no, it's not ironic. having better players serves me. knowing the game well serves me. playing by the rules of baseball as best we can serves me.

it also serves everyone else. don't think of it as changing a rule, it's correcting a rule that's wrong. i'm not advocating an "additional system", i'm advocating using the actual rule. the current set-up is an "additional system" that's unrealistic.

i agree that the game needs to move away from reality at times (e.g., seeing all prospects). this isn't one of those cases.

OK, I'll try another route. Many of us take a team, keep a team and will only give up a team under "extreme" circumstances. Others take a team, give it a shot, see they can't make a dent in the standings after a season or two and move on.

Giving the owners at the bottom hope is a way to retain the HBD nomads. And I think you agree retaining owners is good for the specific world and good for HBD as a whole.

Quote: Originally Posted By MikeT23 on 5/01/2010
OK, I'll try another route. Many of us take a team, keep a team and will only give up a team under "extreme" circumstances. Others take a team, give it a shot, see they can't make a dent in the standings after a season or two and move on.

Giving the owners at the bottom hope is a way to retain the HBD nomads. And I think you agree retaining owners is good for the specific world and good for HBD as a whole.

i agree...the owners at the bottom need to stay...so anything to help them...helps wis...which brings them money from having more owners...which keeps us having a game to play...

I vote C, followed by B with A in a distant, distant 3rd