These worlds will never fill Topic

bigal888
Posts: 390 (0)
Hall of Famer
116 4 3 1 15 77
Prospect
I used to be in the boat of "Too many openings means WifS is screwing up!" but after joining a couple really good private leagues I have shifted completely towards the side of "Too many openings means those worlds suck!"   Fact of the matter is, worlds filled with good owners always fill fast.  Generally what happens in these worlds that have too many openings is that the good teams stay and the crappy ones turn into a revolving door - never having the dedicated owner to turn them around.  Then when nobody wants to take over the crappy teams, the good teams complain that nobody wants to play with them and therefore WifS should fix it.  It's a poor line of reasoning and is a giant red flag as to why these leagues are in the position they are in.
9/28/2011 1:26 PM
csherwood
Posts: 533 (0)
Hall of Famer
12 116
Prospect
Posted by MikeT23 on 9/28/2011 12:34:00 PM (view original):
To put it another way, Cooperstown will have three openings around 10/10.  We're already full.   Two things happen in there:  1.  The tankers are removed.  2.  We look for owners before the season ends. 
Yo put it yet another way, any pretend make believe world that MikeT is in is cooler than any pretend make believe world you are in.  Now, stfu.
9/28/2011 1:26 PM
tecwrg
Posts: 18997 (0)
Hall of Famer
4 1 166 32 129
Prospect
Posted by csherwood on 9/28/2011 1:26:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 9/28/2011 12:34:00 PM (view original):
To put it another way, Cooperstown will have three openings around 10/10.  We're already full.   Two things happen in there:  1.  The tankers are removed.  2.  We look for owners before the season ends. 
Yo put it yet another way, any pretend make believe world that MikeT is in is cooler than any pretend make believe world you are in.  Now, stfu.
I dig the "Yo".  Very urban.  Very cool.
9/28/2011 1:49 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
Posted by csherwood on 9/28/2011 1:26:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 9/28/2011 12:34:00 PM (view original):
To put it another way, Cooperstown will have three openings around 10/10.  We're already full.   Two things happen in there:  1.  The tankers are removed.  2.  We look for owners before the season ends. 
Yo put it yet another way, any pretend make believe world that MikeT is in is cooler than any pretend make believe world you are in.  Now, stfu.
Actually, it was just a thinly-veiled shot.    Very thinly-veiled.

There are a lot of worlds that handle their business properly.   None of them are complaining about too many openings. 
9/28/2011 2:39 PM
soursurfer
Posts: 371 (0)
Hall of Famer
72
Prospect
For Life is a very restrictive private world (no player transfers by any means, trading, waivers, etc...) that is switching commissioners after 2 seasons, has 13 openings, and has no recruitment thread up.  Why would anyone expect that world to fill?
9/28/2011 3:50 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
It has to be WifS fault. 
9/28/2011 3:53 PM
csherwood
Posts: 533 (0)
Hall of Famer
12 116
Prospect
Well in For Life's case it is the fault of stupid world rules -- trading is one of the best parts of baseball of any sort.

And another "yo" for MikeT's coolness.
9/28/2011 4:05 PM
mhulshult
Posts: 982 (0)
Hall of Famer
5 3 63
Prospect
As the commish of a world with no trading (though only in season 3), I can say that many find it fun and challenging to compete in a world where you don't have the advantage of trading.  I've never had any trouble filling open spots (though we've only had 2 offseasons).  Most openings came from folks saying, "I tried it out, but it's just not for me."

With the commish gone after the first 2 seasons, you get a little insight into why "For Life" may have trouble keeping owners.  

I wanted a world with no trading mainly to eliminate trade raping, which is the biggest cause of worlds becoming lop-sided.  I know, vetoes eliminate those trades, but try getting 10 people to agree on what should and shouldn't be vetoed.  So getting rid of trading is limiting enough for teams, I couldn't imagine throwing out free agency, rule 5, and waiver wire claims.  Add in MWR and a player payroll budget restraint (to ensure some attention to organic player development), and it's a great world.
9/28/2011 4:31 PM
soursurfer
Posts: 371 (0)
Hall of Famer
72
Prospect
I agree a no-trade world is a nice novelty to have around.  A no transaction world is just way too restrictive and I imagine would have to get boring and/or frustrating really quick.  Especially as the world gets older.

But seeing as we already had the NTC World, I didn't see much point in the For Life world.  And apparently neither do a lot of its former owners.

Anyway, I'm not opposed to the league, but if you're going to have a set of rules that makes you one of the tightest niche worlds in HBD, you better hit the recruiting trail HARD and EARLY.  Instead, they are switching comissioners (AFTER rollover, d'oh!) and have a late jump on filling a mountain of openings in a world that won't appeal to a lot of people's tastes.
9/28/2011 5:50 PM
shobob
Posts: 3404 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 370
Prospect
I'm in that world, and I 'm sticking with it (for now) because I'm up for a challenge.   Things aren't going well there, but I don't care.  I wanted a long rollover, because it's schedule was too close to Yaz's, the world I commish.  I bet it will fill eventually.
9/28/2011 9:10 PM
willsauve
Posts: 2255 (0)
Hall of Famer
168 1 1 1 200
Prospect
Posted by soursurfer on 9/28/2011 3:50:00 PM (view original):
For Life is a very restrictive private world (no player transfers by any means, trading, waivers, etc...) that is switching commissioners after 2 seasons, has 13 openings, and has no recruitment thread up.  Why would anyone expect that world to fill?

+1

9/29/2011 2:11 AM
t2bott
Posts: 589 (0)
Hall of Famer
37 5 11 16 106
Prospect
I just love the fact he created an alias to post in the forums.
9/29/2011 1:15 PM
shobob
Posts: 3404 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 370
Prospect
who?
9/29/2011 7:17 PM
usfbully
Posts: 905 (0)
Hall of Famer
10 30 41
Prospect
The For Life theme intrigued me as a different challenge. The problem with that world (as is the problem with society as a whole) is the need for instant gratification. A bunch of owners jumped at the idea, with very little insight into how challenging it would be, and now that they are not up to the task they whine in the world chat to change the rules, then bailed.

I think we will fill. We are one of the younger (if not youngest) worlds, with a different set of rules. Just hope that we take the time to get owners that are committed to the challenge.
9/29/2011 7:26 PM
tropicana
Posts: 980 (0)
Hall of Famer
184 13 588 202 293
Prospect
Yeah, being as though I literally just took over as commish, and I've had several inquiries...I'm not horribly concerned. Yet.

It's certainly a unique challenge, and I do think that it puts a different emphasis on a different part of the game that I actually like -- the draft. That was one reason why I thought the world would be useful, because I'd really get to see how good the draft formula I've been using is.

It's not a world for everyone -- that's the first thing I'm saying to people and one reason why a recruiting thread is a bad idea. I'd rather hand-pick owners via word of mouth that either I trust for this or that someone else in the world knows in the game because, quite frankly, it's a different world than almost every other in the game. The worst thing for the world is to have people not think about it and join and play and decide, hey, this sucks.
10/1/2011 2:06 AM
◂ Prev 1234 Next ▸
These worlds will never fill Topic
△Top△Bottom

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2026 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.