New Transfer Policy Topic

Some of you already know. I think the policy is dumb but, if not for the snarky final response, I'd have kept this to myself.
12/8/2017 12:56 PM Customer Support
Mike,
We're only doing transfers if the owner is absent, has violated the site terms, or has violated the world rules in a way that requires immediate removal. That doesn't appear to be the case here.

12/8/2017 1:08 PM

MikeT23
I'll refer to ticket 145291 that was completed on 12/1. New policy or mistake last week?

Either way, an owner is not returning due to missed MWR. If you had a lame duck employee who says "I'll keep showing up but, come Jan 1st, I'm gone. And don't expect me to put much effort in either" would you want him making decisions for 2018?

If it's a policy, it's a policy. But it's one you might want to adjust. HBD works much better with engaged owners.

Thanks
Mike

12/9/2017 11:13 AM

Customer Support
That other ticket appears to be a mistake on our part.

There are a number of negative side effects to an in-season transfer, including credits and team results being applied to the wrong user.

Can you expound on exactly what the benefits would be of a transfer like this?

12/9/2017 4:35 PM

MikeT23
Certainly. But I'll address your negative side effects first. Both users agreed to the transfer. They're not new. Koz knows he won't get the credit, trop knows the final standings will be on his permanent record. So, really, there has to be a better reason to not do the transfer.

The positive is that the incoming owner gets to make roster decisions for NEXT season. Maybe he re-signs a FA that the outgoing owner wouldn't. He would certainly be in control of the 40 man thus preventing a 6 year minor leaguer asking for 4.9m despite never playing in the bigs. He might even make a trade. In short, he'll care about the roster that carries over into the next season. The outgoing owner has no reason to give a damn. He's not returning.

As I said, HBD works better when you have 32 engaged users. A lame duck owner has no reason to be engaged. Again, you wouldn't want an employee whose last day in 12/15/17 making decisions for your 2018 company. It's the same thing.

Thanks
Mike

12/9/2017 4:57 PM

Customer Support
Even if the two owners understand the ramifications and agree, we still prefer the data be correct and credits be distributed appropriately.

A new owner has full opportunity shape the roster during the offseason, including re-signing the team's free agents, making trades, and shuffling the roster. In reality, very few of these types of moves happen at the end of the season. With the season pretty much over, there's not much danger in allowing a team to coast to the finish, since most often there are no postseason implications.

The initial reason that these end of season transfers were allowed was to control the budget, but that issue was addressed to give the new owner more options. So there's not a compelling reason to make these transfers at the end of a season.

12/9/2017 5:33 PM

MikeT23
While I fully understand this is an argument I won't win, you're mistaken. A preference on data/credits on your end is a terrible reason to refuse this request.

Some FA won't re-sign after rollover. Making promotions and filling out the 40 prevents retirements/free agents. Could trade a future FA that they don't want on next season's roster. In short, there's a lot one can do as the season winds down. It's actually the most important time to set yourself up for the next season.

This, however, is silliness:
"With the season pretty much over, there's not much danger in allowing a team to coast to the finish, since most often there are no postseason implications."

Teams do NOT play in a vacuum. A non-engaged owner may be giving games away with inattentiveness and the teams he's PLAYING may be getting an edge in the playoff race. EVERY team Louisville has remaining is in the playoff hunt.

To wrap this up, as I said I know it's not an argument I can win, this "policy" is terrible and pointless. HBD is probably on life support as is and allowing departing owners to stay in worlds because WifS "prefers" correct data/credits isn't going to help. There are very few good worlds left and one of the reasons worlds remain good is because they have rules/restrictions that rid themselves of "undesirable" owners.

Happy holidays,
Mike

12/11/2017 9:12 AM

Customer Support
Thanks for the feedback.
12/11/2017 12:47 PM (edited)
FWIW, I don't think the departing owner will do anything to harm the team or hurt the world. But, if he's disinterested and just lets SIMMY play out the season, can't say I'd blame him. Nor would I expect he's be into all the prep for next season. The one he won't be managing.
12/11/2017 12:49 PM
Yeah, that's crazy. Has the new owner played HBD? From my understanding, he was big into HD.
12/11/2017 1:08 PM
No idea but I don't think you have to be an HBD expert to understand the end of the season is when you're making some pretty important decisions on next year's roster.
12/11/2017 1:11 PM
Posted by MikeT23 on 12/11/2017 1:11:00 PM (view original):
No idea but I don't think you have to be an HBD expert to understand the end of the season is when you're making some pretty important decisions on next year's roster.
I agree. I haven't played HD, but I was just thinking maybe there isn't a whole lot to do at the end of basketball season other maybe finalizing a little recruiting.
12/11/2017 1:15 PM
Job changes in HD has it's problems.

