I am late to this topic so I’m not sure if anyone will still monitor the replies, but some mentioned earlier on that they would like to hear from homegrown managers so I figured that I’d provide a basketball perspective (not just Buzzerbeater). As someone that is attempting to compete through the homegrown route, I find this conversation thoroughly intriguing. I still haven't reached the peak of a mature homegrown team as I have one player that I transferred in 5+ seasons ago (they will be transferring out in the next couple of seasons) and the majority of my team’s “core” is between the ages of 20-25. I think Plan A would be a welcome sight but I understand why some users are concerned with change. Let me explain my stance below.
I have read through many forums in my time playing BB and there is often an argument that the game ought to be more realistic. I believe that implementing either of these plans would be a large step towards doing so. In real life professional leagues, we do not see teams load up on 3 young players at one position because there are simply not enough resources and, more importantly, playing time to go between these players for them to develop and reach their potential. Instead, we see teams try to pair young players together that will ultimately hit their prime ages around the same time. For instance, in this year’s NBA Finals we are seeing Nikola Jokic (28, C) and Jamal Murray (26, G). The Nuggets did what many teams do, try to find pieces that fit together and are in the same age range. The way that the game is currently set up, it would be nearly impossible to replicate what teams do in real life if they attempted to draft and develop guards, forwards, and centers at the same time while allowing them to train what is necessary for their particular positions.
My main concern is that users that are quick to shut down these ideas are casting the homegrown route aside and it will never be viable in terms of trying to win championships at the highest level of this game. If everyone is truly in favor of diversity in this game, then there should be more acceptance of a variety of paths that can followed to reach that goal. Even with the implementation of either of these plans, there will be teams that want to "win-now" and do not want to exercise the patience required to train players for 10-15 seasons in order to go the homegrown route. I do not believe that the transfer list will dry up at all for this exact reason. Most teams would continue to operate as they have been until training and following a homegrown model prove to have success on a bigger stage. It would be great to see a Buzzerbeater environment where we have teams winning while using the draft, the transfer list, or a combination of both as we see the different philosophies implemented in real life. At the moment the first option hasn’t produced profound results.
I am not even certain that either of these plans are the best options available. I am certainly not the type of person that would be able to devise a better plan. However, I believe that introducing different ways to win in this game would make it better and more competitive. We are all trying to grow the game of Buzzerbeater and that should be in every player’s best interest. Additionally, I believe that any new system could be picked up by all users and it wouldn’t be too complicated as long as it is explained correctly and players are properly educated on whichever system is in effect. This game is already not the “easiest” simulation game out there and players have been able to adapt to new features and changes to the game.