BuzzerBeater Forums

You were 100% wrong with your interpretation

Whatever. My mistake. Clearly you are the very essense of tolerance towards those who wish to air their opinions.

And just what brilliant contributions have you offered?

I never claimed to have any suggestions, I posted to have my opinion on the likely results of these changes aired, alongside the opinions of plenty of others. I wonder why bring this up since you are the epitome of tolerance?

you try to lessen your whining by saying it's not really sour grapes, even though it most certainly is

I also never said it was not sour grapes, I said I never meant for it to sound like sour grapes. Do you really not see the difference between the two statements?

a trite capitulation to BB-Charles' response

Actually my "trite" response had less to do with that specific post than to a more complete conversation we had via PM.

Two weeks is plenty of time to sell your best player and get a nest egg to pay expenses if you think you won't be able to handle the hardship.

This is exactly where the problem lies. I will not go broke. I will not have to sell off players. Instead I will break even and watch while teams like Torooo still make enough money to improve their team. The gap between the top teams and the lower will simply grow bigger.

The point has been made numerous times; if the big money teams are the problem why does this solution target the lower earning division I teams?

Keep up the expression!

This is why I shift into "sardonic, mean-spirited replies." I believe I maintained a reasonably contructive role in this discussion until people like you and a couple of others came on and began essentially telling us to shut up and quit whining because it's just a game. Feel free to tell me all about how worthless my posts have been, but I was not the one who felt the condescending need to let people know they were playing a game. At least my woe-is-me posts had a purpose in the discussion and were based on the numbers rather than some self-inflated sense of superiority.

People are having a normal discussion about planned changes and their possible effects and you decide to grace us with your presense in order to let us know it is just a game. Exactly how else could that be interpreted?

As I have said in another post or two - it isn't as though teams like mine will fall apart. What it means is that the very top earning teams will still make plenty, while we will merely be able to maintain our teams as they are. We don't really have much hope of improvement.

I see your point here except for one major flaw.

Suppose that BB would have decided upon an arena tax instead, then these teams would be immediately hurt as their money is already invested in the arena and the only way to adapt to the new rules would be to remove seats from thir arena. Thus, they would need to throw away money and would have no real possibility to adapt to the change

Since the changes are only temporary they would not really need to adapt. They have big enough arenas to keep up as strong a cash flow as the rest of us, and when the taxes are ove they would continue to reap the benefits of their large arenas. The changes as they now exist mostly punish the teams that are the biggest victims of inflation.

For example: The Torooo tax hurts every single other div I team in Canada more than it hurts Torooo because he has the biggest arena. An arena tax would level the playing field for the two or three seasons it is in place, rather than widen the gap between him and the rest of us.

Last edited by TigerUnderGlass at 8/10/2008 9:53:37 PM

So they opened the site and said, "omg, things are waaay out of control, we need to change something now, before dinner!" Exactly.

Fixed.

There's is the best.I haven't seen a better one, have you?.

See almost any post by Kozlodoev.

Last edited by TigerUnderGlass at 8/10/2008 9:57:46 PM

Since the changes are only temporary they would not really need to adapt. They have big enough arenas to keep up as strong a cash flow as the rest of us, and when the taxes are ove they would continue to reap the benefits of their large arenas. The changes as they now exist mostly punish the teams that are the biggest victims of inflation.

For example: The Torooo tax hurts every single other div I team in Canada more than it hurts Torooo because he has the biggest arena. An arena tax would level the playing field for the two or three seasons it is in place, rather than widen the gap between him and the rest of us.

I do not think it is a major flaw at all. If it was a change for just half a season or something like that I would agree with you, but even if temporary, this is something hat will be here for at least a couple of seasons.

Of course an arena tax would level the playing field (as an example I would gain on the big team in Sweden HHH), however it would be an unfair way. The reason why teams like Torooo and HHH are in a better position then me is because they have started before me and that they have managed theor teams in a good way. I cannot see why they should be punnished for this.

If you have played your cards right there is no reason why you should loose out compared to Torooo as a consequence of this change. If we, until now, have managed our teams optimaly there is no reason at all why we could not do this in the future. It is in fact just a matter of adapting.

With that said, I think it is unfortunate that BB designed the game in a way that made it possible for a few teams to "run away", but I cannot see why they should be punnished for doing this.

ahhh the law of taxation :D

actually could bb work something like a corporate tax that in the end will still help the rich be able to be untax as much as they could be

just kidding :D

reminds me of my studies when im in my finance classes :D

As I have said in another post or two - it isn't as though teams like mine will fall apart. What it means is that the very top earning teams will still make plenty, while we will merely be able to maintain our teams as they are. We don't really have much hope of improvement.

And did you have much hope last season to catch up with them? I still strongly believe the plan is not to level the field of competition, just to slow down the widdening of the gap. The changes for all DI teams are the same, so there is no one who will benefit or suffer from these changes more in that (or any) division: the differances that were, will remain.

I look at it as a chance to outwit better teams and by doing so try to bridge the gap to them. To do that I will have to adapt, maybe by weakening my team for now, but coming out stronger. With new tools that might be possible, but with the way it was this season it certainly was not...

Last edited by Thijs at 8/11/2008 5:55:17 AM

I see these changes as somewhat positive. As a 2.5 year old DII team who is only just starting to come even on cash flow I can see how this will make things harder for some teams. I may have made some non-optimal decisions investing heaps on scouting and staff to train players instead of buying readymade players and have recently been upgrading my stadium to get the cash flow up to a decent level.

I was shocked yesterday when I thought about buying a player to shore up a weak position hoping to take advantage of the non-playoff rule to find that I had been well and truly priced out of the market. That is what makes this have to happen.

Yeah the price of players will go down shortterm and sure the top players can afford to reap the benefits of the fire sale but in the long run we will all benefit by having the market come back to respectability. The top top players may be overpriced but quality helping additions should become affordable.

Of course an arena tax would level the playing field (as an example I would gain on the big team in Sweden HHH), however it would be an unfair way. The reason why teams like Torooo and HHH are in a better position then me is because they have started before me and that they have managed theor teams in a good way. I cannot see why they should be punnished for this.

You are right, but i don't thnik they got punished for this, the changes just avoids thats a medium or bad manager who started earlie will be in front of a good manager who started later just because.

Tatoroo will stay competive, and his opponent are punished the same way ... BUT the teams in lower weeks, but their progress won't be faster then the one of an as good manager in a lower leagues. Maybe it is a bit slower so the manager could catch up, or still a bt higher but actual you benefit a lot in playing a higher league.

No. I was not going to catch him this season. The difference is that before I had enough cash flow to at least upgrade my team every so often. With these changes my cash flow will only allow for the status quo.

The changes are not the same for all div one teams. For me and some others the changes will mean we barely break even. For Top teams the changes mean they will only make 6 million instead of 8. This is the problem. As Kozlodoev pointed out, why treat a team with a 20k arena the same as a team with an 8k arena?

Secondly, if you recall, the changes are temporary. How can you adapt for the long term with little positive income while the tops teams have enough to wait it out?

I get that they do not want to automatically level the field, but the goal should be to lessen the slope rather than steepen it, which is what these changes seem likely to do.