Open Discussion:

Let's capture ideas that have been discussed that can improve taking over a new team that are relatively simple and straightforward. Disregard for now some ideas that a few people want like capping divisions.

1. Allow scheduling when taking over a new team.
2. Cut players signed by sim in 1st session.
3. Actions automatically unlocked for players at your division

Other constructive ideas welcome.

1 and 2 are good.

3 is stupid. Returning users have to open actions. New users get it done automatically.

So the "fair" solution is that all player actions are opened to all users at that level. That feels really stupid. Taking over a new team should NOT be easy.

Did I start drinking too early today, or are the forums getting really weird?

YES!!!!

Define rationally.....

Posted by MikeT23 on 1/18/2018 6:20:00 PM (view original):
Open Discussion:

Let's capture ideas that have been discussed that can improve taking over a new team that are relatively simple and straightforward. Disregard for now some ideas that a few people want like capping divisions.

1. Allow scheduling when taking over a new team.
2. Cut players signed by sim in 1st session.
3. Actions automatically unlocked for players at your division

Other constructive ideas welcome.

1. Schedule what? Exhibitions? Or games for next year, if the slots are open? Or both? It isn’t related to taking over a team, but I think allowing teams that miss the postseason to schedule exhibitions for the postseason is generally a good idea, if it’s an easy implementation.

2. The problem is that the action should only be allowed for teams taking over new teams. People should not be able to cut their own incoming players. That would be abused. And not sure if it would be easy to only allow it for a tiny subset of coaches, but remain locked for everybody else.

3. Nah.

I would definitely support giving new and job changing coaches an opportunity to choose whether to start before 2nd session recruiting or wait until the season starts.

As always, I also support tweaking the late preference recruits to begin signing 2 cycles later than they currently do, to ensure teams with new coaches, or unexpected EEs have their effort considered.

I also support rolling out a group of jucos - call them late bloomers - new for the second session, for everyone to start fresh on.

1. Non-cons
2. I'm not sure anyone is suggesting cutting guys signed in RS1, by the user, during RS2. That seems like someone fumbling around, stepping on their own dick and yelling "Hey, who stepped on my unit!?!???"
3. Yeah, no. Bad idea.

Posted by topdogggbm on 1/18/2018 7:01:00 PM (view original):
Define rationally.....

www.dictionary.com

Posted by MikeT23 on 1/18/2018 7:05:00 PM (view original):

Posted by topdogggbm on 1/18/2018 7:01:00 PM (view original):
Define rationally.....

www.dictionary.com

sarcasm.com

You left out the www.

Posted by MikeT23 on 1/18/2018 7:04:00 PM (view original):
1. Non-cons
2. I'm not sure anyone is suggesting cutting guys signed in RS1, by the user, during RS2. That seems like someone fumbling around, stepping on their own dick and yelling "Hey, who stepped on my unit!?!???"
3. Yeah, no. Bad idea.

I’d be ok with 2, if it can be coded to allow the option to incoming coaches only. Maybe that’s easy to code, but I’m not a programmer, so I don’t want to presume.

I get why a guy would cut a player signed in RS1 but I'm not sure it would be frequent. But, then again, I've had 4-5 guys on the line and only offer to 3 because I only had 3 spots. The risk of not offering would be removed since you could simply cut a guy and re-offer.

That said, having two "assigned" players at UNC-A, sucked.

I solved the scheduling issue here.

The 16 views in 3 weeks is impressive. Find your audience, bro.