There are not enough fielding coaches with even reasonable ratings (50+) to cover the league. It's ridiculous when coaches are getting signed for more than Type A FAs.

Sure, have a few elite, a few more 80+, but there have got to be more available in the 65 -75 range.

There were 21 FI's rated 65 or more in your previous season, and another 2 that were hired as bench coaches.

Doesn't seem like a problem.

So, going by your numbers that means 11 teams had FIs with ratings below 65 and this is good? Also, at least one team hired a BC as a FI. Why the short supply to get a reasonable coach?
Are there any other coaching positions where it is so hard to get a mediocre and above coach?

In case you don't understand my previous post, this had been done thousands of times.

There aren't enough legit SS who can hit .250+.
There aren't enough SP who can be shutdown aces.
There aren't enough fielding coaches with 70+ ratings.

Let's just go Special Olympics and give everyone a goddam blue ribbon.

SS and SPs have nothing to do with coaches....keep pumping out the childish graphics and misspelled profanity though they serve as a reminder to all of what's behind your comments.

 

It has everything to do with supply and demand.   S&D has everything to do with the real world and it should have something to do with this game.

Posted by kschoenberg on 5/28/2012 5:06:00 PM (view original):
So, going by your numbers that means 11 teams had FIs with ratings below 65 and this is good? Also, at least one team hired a BC as a FI. Why the short supply to get a reasonable coach?
Are there any other coaching positions where it is so hard to get a mediocre and above coach?

Are you trying to argue that everybody should have a 65+ FI?

The only time this is ever brought up(which is often) is when someone gets burned on signing a FI. 

Isnt this supposed to be for new ideas?

Well, truthfully, the supply of high quality HC and PC makes coach hiring a joke.   See: The Broken Things in this forum.    So, rather than just flood the market with a dozen 83 rated FI, maybe gradually reducing the number of 83 rated HC/PC is the answer.

I would say that there are far too many HC & PC who are over 80 rather than a dearth of FI.

Posted by hurricane384 on 5/30/2012 2:40:00 PM (view original):
I would say that there are far too many HC & PC who are over 80 rather than a dearth of FI.

That may be true, but it's easier to just complain.

It's also the reason why the complainers think they should have an 80 FI.