BuzzerBeater Forums

2. I've been a scout for a lot of the 22+ guys for the past couple seasons. I seem to be the only candidate aware of what types of players we have, and what's in the pipeline. In fact, I seem to be the only candidate that realizes the types of players we're up against as well. Well, I bet the Dutch guy realizes that. He seems cool.

This makes me laugh. You act as if you are the only person that knows anything. I know d*** well who our players are and what their skills are as well as what our pipeline holds. I also know very d*** well of who we are up against.

I feel their is confusion as far as where I stand on this election. I am not saying "commit full fledged right now to go outside offense, or any other offense." Now, I will however look at the situation and if calls for something different then I will do my best to act on the situation and try something different.

What I am saying is build for the ability to play multiple offenses down the line in 3-6 seasons. Which this is where Im confused where you seem to not agree at all with me because you just said in a prior post that you want to create players that can play in multiple offenses. So now I have to ask, are we only different in the aspect of how we choose tactical decisions?

Im quite stunned that you would say that you are the only one that knows who our players are, though. That,to me, makes it seem as if you are putting yourself at a higher pedestal. I am always looking at our roster and analyzing it. I don't however suggest anything in the forums anymore though because things continue to be the same thing anyways.

My question to the candidates is: should the U21 team take a (relative) back seat to the National Team when it comes to high-potential players in the hopes of creating world-class, salary efficient players (ie emphasizing training secondaries at a young age rather than waiting to do so once they hit 22 years old)? And if so, how would you work with the U21 coach to enact such a plan when your respective goals are at least partially conflicting?

This is something I have always believed in doing and in all honesty has actually been happening to a certain degree. While U21 trophies are nice, our NT should be our first priority. The past few seasons the NT and U21 has done a great job in cooperation of who is on NT track and who is U21 track. Obviously superstars and PA players and even MVPs should be the ones taken on the U21 track because they do not have the cap room to be on the NT. So those players should be trained towards the direction that the owner feels works for their own team, as well as the U21. Now, some of those MVPs, if trained to be a special type of player, could make the NT but very few make it this day and age.

For HOF and ATGs, that really does depend on their starting skills at 18yos. If they are a special player then they will be used on the NT track. If, however, they start out as a 7'5" big with all 1s in secondaries, then I almost argue they aren't worth the training and they should just be trained to the owner's liking, unless we want to try to make him a primaries beast, which isn't beneficial salary wise. But yes, in short, many of our HOF and ATG prospects should be on the NT track and MVPs and SS on the U21 track.

Well, I'm a tad bit lazy, and don't much care what the other candidates may or may not be saying. So why bother?

And just so everyone knows, I'm probably least aware of what our current pipelines hold of all the candidates, as I'm currently restricted on the offsite.

Other basic stances of mine:
-Being NT coach is not that tough, seriously, for me the toughest part was keeping community involvement up in a smaller country, fortunately not a huge problem here.
-I think we've had a bit too much of the "it's not anybody's fault" going on recently. We keep saying it's on the 'community', but really in my eyes the buck always stops at the manager and he/she needs to step up and take responsibility.

Well, I'm a tad bit lazy

So you are unlikely to in-depth research of our future opponents. How will you bring tactical superiority compared the other candidates, given that the buck stops with the NT coach? Would you plan on tactics other than LI/M2M?

Ahh, difference in being a tad bit lazy and not wanting to read through a thread with so many tangents and things not related to myself and successfully managing a NT. I have managed a NT for the past 4 seasons with basically no assistance (compared to the US support base at least) and have it within 10 spots of the US in the world rankings, I think I know what it takes to research an opponent.

With the way the US roster looked at last check, I would probably lean towards inside offense and MtM defense in most situations. Our guards especially were not built to go outside. The only thing I could promise for tactical superiority is to fairly evaluate all of our players, where as the current regime seems to... for lack of a better phrase pick their own. I'm all for the US owning it's players, it's simply more cost effective, but it's never going to be a factor in my roster picking. (I'm not saying past managers have favored their own players, but they have favored US owned players.)

