BuzzerBeater Forums

Pros:
- The training of the young people would not mean a decrease in the competitiveness of the main team.

- The difficulty of the training would not change at all. It would only be progressive. The first year you would only have 3 trainables but after 4 years you would only be able to train 3/6 of the 12. I understand that this would help new users.

- The players would arrive at the main team with a potential performance that would not be a burden on competitiveness.

- Players over 22 years old could train more than now in the professional team, especially those who do not have maximum potential.

- Users could focus, if they want, on training the young people to the maximum in the university team regardless of whether they do not win and/or compete to the maximum in the professional team without being limited by the training of young people who have not yet performed at all. . Or continue as now.

Cons:
- By having two teams of coaches (university and professional), players could reach higher levels more quickly than now.

- It would force all users to carry two computers. If they want to optimize the training of the entire squad. (I think that the best players (Historical or Legend) would train the same as now and only mediocre players (All Star or Franchise Player) would benefit from that effect, therefore not being "mandatory" to have this second team)

- Being able to train on the one hand and continue competing at the same time could mean that the rotation of dominating teams in major competitions is not as fluid as it is now.

Just to clarify first, is your idea the same as Kubson6's (323628.1) youth team , where the training speed in the youth team is slower than the main team?
And,

- By having two teams of coaches (university and professional), players could reach higher levels more quickly than now.

Why it is more quickly than now?
Players start training at 18 years old, and the training speed doesn't get faster.

Last edited by little Guest at 5/30/2024 11:32:30 AM

It is not exactly the same but its foundation is very similar. I think my proposal is more elaborate. He outlines many proposals in that thread but does not develop them too much.

It would be faster the way I show, not too much, but to the extent that the young people will not have to compete in training with veterans who are still trainable during their first 4 years.

By not having that direct competition they could train more during that time, but not faster.

Right now I think that most of the training sessions are assigned to very young players or players with very high potential, so I think that my proposal benefits the most veteran players and especially those who do not have TOP potential because they do not have so much competition if they may be going to train something more if the proposal is implemented.

According to your respond, assume that the training speed in the university team is the same as in the main team.
Then, let me borrow mkapa's words:
"That would create U21 factories ... I'm not really in favor of that ..." (309376.929)
Although this was originally mkapa's response to Kubson6's Youth Team, I believe mkapa's thoughts still apply here.

1. If teams can choose whether to spend money to establish University team, I expect it would become mainstream to establish them.
Because teams that are training young players will definitely do this for the main team's performance, and those that are not training young players will also help train players for their country's U21 team.

2. It will increase the number of matches each week.
I think having four matches (2 league game, 1 BBM, 1 cup/scrimmage) a week is the maximum acceptable number.
If we introduce University Leagues, managers will be forced (even though it seems like a choice) to establish a university team, which will increase the number of lineups they have to set and cause complaints.
For Kubson6's (323628.1) youth team, because of the slower training speed, there is no issue of being forced, but there is still the disadvantage of an increased number of matches.

3. If our goal is to train young players without incurring a very big penalty when playing them in league or cup games, then why not choose older players who have better skills?
It might be difficult to find 2x-year-old players on the transfer market who are both reasonably priced and meet the skill requirements.
However, in Season 63, the maximum skill level for 19-year-old draft players will rise from 9.5 to 10.5.
Choosing excellent 19-year-old players should also be considered an improvement to this issue, and the quantity and quality of draftees are also something BB can control.