaving the game. I worked this hard to develop a team to get up to division I, only to learn that all the benefits of being up there will no longer exist.

Why not change the division structure so there is more movement in divisions? That's why moving up seems so daunting. When only 1 team out of 16 can move up per season, it sucks. With so many teams it also makes it difficult to develop a community in your division.

If that's not the issue, why not make changes that are much less severe and will have less of an impact on the game? Also, why can't the changes be phased in?

Or - why make changes at all? Let the game stabilize - do fine tuning like improving the end game and taking the bugs out of the live game.

This sucks.

Bit of the Gordon Browns about the changes!!

I'm sure they have been thought through for the greater good of the community but the last thing I want to read is people now calculating whether or not they stay in the same league or even consider getting relegated...

The saving grace has to be more consistent attendences and higher caps for season ticket holders.. this is the only way to justify the changes to Div 1 teams.

The only major disappointment for me is the volatility in transfer prices this will cause. The transfer compare will be seriously mis-leading for the next few weeks (maybe wise just to turn it off for a while) and I guess teams that are celebrating that the big boys wont be making much money should sit back and calculate how much less profit they are now likely to receive from their training regime.

I think overall it is going to be much more beneficial for big teams as to build a stadium now is going to be so much more difficult.....we will still end up with more money - just less more money than before....

Do we know anything about the new staff system? Obviously almost anything would be an upgrade but I hope it doesn't overpower the actual game play.

As a lower tier division member, I'm not opposed to the changes. It is going to suck and hurt a few teams as mentioned in the next month or so when people try to recoup the high prices they paid for players recently, but the changes are going to affect everyone, not equally admittedly, but that is the age old debate over flat tax versus relative tax.

My biggest questions are more minor. First, aren't most national teams comprised of young players already? Isn't it a bit premature to have the junior teams? Maybe not next season but it seems like age won't be the biggest factor in causing you to be on the junior team.

Second, why even bother giving a TV revenue? Why not forget the $35K? Again, if it is going to happen to every team just leave it out. The beauty of the TV Revenue was the variance it produced. Some teams would be scrapping just to get by and everyone had money at different times. In a way it spread the wealth over the season and let you plan a little more. Now it is just blah!

Thoughts?

2 weeks to adjust??

is that the 2 weeks that new players are ineligible to play for you during the playoffs?

Im on $400k a game (and thats after a 22-0 - i hate to think what it goes down to after a loss!)

So thats $400k - $160k = $240k +TV = $275k
PR - Staff (thank goodness I still have Max Paine!) - Scouting = Break Even.
Salaries $200k pre update....

Then Cup revenue (was 32.5k against a bot - awaiting for BB3 announcement)

I hope I can still squeeze out $100k a week til the allstar week then break even til the playoffs then a bit more in the last couple of weeks.


Last edited by Superfly Guy at 7/28/2008 11:20:06 PM

we had a salary cap even before. it's just that we were far enough from it to feel its stinky breath.

i think if there was it wasnt enforce or made you feel any sting. as i know as long you have the money to sustain that team and so on you can keep doing it.
=================================================

for instead of making the income less especially for top divisions teams, since i understand being in the top league is tough.

why not make a salary cap same as the nba, before the start of the new season where the relegated left and the new comers come in. by matching the expenses of players we could arrive at a mean or average how would that division fair and by that come up with a salary cap.

so if lets say the average team of a division should be around 150k salaries combine all in all then who goes over the difference will be in sort of a penalty that will be charge to them after the season and give to those relegated as compensation. ( did you know that the nba does give compensation to those teams that sucks as to help with their operation , yes that is where some of that salary cap penalty goes. now you understand why the clippers like loosing then when they havent got brand, maggete and etc )

now it could be a bit harsh if at start a season getting the average, another way is basing it on the average of last season salaries like a mean of the whole division or another way is give the present season till probably a time and get the average of the whole team ( this is hard ).

=================================================

closing the gap of the have and have not is a issue, also its going to get tougher with this how to get ahead from other teams.