BuzzerBeater Forums

i think that the level of salary of fanesi and ikstens afteri the updating of end season is however well proportionate to the strenght of these player

I completely disagree. 200k+ per week for ikstens skillset is not worth the money. You can get a player that has 3 fewer pops per the main three inside skills for 1/4th or 1/3rd the price. Is 3-4x the salary worth it for only a few extra pops? Not a chance.

What's the level of shotblocking of your center?Look at this when you look at Ikstens salary,he hasn't three skills very high,but another quite high skill(plus jump shot which doens't count so much in center salary)If Ikstens has 4 level less in shotblocking he could have a salary near to 180 k,which are not so impossible to afford and reflects the fact that is at the top between the centers
There will be a problem when the level rise,when will be an unproportionate relatinoship between the salary and the strenght of the players

17-16-15-10 and with good secundaries,I think this is a problem of the position 5,the salaries formulas for them I think should be reviwed,because a small player with the same impact in a team costs way less

A guard with 17 JS, 16 JR, and 15 OD would still cost around 125k+ without any other major skills. They're not many of these cause you also need to train your guards in handing/passing/driving which slows the process.

Maybe if there were easier ways to train your players in more skills these players won't occur very much. Since there seems to be little reception to calls for more flexible training I assume there will be quite a few farm teams for overpriced players.

Top teams appear to be making around 100-200k per week, depending on the quality of their league. I have prob the highest salary expenses in the US (around 350k) and have been pulling around 430-450k in attendance, with most of the other revenues and costs evening out.

Any of these 150+ centers would erase any profit i have before adding in the raises the players i train are due. Training doesn't raise very much money, it appears to slightly out pace ongoing player deflation. Only other income is bonus money.

In the Dutch first league, the average net income is 124k and the average revenue 337k.

In the german league we have an average revenue of ~380k and an average net income of ~115k.

Last edited by Yoginger at 5/13/2009 7:40:31 PM

Sorry to reply to this after so many other posts went by. I seem to be online when most people are asleep and then log off just as the masses are getting on board.

I do see what you are saying but I disagree. Players are nothing more than the sum of the actions taken by their managers in training. I don't think that a player who has an unaffordable salary is the best player in the game. You have to weigh costs and benefits in this game. Up til now most managers have been blindly training single position with emphasis only on primary skills without looking down the road three seasons and seeing that their Frankenballers were going to have ridiculous and unaffordable salaries. Why is that a problem? It is a problem for the managers who trained those freaks and for the idjits who pay to have them on their team. It is no problem for managers who have spread their training around to create more balanced players who perform at a level of, say, 13-15. I think this trend for creating triple 18+ is not only overly testosteronic but obviously stupid financially. If a manager couldn't see that they were creating an unusable player, maybe next time they will open their eyes. Those players whose salaries make them unplayable will retire. So what? There will be hundreds more shortly. And maybe they will be more all-around, but I doubt it.

Now, to look at your problem from another angle- Perhaps a change in ticket pricing, tv revenue, or some other merchandising outlet can be introduced to increase the amount of cash teams are pulling in. 35k/week seems a bit low for tv revenue in the 21st century.