BuzzerBeater Forums

The problem with guaranteed contracts is - you can't get rid of them. So basically any manager not really home with "what his incomes can handle" is at a big risk of being bankrupt at the end of a season (or sooner). With BB's training system, more than one season contracts are not reasonable anyway. You can't predict the teams training plan and it might change drastically with occuring injury.

How many teams have money at the start of the next season to hand out signing bonuses. I know big country teams are sitting on low cash. If they can't unload some of their players for cash (with contracts), where should the money come to sign any players at the start of the season? This would make tanking even more powerful. As teams who have been playing near salary cap, can not sign anyone at the start of the next season.

With valueing contracts by "what the player feels is best for him" is wandering into a really gray area. That's why BB has salarys based on skills. Want that player -> pay that salary. There are no Payton's, Malone's etc to agree to a low salary to get a championship.

Contracts would also kill the TL completely. There is only offseason for contracts and really no point in looking at the TL. If the TL is active with that system, then a lot of teams are going bankrupt -> a lot of players leaving. I don't think anyone wants that. If everyone is good at managing contracts, there is no activity and the next time you get some exitement is next offseason. Pretty boring imo. There are restrictions to daytraders currently and I don't think it is easy atm. If a manager can make profit on the TL, then by all means, let him get it. Knowing the TL and prices needs a lot of browsing work and free time. Eventually the daytraders get tired and most of them quit. Some start proposing ideas in the forums to limit it even more (as they are tired of doing it themselves). I used to oppose daytrading strongly when I started the game. I have realised that it's ment to be part of the game by BB's. Currently it seems hard enough to not be a problem.

One more thing we disagree on. You think the FA is bad and the starting price for FA's is too low. Here is an example of a player who just retired (10952856). I would have bought this guy. I like many divI teams in big countrys (Estonia is nr13-th in size, so I consider us a big country) just do not have enough money lieing around (yes I said it, I have less than 1mil free funds). There are plenty of similar retirement. This actually shows, the FA system is working. Managers have stuffed their salary caps -> less free funds -> more FA retirements.

A massive extension to how I was thinking about it, but I really like it. I reckon it'd add a more natural state to the economy. But... Who knows what troubles it might bring?

Well, I see another negative aspect of this idea. If each player has contract, it means there won't be any transfer market during season, because managers will buy/contract players in season break. What does it result? You should be able to stay online 24h to contract your whole roster on that time. Nobody will break the contract of their superstar. I don't see any positive effect of doing this. Former employer have no interest doing that (currently it's about 80-97% of transfer price).

One key aspect of contract negotiations is monoskilled would be paid less and versatile would be paid more...balancing out a bit the realism . still some player would be overhyped/overpaid but this would be the failure of the manager who negotiated the contract, not a autoset system to pidgeon hole every manager in the game to pay players weekly on the same bogus criteria.

Hit the nail on the head!

One key aspect of contract negotiations is monoskilled would be paid less and versatile would be paid more

But then there is no downside if you train a monoskill monster. Currently it's a lot harder to train multiskill, trading off wins to play out of position etc.
I think the proposed contract system is messy, has too many variables/negotiables. Is not an upgrade to the current system.
Edit: correction, thanks Wolph

Last edited by Kukoc at 6/16/2012 2:54:46 AM

I think the proposed contract system is messy, has too many variables/negotiables. Is not an upgrade to the current system.

It would seem exactly the same if we were using a contract system and considering the system we have now.