BuzzerBeater Forums

i think just myself,

the bb shouldnt be controlling much the money flowing in a team, but the money that a team already made or makes in other words the amount that is in their pockets

because the way i see it now, your are only slowing a process that is already going there, wherein if you try to hit the problem directly which is some teams makes to much money for others to catch up or the balance of money isnt right to generally say that all bb teams have the gap of the have much and have few.

i dont know how will teams react but surely the fastest teams that will or could adjust to the new rules are those already well establish and if the new rules were made because of this teams but seemingly affected largely those teams that arent well manage and establish giving more room for this well established teams to create a bigger gap in the coming season :D

Are you a victim if the wound is self-inflicted?

Well - just imagine how much more I would have made if I hadn't have lost over 1300 season ticketholders before the season - perhaps 41 thousand billions.

And if you had won B3, I estimate you would have made a grand total of over 1 gazillione!! (before tax that is....)

(6248337)

we have the first victim of the rule changes — this was a div. II final, and the home team decided to tank it.

Wow, that was quite the tank.

I decided to try to promote so I can take my lumps from Toroo. I have this optimistic outlook that the changes might work. ;-)

262 comments on the changes and probably less than 10 people agreed with them (don't know if it even got close to 5...). I think there's a pretty big controversy. Matter of interpretation.

Hmm, a big controversy. Lets take a closer look at the numbers.

Total posts: 316
Number of posters: 48.
Number of people with more than 10 posts in this thread: 12.
Total number of posts by the last mentioned group: 196.

So 25% of all posters here got more than 60% of all posts in this thread. Just a few numbers.

Actually I think these changes are great, the inflation was terrible this season (especially in the end), it's way to easy to earn loads of money in the higher divisions right now. The salary's are too low to compensate the income, so the income should decrease.

At the beginning of the season I got around 1m. I wanted to buy a $10k PG with some decent OD and PG with my cash, which wasn't possible of course, the price was around 2m, way too much. I decided to wait untill I got some more money. I didn't sell any players, and around the ASB I got around 2.5m I believe. But by then the price of a $10k PG was 4,5m. No chance at all to buy any. Now the price is over 6m for a 4x prominent PG.
This is my situation, my terrible story! (time to make a movie about it). The numbers aren't exactly right, I guessed them. But I was pretty frustated that I had no chance to buy an above average player, while I'm in the D2. I lowered my standards, but still every time someone else, mainly D1 teams, got a higher bid.

It was way to easy to get a very nice economy. The salary's of the players are too low, so the income of all teams is way higher than the expenses. Money is flowing into the game, but there isn't enough money going out. I hope next season will be better.

I think your argument holds water. I totally agree with any measure that gives opportunities for all in the long run. If inflation has the effect you are describing the game will die out from the bottom. People will get tired of not progressing and being in with a chance. I'm playing my playoff finals (leading 1-0) and might promote to div 1, I will be one of those affected worst (both financially and that I'm picking the draftees late) but I'm all for it.

Very few people like change, especially when it is percieved to not be in their best interests. Neither do I, unless it certainly is in MY best interests.
Without restating all that has been said, one thing that could be changed that would be a LONGTIME equalizer would be to modify the draft.
Why should NBBA, Div I, Div II, and Div III teams have access to the same quality players in the draft?
My proposal is to make the available players in each Leagues draft a little less devloped the higher one rises in the Divisions.

For instance, of the 48 players in a Div III League, there might be
10 5-star players (with all players 18 years old)
10 4-star players
10 3-star players
9 2-star players
9 1-star players

in Div II there might be
8 5-star players ( 80% 18, 20% 19 year old)
8 4-star players
8 3-star players
12 2-star players
12 1-star players

in Div I there might be
4 5-star players ( 25% 18, 75% 19 year old)
4 4-star players
10 3-star players
15 2-star players
15 1-star players

NBBA
2 5-star players ( all players 19 years old)
2 4-star players
14 3-star players
15 2-star players
15 1-star players

this would not check the inflation at the present, but would make it easier longterm, for Div III teams to move to a higher Division.

Also, the Buzzerbeater could adjust the star rating as needed from season to season to increase the chances of promotion.