I think what concerns me more is the general lack of understanding about what non-engaged users do/don't do over the last 20 games and the off-season. And the logic for not making a transfer.

This is the most concerning:
"With the season pretty much over, there's not much danger in allowing a team to coast to the finish, since most often there are no postseason implications."

A team running out a 2-18 finish could definitely determine who makes the playoffs as a WC since they're playing division games. I can point to an example as I had a soft-tanker in Coop change the WC2 many seasons ago.
12/11/2017 1:28 PM
A new owner has full opportunity shape the roster during the offseason, including re-signing the team's free agents, making trades, and shuffling the roster. In reality, very few of these types of moves happen at the end of the season....


Wonder how this observation was made. Most of the people I talk to are firm believers in taking care of promotions/demotions and 40 man protection, at the very least, as soon as they're done with the playoffs. End of season trades are probably less prevalent but I'd bet there's a lot more resigning potential FAs than WIS seems to think.
12/11/2017 1:53 PM
As I said, I think it's a general lack of understanding of HBD. Which is concerning.

Or it's a stubborn unwillingness to do the simplest of requests. Which might be worse.

I'd understand if both users didn't agree. Hell, if they want to make us jump thru hoops, with commish, departing/incoming owners all responding to the same ticket, so be it. That's fine. But this "we still prefer the data be correct and credits be distributed appropriately" as the reason is nonsense.
12/11/2017 2:06 PM
If it's Seble, he's generally clueless and lacks both customer service and critical thinking skills. He might be a heck of a programmer, but he shouldn't be let anywhere near the customers...
12/11/2017 3:38 PM
It doesn't really matter WHO it was. The fact that they were unable, or unwilling, to admit/understand that the reason TO transfer far outweighs the reason TO NOT transfer is a problem.
12/11/2017 5:54 PM
One of the worst things about taking over a new team is that the previous owner didn't negotiate with departing FAs and typically they are not willing to sign when the new owner takes over.

Furthermore there may be some aging vets asking for 4 or 5 year deals to re-sign. Do you want to pay a 31 year old RF already in slight decline 5 or 7 mil for the next 4 seasons?
That is a decision better left to the guy who will be running the team going forward.

I've also seen a crap ton of retirees, even decent ones with BL potential, because the previous owner didn't bother to promote.

You would think they would be well aware of this, since it is how the game is designed.


Sad that the new "management" seems to not know or understand all of this even when fully explained to them.
Or they just don't care, which is a big part of what brought HBD to the state it is currently in now.


Thanks for the feedback...
12/11/2017 8:15 PM (edited)
I'm a big fan of saying "It's their game and they can do what they want. We do not have to purchase it."

This specific situation isn't enough to turn me away but I can see how it would turn some away. And how it could be problematic in the future.
12/11/2017 9:20 PM

This is absolutely a ******* match that you correctly stated that you (or freaking logic) will not win. Given the mistake that was previously made on ticket #145291, it’s clear that the CS rep you corresponded with is flexing his muscle. It’s also crystal f*cking clear that he doesn’t understand how much goes into planning for next season post transaction deadline. It’s unfortunate that nothing can be said/argued/suggested that will change (or educate) this particular CS rep’s decision.

Other than being frustrated and ****** off, this is the what we have to deal with going forward. I know that trop and Koz are seasoned enough owners where trop could ask Koz to make moves for him. Another work around for this particular instance only, Koz could temporarily change his password and give it to trop to make whatever changes he’d like to make for next season. Koz can then change his password back to what he had before. Yes, there are unfortunate by products of this where the new owner has access to the former owner’s tradecraft but in this case I’m certain that wouldn’t be an issue. This isn’t a workaround that is new to seasoned owners, but it is what it is.

It’s shows that this sorry, pathetic CS Rep is just flexing his muscle. Will they post something where they explain this new policy? No. Why? Because at some point a commissioner will request a change late in the season identical to this request and a less arrogant, commonsensical CS rep will grant the request.

And owners like myself who truly enjoy this game will have to go along with illogical, arrogant outcomes like this.

As for me, I have the 5 minutes to bang my head against the wall and open a ticket asking for clarification on this topic. If I get a clear response, I will update.

12/12/2017 12:49 AM
Yeah it seems like unnecessary muscle flexing...and it'll definitely hamstring me a little but it is what it is I suppose and I'll play by those rules.

It's exceptionally wrongheaded by support but...isn't the first time and won't be the last they've made an ignorant decision without fully thinking it through.

And let's be honest...I'll just screw it up next season anyway, lol
12/12/2017 12:01 PM
Giving you less control over next season's roster might be a good thing.
12/12/2017 12:11 PM
123 Next ▸
New Transfer Policy Topic

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2024 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.