Some general comments to all that I read in the posts.

- I believe a NT coach is an unity builder! A country needs it's top teams, league I and II to train it's best players. Transfers of NT players should be kept to a minimum. If the own folks don't build on their national team, who would do?

- U21 is a totally different business than the National team. The National team players build up, has to kept as long as possible, financial interesting for the training team. Keep in mind that nomally a NT player is only member for 4 to 6 seasons, while training him to become a NT player will keep for sure as long as 10 seasons. That is more than 2.5 years a lot can happen in such period.

- I don't know the current skills of most of team USA, but I have a lot of knowledge on the different tactics and what kind of players you need for it. I also have experienced with a NT team what difference it makes to have a high enthousiasm or low.

- My plan for team USA is to make a selection of 12 to 14 players, who are just the most skilled/best for their position players and 1 or 2 what I call jokers. This can be a player that has a strange skill set or an older player with very high experience, etc. I like to keep a couple of positions open at the beginning of the seasons to add some needs later on. You never know when an injury happen or an unexpected transfers comes which lowers the gameshape a lot.

- Secondly I like to work with assistants. A discussion between 3 to 5 good managers mostly gives the best result. The coach decides, but to reflect his ideas makes the decisions only better. If I become the USA coach, I would like to have some USA assistants.

- last but not least, I will make in all honesty decisions. I am somebody that communicate in a direct way. Good is good, bad is bad. And never forget, it is a game for fun and you have most fun when you win.


Last edited by Ruaidri at 9/20/2013 6:41:24 PM

Well the most recent news post changes things a bit. It's as if smallfrie can predict future changes to BB. It seems like now there is a disadvantage to being predictable, and the whole "keeping the competition on their toes" bit seems to now have merit. This also makes worlds in season 26 a bit more interesting. I still think we have to build mutltiskilled and sustainable players, but it also looks like we have to focus a bit more on building players who can play multiple tactics.

I just noticed that none of the Top 5 U21 teams in the world (Italy, Russia, USA, Latvia, Phillipines) have a National Team that is ranked in the Top 10. I think this is a reflection of these countries encouraging the primary skill-heavy "arms race" of U21 to trainers of high-potential young players rather than a balanced build for players early on. A recent example is David Aquino (27260671). A manager on the offsite commented that he would train OD/PA for a season if he bought him. Our U21 manager's response? Aquino will "get OD and PS training this season over my dead effing body."

My question to the candidates is: should the U21 team take a (relative) back seat to the National Team when it comes to high-potential players in the hopes of creating world-class, salary efficient players (ie emphasizing training secondaries at a young age rather than waiting to do so once they hit 22 years old)? And if so, how would you work with the U21 coach to enact such a plan when your respective goals are at least partially conflicting?

I should protest that you've taken my smart-ass comment a bit out of context...it was directed about a specific player and a specifically stupid post, and is not a summation of my U21 big training philosophy.

This issue has been discussed for many seasons now, and in my experience each season I've coached U21 I could count no more than two players that have been "NT tracked" and trained in a way that he was no use to U21 (Magiker's Bello being one of them). This only potentially affects bigs with 9+ potential, and I've come around that this really isn't a big concern for either program. I'm just not seeing players being "lost" for NT purposes, and the depth taken out on the U21 roster isn't a make or break problem. I'd be curious if any candidate who feels otherwise can give detailed proof otherwise.

Your example of other countries doesn't hold up, either...both Poland and China's U21 and NT programs have consistently both brought home hardware for many seasons in a row now.

I've actually been creating the scouting groups for some time now, so I'll continue to make that "NT track" group and give it to jfarb. Screw fewmit. Nothing he can do, regardless of who's elected as the manager.

Up yours.

Hmm...interesting

Up yours.

What am I reading? 50 shades of gay?

Does anyone else feel the erotic buzz coming from all this sexual tension lingering in this forum? You guys are taking full advantage of my emotional vulnerabilities. If this continues, I'll have no choice but to drop trou' for the rest of this electoral debate.