BuzzerBeater Forums

Ok... What about some form of system/ranking thing for managers.
You receive values/scores based on managing ability. Decisions that are good, winning games you shouldn't have, losing games you should have won. Mismanaging a key players minutes and messing up their game shape. Expanding luxury boxes when you're not even selling them out already, etc. Things like that.

1. Example; Bode-Diggity Dogs, from my league, crazy manager don't know what he's doing, but he got a higher country rank than me?!

BAD EXAMPLE
My sytem of ranking proposal has nothing to do with the country rank at all, or world rank.

I really like your post, thank you.

What you've shown is that you can do a lot with a little. Either you're quite lucky or you've made some really good decisions. Good decisions should be rewarded.

It's a tough job to work out how to reward good decisions and even tougher to work out which decisions are good ones (obviously the ones that end with good results, but that can be difficult when chance is at play).

Last week I had three tough games.

Away at Bell Park SuperCats #8 in Australia #553 in the world.
Home against Aussie Pride #5 in Australia #244 in the world.
Home against JW City Bulls #33 in Australia in the cup.

I can't possibly win all three games and maintain decent gameshape so I had to throw one game.

This week I again have three tough games.
Away at Black Label Society #3 in Australia and #97 in the world.
Home against Lewisham Wombats #1 in Australia and #42 in the world.
Away at Gisborne Gladiators #81 in Australia in the cup.
They are a strong team despite their rating with $70k, $60k etc players who CT'd their cup opponent last week. If I want to win that game at their arena and not get knocked out of the cup I will have to send in my starters.

I am also training players and have to somehow get them their minutes.

So should I be penalised further? I already will lose two league games while others get to beat up on bots and noobs?

I think there should be some minimums like you should have to suit up at least seven or eight players in a league match (although I think there was a NBA game a season ago where a team only had six or maybe seven guys not injured and in transit after a trade) so maybe we should be less radical and just stick with a minimum five instead of three.

I think the salary floor should be raised, it is the best mechanism against tanking. Also a minimum of five players rostered for a regular season league game or you forefit the game and in any week where you forefit you lose your TV money for the week. I also think it is stupid that opponents of teams that forefit have their training minutes wrecked. That should be an easy fix.

i think it is really hard to judge when it is tanking or not, but situation like yours might be punished(which is somewhat especially on a realistic standpoint), but imho the damage would be short time to and maybe we had to adjust then our tactics a bit(more GS training, less 7-8 men rosterr etc.)

Tanking doesn't work. It's not a nuisance it's only a "comedy of errors."

What I would suggest is simple. Fans want you to do what's in your power to avoid relegation and put a good product on the floor. The more cash you have in your bank account, the more fans hate losing. It's true in real life. If you support a struggling team financially you're ok with being an underdog. But if your team has amassed huge amounts of money you expect them to use it one way or another and you cannot accept a team that lets itself drown while having the means to prevent it.

Wow, this is one of the best ideas I've heard, yet. It completely makes sense.

+1 for you.

Does anyone have arguments against it?

#2 Losing record

I don't think a losing record necessarily constitutes a tanker. I think there are a string of things that need to happen. For example, if someone loses by 20+ 3-5 games in a row, and their bank balance is over a million, fans should decrease. If someone loses by 30+ 3-5 games in a row, and their bank balance is over 2 million, fans should dramatically decrease.

Certain other things still need to change, however. A team can still go through, win all the games before home games, tv games and rival matches, lose all the rest and get good money from attendance.

Add that to the possibility of a team doing that, then buying up big just before the playoffs, and it makes things silly.