$3m is not enough to make much of a difference.  It's a much more level playing field than what you can have with an uncapped prospect budget.

Yes

Posted by jonas1102 on 11/3/2011 9:25:00 PM (view original):
I think what will is trying to say is that with a  $20M cap, the team with the first pick will have to spend $4M leaving him with $16M for Internationals, while the team with the last pick, spends $1M and can spend $19M in Internationals.

This

That's why I don't like a 20M cap.

Posted by jonas1102 on 11/3/2011 9:25:00 PM (view original):
I think what will is trying to say is that with a  $20M cap, the team with the first pick will have to spend $4M leaving him with $16M for Internationals, while the team with the last pick, spends $1M and can spend $19M in Internationals.

exactly, plus most of the very good teams have no problem givin up their draft picks for the weaker less attractive, but still useful TYPE A's

i vote we make the game only able to be played one particular way, that a few people have decided is the most fun for them

I have no problem if people want to be in world where they can tank and make their world unbalanced. I just have no pity fot them when they have to wait weeks/months to fill each season.. and don't like reading their whiny posts blaming wis for not advertising enough or giving out enough free credits for their tard world can fill..

That's the thing.   "It's my team, I should be able to do what I want" becomes "WifS needs to do something to fill this world" because no one wants the crap left behind because everyone was doing what they wanted.

I'd rather see all international free agents initially ask for $50K, which would make international scouting even more important. As it is now, you can pretty easily guess which prospects are good by checking their current ratings against their asking price while spending $10m to $12m on int'l scouting.

Or better yet, make advance scouting influence the accuracy of the ratings seen and tie international scouting more to the number of free agents seen (this would actually work pretty well with HS/college scouting while also making ADV scouting relevant).

Did you steal that from my interview?  I think you did.

Posted by MikeT23 on 11/4/2011 8:17:00 AM (view original):
Did you steal that from my interview?  I think you did.

What interview? I don't watch Bravo.

It was a Behind the Music piece on VH1. 

A $20M Prospect cap is too hard, to me.  But combining win minimums and prospect caps is a pretty effective way to de-emphasize the strategy of "I just won't give a damn about my ML team for the next 4 years so that I can be good for the 10 thereafter".  The likelihood of getting through those 4 years with a large pool of talent is much lower when you have to meet the win minimums (draft position) and you can only spend so much on IFA (prospect cap).  It is not intended to allow the $100M+ player payroll teams to escape with lots of top IFA talent, and I'm not sure I've seen that happen too often.  They might get one strong IFA a year--but that's while punting the draft, so that one IFA is the only worthwhile player getting added to their org that year from a prospect standpoint.

Posted by travisg on 11/4/2011 8:13:00 AM (view original):
I'd rather see all international free agents initially ask for $50K, which would make international scouting even more important. As it is now, you can pretty easily guess which prospects are good by checking their current ratings against their asking price while spending $10m to $12m on int'l scouting.

Or better yet, make advance scouting influence the accuracy of the ratings seen and tie international scouting more to the number of free agents seen (this would actually work pretty well with HS/college scouting while also making ADV scouting relevant).

I agree with you/MikeT. Also, I think they should throw out the "definitely wants to sign" or "probably won't sign, happy playing in his home country."

I zero out advanced, HS, and college, so I usually have plenty to spend on IFAs.

I've already dropped from 20 to 16M in international scouting, and lately I've been thinking I should just drop to 10M. I think the extra 5M to spend is worth seeing slightly less prospects and having less accurate projections. If I see a guy asking 5M+ who is "Looking to sign." I know he's a beast and whether his vL winds up at 82 or 86 isn't all that important to me.

Posted by tecwrg on 11/3/2011 8:58:00 PM (view original):

Posted by willsauve on 11/3/2011 8:04:00 PM (view original):

Posted by kahrtmen on 11/3/2011 7:41:00 PM (view original):
I am not sure I follow - why would the top teams be getting all of the good IFAs.  Generally speaking, getting an IFA depends on only two things:  International Scouting Budget and money in prospect.  Seems like good teams would on average have less to spend in either of those areas.

Extreme example in a world that you're in is Hartford Sith http://www.whatifsports.com/HBD/Pages/Popups/FranchiseProfile.aspx?fid=3004

A 120 win team that was able to transfer so much more money to prospects and sign the most expensive IFA.. This team is a prime example of tanking.. and a 30M prospect cap would benefit him more than anyone.

Look at it's finances from when the current owner took over to the present:

Season	Franchise	User	Player	Prospect	Coach	Coll. Scout	HS Scout	Int'l Scout	Adv Scout	Training	Medical
19	Hartford Sith	palpatine242	69 (37)	20 (36)	16	16	4	20	0	20	20
18	Hartford Sith	palpatine242	62 (24)	20 (39)	17	18	8	20	0	20	20
17	San Juan Sith	palpatine242	67 (25)	20 (41)	12	16	12	18	0	20	20
16	San Juan Sith	palpatine242	59 (22)	20 (37)	18	18	16	18	0	20	16
15	Pittsburgh Sith	palpatine242	60 (44)	20 (28)	11	18	18	18	0	20	20
14	Pittsburgh Sith	palpatine242	63 (35)	20 (34)	8	18	18	18	0	20	20
13	Pittsburgh Sith	palpatine242	64 (34)	20 (35)	7	18	18	18	2	20	18
12	Chicago Sith	palpatine242	63 (27)	20 (38)	8	18	18	18	6	20	14
11	Chicago Sith	palpatine242	66 (34)	20 (36)	7	18	18	18	10	18	10
10	Chicago Sith	palpatine242	68 (72)	20 (21)	18 (8)	14	14	14	14	14	9

He's transferred tons of money into prospect from S11 on.  The reason why he's a 122 game winner in S19 is because of the IFA's he's been able to sign in S11-S18.

He's signed 12 IFA's to $10m+ bonuses since S10, with half of them at $28.1m, $29.2m, $26.1m, $20.9m, $30.1m and $22.8m.

Cap the prospect payroll in those seasons, he's not getting all that IFA talent, and he's not winning 122 games in S19.

As a league we were slow to put in a win floor. Under the rules now in place this wouldn't have happened.