Quote: Originally Posted By plague on 1/13/2010How about taking away the $4 credit for people who finish last in their division

Quote: Originally Posted By MikeT23 on 1/12/2010
Yes, we do. I'd much rather people get to the point and say what's on their mind. I'd far prefer a smack in the face to a knife in the back. If that means brutal honesty is the way to get there, so be it.

I can't think of anything worse than 10 minutes of idle chitchat and, when you walk away, someone saying "What a jerk." Knock it out in the first minute and save us both 9 minutes. No need for fake civility.



How about sincere civility?

Quote: Originally Posted By tedwmoore on 1/12/2010

Quote: Originally Posted By MikeT23 on 1/12/2010

Yes, we do. I'd much rather people get to the point and say what's on their mind. I'd far prefer a smack in the face to a knife in the back. If that means brutal honesty is the way to get there, so be it.

I can't think of anything worse than 10 minutes of idle chitchat and, when you walk away, someone saying "What a jerk." Knock it out in the first minute and save us both 9 minutes. No need for fake civility.




How is this about a slap in the face versus a knife in the back? Or fake civility?

Like was mentioned, why is it so hard to say "I disagree, and here is why" instead of "you idea is stupid?" And how does that waste 9 minutes with idle chitchat, inevitably leading to behind-the-back insults?

Hyperbolize much?

Quote: Originally Posted By gjello10 on 1/11/2010
What do you think about allowing Prospect Budget to be set to $30 mil on budget day? This would force even more money into Player Payroll on the lowest payroll teams, by not starting the season with, essentilly, $10 mil scheduled to disappear into a transfer penalty right off the bat. I think most teams hovering in the 50-65 win range, especially new owners and owners taking over teams that have been in the toilet for many seasons, would genuinely like to field a better team if they could. But sometimes the best way forward with a really crapped out team is to take a step back. And this would help.

Again, nothing is going to help those who are trying to lose (Mike said something about a boot and an ***, I believe). But the way I see it, the transfer penalty should be an actual penalty for mis-budgeting, and having to make a transfer in-season. It shouldn't be a cost-of-doing-business for bidding on top IFAs. Having it this way distorts the IFA market.

At the end of the day, it's better for IFAs to be distributed, as they are in real life, based mostly on how much money an organization devotes to its scouting, and not based on who can cut their BL budget under $40k.

So, I say cap total prospect budget at $30, let people budget $6-30 mil on day one, and leave everything else, including budget transfers, the same. (edit: the $100k increment idea could also be added)

This will lead to far less money being dumped out of the World as intentional Prospect Transfer penalties, which will help maintain the overall talent in the World at ML and MiL levels. Also, more teams which are currently not in the IFA market heavily will increase expenditures. This will help minimize the advantage of cutting payroll to $25 mil and having a crappy team.

Again, when it comes to what to do about people who want the #1 pick 5 seasons in a row, see Mike's solution. But I think this would fix everything else.

Quote: Originally Posted By tecwrg on 1/12/2010

Quote: Originally Posted By patrickm885 on 1/11/2010




We decided that one way to curb the tanking is to limit the amount of money that can be dumped into the prospect payroll budget. That amount is going to be $30M and max contracts will be handled the same exact way that was outlined in the last update thread.

Setting the cap to $25m would be better. A hard cap at $20m would be best. I'm not sure if a $30m cap would provide enough discentive for the tankers.

We also talked about getting rid of the budget transfer page altogether, is that something that you would rather see?

No need to eliminate it completely as long as a reasonable hard cap on prospect is in place.

Quote: Originally Posted By pieo on 1/13/2010

Quote: Originally Posted By gjello10 on 1/11/2010

What do you think about allowing Prospect Budget to be set to $30 mil on budget day? This would force even more money into Player Payroll on the lowest payroll teams, by not starting the season with, essentilly, $10 mil scheduled to disappear into a transfer penalty right off the bat. I think most teams hovering in the 50-65 win range, especially new owners and owners taking over teams that have been in the toilet for many seasons, would genuinely like to field a better team if they could. But sometimes the best way forward with a really crapped out team is to take a step back. And this would help.

Again, nothing is going to help those who are trying to lose (Mike said something about a boot and an ***, I believe). But the way I see it, the transfer penalty should be an actual penalty for mis-budgeting, and having to make a transfer in-season. It shouldn't be a cost-of-doing-business for bidding on top IFAs. Having it this way distorts the IFA market.

At the end of the day, it's better for IFAs to be distributed, as they are in real life, based mostly on how much money an organization devotes to its scouting, and not based on who can cut their BL budget under $40k.

So, I say cap total prospect budget at $30, let people budget $6-30 mil on day one, and leave everything else, including budget transfers, the same. (edit: the $100k increment idea could also be added)

This will lead to far less money being dumped out of the World as intentional Prospect Transfer penalties, which will help maintain the overall talent in the World at ML and MiL levels. Also, more teams which are currently not in the IFA market heavily will increase expenditures. This will help minimize the advantage of cutting payroll to $25 mil and having a crappy team.

Again, when it comes to what to do about people who want the #1 pick 5 seasons in a row, see Mike's solution. But I think this would fix everything else.

This is the best idea

Quote: Originally Posted By MikeT23 on 1/12/2010
Yes, we do. I'd much rather people get to the point and say what's on their mind. I'd far prefer a smack in the face to a knife in the back. If that means brutal honesty is the way to get there, so be it.

I can't think of anything worse than 10 minutes of idle chitchat and, when you walk away, someone saying "What a jerk." Knock it out in the first minute and save us both 9 minutes. No need for fake civility.



it is a rare day that i agree with miket...

give the morality lessons a rest, tedwmoore (i love the irony of mr. holier than thou posting porn links and naked goth girls in a bathtub of cheese doodles)...

Quote: Originally Posted By psoffl on 1/21/2010I am new to this and I have been told to try not to relate HBD to real life