BuzzerBeater Forums

Suggestions > NT/U21 suggestions

NT/U21 suggestions

Set priority
Show messages by
This Post:
00
233670.13 in reply to 233670.12
Date: 3/27/2013 9:38:23 PM
Maddogs-Hellas
IV.5
Overall Posts Rated:
13091309
I believe it would be fair,only for NT and U-21 players, if they got TLed, their respective country teams to have a kind of first option, on bidding.
I mean, when a NT players gets listed for the first day or two, only his country's teams can bid on him. If he gets even one domestic bid, then until the transfer deadline only other domestic teams can outbid.
If he doesn't get an initial bid from his country in the afore mentioned (initial)deadline, then the rest of the world can come in and bid for him.

My reasoning behind this, is that the already existing problem, will intensify going into season 24.

When the 2 week drop in GS comes into play, a purchase in order to harm an opponent NT, even if its for a week and then the player gets sold again, can ruin the player's entire NT season.

Additional provisions, regarding GS for NT players will have to be made, as well.

For instance, im told that very recently there was such a buy.

NT1 has a 230k player. His team put him up for transfer. A division III from another country went into a bidding war and got him.
The DIII team is from a country that plays soon against NT1.
The DIII team already has a +200k domestic NT2 player and then 5k scrubs. We all understand whats going on here...anyway.

The player of interest has got in the first two games with his new team, 92mins of play and the week isn't over yet...


Put this real scenario into next seasons GS changes. The player gets bought by a countryman of an opponent NT. He gets a big drop in his GS. Then lets say he stays there only for one week, gets another drop by being overused and then he gets transfered and he gets another 2 week drop! In one single week, his entire NT season(at least) is screwed.


From: locopaps

This Post:
00
233670.14 in reply to 233670.11
Date: 4/8/2013 1:37:35 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
3333
This is off topic, but why do yuo tyep liek thsi?

This Post:
00
233670.19 in reply to 233670.13
Date: 4/11/2013 6:24:44 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
952952
I believe you are talking about our case. That team has a history of doing the same at least twice more and I'm sure there are more teams like this that are doing the same.

I actually like another suggestion that I ran into: A team cannot buy, say, a player with salary that's more than 150% of their TV contract. This still leaves the problem of D.I teams sabotaging other NTs, because they could still buy players with whatever salary they wanted.

This Post:
00
233670.20 in reply to 233670.19
Date: 4/11/2013 9:01:31 AM
Maddogs-Hellas
IV.5
Overall Posts Rated:
13091309
;)

The bottom line is that if he have a problem already now(that we do), next season it will be much bigger and it can destroy NT tournaments, provided drastic action is not taken in advance.

This isn't just an aesthetic kind of suggestion topic. Its crucial something's done. I would like to read some BBs and GMs opinions on it.

This Post:
00
233670.21 in reply to 233670.20
Date: 4/11/2013 9:46:43 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
32293229
;)

The bottom line is that if he have a problem already now(that we do), next season it will be much bigger and it can destroy NT tournaments, provided drastic action is not taken in advance.

This isn't just an aesthetic kind of suggestion topic. Its crucial something's done. I would like to read some BBs and GMs opinions on it.


So to "protect" the integrity of the NT/U21 tournaments, you're going to make it impossible for everyone in the game to purchase players from other nations' NT/U21 rosters? I understand that some people feel that the international teams are important, but proposing rules that actually tell users that they can't buy a player simply because it inconveniences the NTs is a horrible direction to go in. The NT should never be an infringement upon the core game, period, end of story.

This Post:
00
233670.22 in reply to 233670.21
Date: 4/11/2013 10:16:42 AM
Maddogs-Hellas
IV.5
Overall Posts Rated:
13091309
In all real leagues, around the world, there are transfer limitations, much stricter and more "unfair" than the one i proposed.
Without even getting in the "fair play" subject, that is the main concern here and any breach of it has become part of written rules and regulations of the game.

In addition, i don't see any constructive input. I can't even tell whether you recognise the existence of the problem or not. Your only opinion on the subject, that i know of, is that we shouldn't have NT-U21 teams and tournaments at all.
Fair enough, but i also believe its redundant to aplly any critisism to any proposition, on this subject, since you trully believe it shouldn't exist as a subject, to begin with.

This Post:
00
233670.23 in reply to 233670.22
Date: 4/11/2013 11:33:27 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
32293229
In all real leagues, around the world, there are transfer limitations, much stricter and more "unfair" than the one i proposed.
Without even getting in the "fair play" subject, that is the main concern here and any breach of it has become part of written rules and regulations of the game.

In addition, i don't see any constructive input. I can't even tell whether you recognise the existence of the problem or not. Your only opinion on the subject, that i know of, is that we shouldn't have NT-U21 teams and tournaments at all.
Fair enough, but i also believe its redundant to aplly any critisism to any proposition, on this subject, since you trully believe it shouldn't exist as a subject, to begin with.


If my criticism of the proposal was "omg, international play is teh sux!" then you'd be correct. But my concern about the suggestion, strange as it may appear, is exactly what I said it was to be - it's saying that because of some rogue actors that are sabotaging the NT/U21, we must limit the ability of all users to purchase NT/U21 players from other countries. This, essentially, is telling users who might legitimately be interested in purchasing those players that while they aren't intending to do anything wrong, their actions nonetheless can't be permitted because the international game is more important than your silly little club.

Of course, if you're more interested in actual constructive input, what about this scenario: the NT manager from some small country sees a nicely-trained player from his country on the TL at a fairly low price. And we're not even talking NT/U21 caliber player, but a nice SF let's say. The NT manager adds the player to the NT, makes the initial low bid, and walks away with a steal. Sure, this may be no more of an abuse of the system than what's going on now, but instead of a NT being hurt, actual club users (both those who train/sell the player and those who would otherwise buy the player) are harmed. And this isn't even preventing NT sabotage - it's just an opportunistic move by an NT manager to enrich their club interests.

As far as the restrictions in the real world, I've got no problems with restrictions that are set up to improve the game - not letting teams in leagues with a 50k TV contract place a bid on a guy with a $200k salary (NT or not!), regardless of nationality, for example is something I'd support. But adding restrictions this widespread to address a game problem that only really matters for the NT/U21 is trying to crack an egg with a hammer.

Advertisement