BuzzerBeater Forums

Easy, I am not taking your money.
There are two sides of the story: one is realism, another is... you just described it.
I do understand you that back then you didn't have no clue about these changes and adapted to current system and don't want to get puniched for that.
Still I think this is sort of sucked out under compulsion, but for the future balance maybe needed change.

For TV revenue, it gets negotiated for the entire league rather than on an individual basis. So regardless of the players you have, everyone will get the same amount. Lucky break for those in the big leagues with smaller salaries. For merchandising though, it's on a team by team basis.

Yes, we won't be seeing free agents unless they are part of their NT setup if I read the news correctly. Great change. With all the new players being trained every season, there is an 'in' but no 'out' so the pool of skilled players gets bigger every season. Which causes your players value to go belly up.

Easy, I am not taking your money.
There are two sides of the story: one is realism, another is...

if we make realism, additional tv contracts will raise the visitor income and not decrease it ;) NBA has awesome tv presence, but even there people travelling for all over the world to their games and even the unimportant one are selled out for proud prices.

I could tell the same about soccer in my countr, you could watch games easily in tv but this doesn't lead to shrinking visitor, it increased it through the medial presence.

Even if i would say, BB making a lot compromises to fun and thats good i don't want a boring game who reflect reality, i like to see my players develop etc. So more fun should be target number one.

Maybe realism should also lead to extra income of this big arena throungh renting, then for concert, maybe selling it for a guy for more money who need a congress zcentrum fast and is happy that i don't need that much time, or in NBA terms the team get a lucrative offer from another city and the team move - who gets competive to the old because you don't need a fine arena anymore.

I do understand you that back then you didn't have no clue about these changes and adapted to current system and don't want to get puniched for that.

exactly this is improtant if you made such a change, i don't find him that necessary, because arena building wasn't limitless and in the biggest arena the additional seats are really long term investment.

Last edited by CrazyEye at 6/2/2009 5:20:05 AM

i agree! its very unrealistic to get the same money back and its just unfair for teams who been there a while and played in topleagues when they did not have to pay much for their starplayers. so you could save some money in your arena and then pull it back nowadays where you get much better players for the money you once invested

i think its good! because it makes the managers to choose more carefully what they want to do.

but we have to consider this, if you were playing the game before and the source of revenue was the attendance and the tv contract which the later was subject to economic restructuring.

what else do you need to do just to keep your team afloat or in some teams to keep their best players is to keep building arena capacity or sell players. .. . .

and suddenly the change comes in and everyone who invested in this term as well as hurting their team or in the sense went through a lot of head and heart aches ( probably have to sell player they love ) gets burn, i do think this 100% money back guarantee will just be temporary.

i mean just looking at it, put yourself in their shoe. if you never cared or didnt mind about arena expansion and now your just reaping the benefits of such compare to other teams that had ?




Last edited by Shoei at 6/2/2009 7:08:40 AM

Nobody wants to watch a basketball game in a giant football stadium

Then what is considered an acceptable stadium size?

capping 40K?
or 30K?

I cannot imagine at 20K; since then alot of people would like to downsize their arena; which result in a cash increase; hence inflation.

So how would it be clear for the people who built 20K up; that is is no longer viable to expand?

I fear if there is no clearer answer the expansion button wont be touched by ANYone in BB this season. Which causes again the inflation.

I really like the flexibility of the arena expansion which makes this game a bit more interesting then just train train train.....So I sincerly hope the arena button wont be a button I will never touch again...like the investing in draft button..:D

Last edited by GM-Rijswijker at 6/2/2009 7:49:34 AM

I cannot imagine at 20K; since then alot of people would like to downsize their arena; which result in a cash increase; hence inflation.

Some inflation but probably not all that much. A very small % of teams in BB have larger than 20k stadiums, so even if everyone reduced to 20k it would likely be a small blip on the TL, and probably only on the best players on the list.

Overall, I think this was a very clever way to deal with an arena problem that was getting out of control. Nobody loses out either, and those that invested in stadiums that will soon be too big have a nice savings account to dip into.

Overall, I think this was a very clever way to deal with an arena problem that was getting out of control. Nobody loses out either, and those that invested in stadiums that will soon be too big have a nice savings account to dip into.

It seems like another way to separate the little guy from the big guy

From the front page-

Starting at the all star break this year, every league will be negotiating its TV contract independently, and leagues in larger divisions or with more superstars will be able to make deals with larger TV networks, making it possible for more people to follow their team from the comfort of their home

Does larger mean higher? Like division I? If so this seems to help create more separation between divisions. It would be hard enough to promote to the top as it is, but now we feed more cash to the top managers in the higher divisions.

@ all
I also dont understand the fascination with incentive for teams that play players from thier own country. This is an international game, why the subtle segregation?

@ all
I also dont understand the fascination with incentive for teams that play players from thier own country. This is an international game, why the subtle segregation?

Makes sense to me;look at Xavi and Iniesta Valdes; they are local heroes at Barcelona.It is pretty difficult to succeed at a top team; let alone one player from local. So if this guy indeed succeed in playing regular furst team. I can imagine people would want that to wear that jersey; aside from the supergreat Messi and Henry..

Another note; BB did not mention you are getting less from now..Only you will be getting more if indeed you would have a local hero...

You forgot Puyol an Pique:) You are right I was afraid this is going to be increase in foreign players salaries but increase in revenues is more acceptable.

Last edited by profit007 at 6/2/2009 12:15:06 PM