In filling our the coaching survey I got to thinking about what would make HBD more enjoyable and I came up with this:

Turbo Leagues:

A smaller league size 12,16,18 or so..
Shorter season
Multi season purchase - your 24.95 buys in for 3 - 5 consecutive seasons

Works just the same as HBD but on a smaller scale. Turnover would be easier to manage, and the 3 year buy in would allow the league to grow together with little downtime between seasons.

I may be way off base or this may have even been mentioned before but I think it would be a nice change.

So you are going to play what 90-100 games?

I don't know why you need a smaller league size. You don't think you can find 32 owners who'd want a faster-paced league? Hoops Dynasty has no trouble getting owners in its turbo leagues. While I think the current 3-games-per-day setup is fine, I (like many others) do get a bit impatient and would have no qualms with getting to do the fun offseason stuff twice as often while seeing the fruits of my work twice as quickly. I'd sign up for one of these leagues in a second.

I think the point of less teams and a shorter season was to allow for the 3 seasons for the price of one. However to accomplish that you would have to have a season that was about 40 games long.

Well I agree that players in these leagues should have to make a multi-season commitment, but I think that commitment can just be somewhat discounted rather than slashed to be 1/3 of the current price. Maybe the season sims 5 games per day instead of 3 (so that it doesn't sim twice during sleep hours, which I think most people would agree they wouldn't want). Let's assume this only applies to games; there are still 6 daily cycles just like there are now, and offseason stuff goes at the same pace (so that, for example, you still have a full day to do budgets, 3 days to do FAs, etc. which I think most would want to preserve).

With this model, a season (which currently lasts ~87 days) would have an 8-day offseason, 3 and 2/3-day spring training, a 1 and 2/3-day "prepare for regular season" (which we have right now, and could easily be trimmed to 1 day), a ~35-day regular season, and a ~7-day playoffs. So we'd trim the season down from ~87 days to ~55 days, which is 63.2% of a current season.

Let's say WiS charges $16 per season for a turbo league, which is 64% of a regular season. WiS makes a tiny extra profit from these leagues, secures 3-year commitments from the players, and gives players a new option that allows them to play in these faster leagues. This would allow leagues to still have 32 teams with little turnover, and it seems like everyone gets what they want. Why not do it this way?

Quote: Originally posted by prezuiwf on 5/17/2010Well I agree that players in these leagues should have to make a multi-season commitment, but I think that commitment can just be somewhat discounted rather than slashed to be 1/3 of the current price. Maybe the season sims 5 games per day instead of 3 (so that it doesn't sim twice during sleep hours, which I think most people would agree they wouldn't want). Let's assume this only applies to games; there are still 6 daily cycles just like there are now, and offseason stuff goes at the same pace (so that, for example, you still have a full day to do budgets, 3 days to do FAs, etc. which I think most would want to preserve).With this model, a season (which currently lasts ~87 days) would have an 8-day offseason, 3 and 2/3-day spring training, a 1 and 2/3-day "prepare for regular season" (which we have right now, and could easily be trimmed to 1 day), a ~35-day regular season, and a ~7-day playoffs. So we'd trim the season down from ~87 days to ~55 days, which is 63.2% of a current season.Let's say WiS charges $16 per season for a turbo league, which is 64% of a regular season. WiS makes a tiny extra profit from these leagues, secures 3-year commitments from the players, and gives players a new option that allows them to play in these faster leagues. This would allow leagues to still have 32 teams with little turnover, and it seems like everyone gets what they want. Why not do it this way?

well I think their first argument would be that "sleep hours" are not the same for everyone playing the game, so you couldn't designate which normal cycle would have 1 less

With 3 games per day, HBD is fairly well paced...I dont see the point of a faster world.

Me neither. I like a full baseball season.

And why would they charge less for something that is giving full value just in a shorter time frame?

Exactly. If anything, they'd charge more for the privilege.

How about 10 team, 72 game seasons (4 home, 4 away vs each other team), no expanded rosters, with no spring training and a 5 day preseason? Playoffs for top 4, best of 5 semi-finals and finals in 4 days. Done in 33 days. Turbo enough?

I would be in for a turbo league and I know at least a few owners who also would be interested. I think the proposal preziuf presented is great and I would up for it in a second. There is no need to take anything away from what is already existing in HBD, except that games occur in 5 of the 6 cycles instead of the current 3 out of 6. Good suggestion guys.

Quote: Originally posted by kneeneighbor on 5/17/2010I think the point of less teams and a shorter season was to allow for the 3 seasons for the price of one. However to accomplish that you would have to have a season that was about 40 games long.

162 divided by 3 is 54.

Yeah but I was assuming the preseason events would stay the same length.

Quote: Originally posted by moustachee on 5/17/2010

Quote: Originally posted by prezuiwf on 5/17/2010Well I agree that players in these leagues should have to make a multi-season commitment, but I think that commitment can just be somewhat discounted rather than slashed to be 1/3 of the current price. Maybe the season sims 5 games per day instead of 3 (so that it doesn't sim twice during sleep hours, which I think most people would agree they wouldn't want). Let's assume this only applies to games; there are still 6 daily cycles just like there are now, and offseason stuff goes at the same pace (so that, for example, you still have a full day to do budgets, 3 days to do FAs, etc. which I think most would want to preserve).With this model, a season (which currently lasts ~87 days) would have an 8-day offseason, 3 and 2/3-day spring training, a 1 and 2/3-day "prepare for regular season" (which we have right now, and could easily be trimmed to 1 day), a ~35-day regular season, and a ~7-day playoffs. So we'd trim the season down from ~87 days to ~55 days, which is 63.2% of a current season.Let's say WiS charges $16 per season for a turbo league, which is 64% of a regular season. WiS makes a tiny extra profit from these leagues, secures 3-year commitments from the players, and gives players a new option that allows them to play in these faster leagues. This would allow leagues to still have 32 teams with little turnover, and it seems like everyone gets what they want. Why not do it this way?

well I think their first argument would be that "sleep hours" are not the same for everyone playing the game, so you couldn't designate which normal cycle would have 1 less

They could sim a series at once.