BuzzerBeater Forums

I totally agree with Wolph here.

I just saw a guy pay 1.5mio for a HoF 18y trainee and thought "oh dear, thats the peak of his transferprice and he's miles away (or lets say 6 seasons, i.e. 1.5 years) to have the skills for what you paid for". I acknowledge that one an sell 21-24yo players for over 2mio, but training them to 180k salary, they will only be worth sub 1.5mio at the age of 26+. How wrong is that?

Training players has a negative effect on their transferprice at a certain point and doesn't add any value in between 19-23, considering the player was bought for a market price, which includes any kind of future expectation.

BB is going to fail if things continue like this. We have at least 30-40% of the managers in switzerland considering to stop, because things are just getting too stupid. Including myself.

Last edited by shades236 at 5/23/2012 2:21:24 AM

I agree, they should let the market determine the price and not overflow the market with supply.

I've studied economics, but really, there's no need to study that to know what's going on.

thats why the FA get reduced step by step, cause a total removal over night would have bigger effect, who make it a bit of a gamble if you bought your player before or after. So the market react slowly to it. And Fa were introduced, that salary spend fit to the income, afaik.

Why only the high salary they want to lower it?

cause top div with around 500k salary each week earn like crazy. Insert different numbers for lower leagues, and the BB try to fight this inbalance in different ways in the past(speed up training etc), since it give/gave a inbalance to the game.

And you get a pretty good div 4 roster for a small price too, and that those 200k+ players ain't worth much have less to do with FA. or why you don't have 2 400k guys in your roster, if they are so incredible cheap?

Last edited by CrazyEye at 5/23/2012 6:51:04 AM

I totally agree with Wolph here.

I just saw a guy pay 1.5mio for a HoF 18y trainee and thought "oh dear, thats the peak of his transferprice and he's miles away (or lets say 6 seasons, i.e. 1.5 years) to have the skills for what you paid for". I acknowledge that one an sell 21-24yo players for over 2mio, but training them to 180k salary, they will only be worth sub 1.5mio at the age of 26+. How wrong is that?

Training players has a negative effect on their transferprice at a certain point and doesn't add any value in between 19-23, considering the player was bought for a market price, which includes any kind of future expectation.BB is going to fail if things continue like this. We have at least 30-40% of the managers in switzerland considering to stop, because things are just getting too stupid. Including myself.

Depends... if you are only training perennial all-stars or better yeah... probably. But, if you are training up crappier potential guys and selling, not so much.

Well, according to the topic "Balance in the market " there is a balance. People, managers, WE create the market. If someone sends his player to transfer market for 1M starting price and there is a bid during 3 days it means it was a fair price, because other position see some profits of that price. Prices dropped seasons ago due to growth of new managers. I started playing BB since season 10 and there are more managers now. It means more money, and even more players. Well trained players also dropped at their price. Check how looks like B3 final in season 10. My team looks better season ago in Div.3 than B3 champion then. What it suppose to mean? There are more well-trained players. When supply rises and demand stays on their level than prices have to drop. Typical economic rule. I think prices will drop even more in closest seasons.

Another reason why prices have dropped is team's financial balance. In first BB seasons, teams look like they were earning 2-4 millions per season (top teams). Nowadays, perhaps it's 1 million average for developed countries like Spain, Poland, Italy, Turkey etc. Teams spend more on their salary = less money on the market. Teams in lower divisions make of course less money per season.

Both factors affected that draftees cost more (I would add also national team factor, which is associated to prestige what makes perfect draftees some kind of luxury good). It's sound irresponsible that managers pays more for 18yo 5k draftee than 26yo 100k player. However nobody says that investors make proper decisions :) I think people don't know especially what they do. If i spend 1M i have to see some profits due to that decision. Managers spend 3M on draftee and will never see a profit. Firstly, they won't cap him. Secondly they won't buy any other player.

Market is balanced, but participants are just stupid (not all of course). Your decision is how to make an advantage for yourself due to that situation. After some time managers will see that they pay too much on draftee and will buy those trained 26you players. Then, you should train players, because when supply falls then price goes up. That's the clue.

Even on stock market you can see irresponsible participants which hold their stocks when price goes down. Just 10% make profit:)

System only put players on market, but doesn't bid them. We do that. So we create price.

Comparing to stock market - check AIG after 2008. As you see it happens.

Another situation however according to sports. Imagine situation when sport's club goes bankrupt. Players after that goes to office job and starts different life or just they find another club which hire them?

FA market should stay, but not on current rules.