BuzzerBeater Forums

It's not selfish, as he isn't even a Calamari I don't believe.

Regardless, here are my thoughts on the issue:

I like the idea of the handicap system.
If you play someone in a division above you, you should be able to nominate one player that they can't use.
If you play someone two divisions above you, you should be able to nominate two players that they can't use.
This is a slight adjustment from Fishy's suggestion of two and four respectively, which I feel is too many players to nominate.

Regarding the MVPs. I think that we should have MVP writeups next season, however, they should only be for a limited number of games. These limited number of games will be the six games chosen for the tipping games.
In other words, the six matches that are selected each week for the tipping competition will be the only matches that will have MVP writeups. Now I realise some people may complain that this means that it advantages the teams that get picked for the six games each week, but that's just part of what makes it more interesting. Each week we have different teams being picked, so over the entire season it should balance out. I also suggest choosing the matches that will have the closest games for the tipping competition so that every game will be more interesting.

Regarding the reshuffling of federations, I don't mind doing this if people seem to want to try and get to meet new people. But if it is the case, then I agree that all the federations need to be completely reshuffled. Or perhaps each federation can keep three teams, and the rest get shuffled.

I agree with most of what you and others have said, Naker.

Firstly, I like the idea of one player being nominated for each level above your team you play. That is, Div IIII v Div II = 1 player from Div II sits out. Div III v ABBL = 2 players nominated to sit out from ABBL team. I think this would be a fair handicap given that the loss of 2 key ABBL players against a strong Div III team will be far more competetive.

Secondly, I disagree with the MVP write-ups being relegated to only those matches chosen for the week. I disagree for the reason you put forward: teams will be unfairly disadvantaged. How to fix this? Simple: use your system, Naker, where a simple 3/2/1 votes are given (listing important stats like 33 pts, 22 reb etc) would be simple, and allow all teams to have a shot at seeing their players gain MVP votes.

Thirdly, like you, Naker, if everyone is really keen to mix up the federations to try and have mangaers work with other managers, I'll happily do this in the spirit of keeping the Fishbowl active and alive. I must just add that I am, will always be, a Calamari...regardless of who drafts me. lol However, the Fishbowl has allowed me to meet so many awesome managers that I wouldn't have a problem joining them. Which leads me to my final comment...

...although not a Calamari, Skyhookz, I would never describe you as 'selfish' mate. You just understand that sometimes teams work their arses of to become a great team and that breaking them up when they achieve this is somewhat unfair.

@ leeroy i agree we will have 2 make some changes

@ skyhook u rnt selfish but i think changes r needed

@ naker y maybe ur suggestion is better 2 just exclude 1 player in the handicap maybe that is a big debate worth a poll?

dont like ur suggestion on mvps just doing random games

but i do think the "naker style" riteups r the go

I think it depends on the point of the MVPs - is it to give out an award, or to stimulate discussion on the games etc. In my view, the point of them atm should be the latter, in which case I'd prefer more detailed writeups on fewer games, rather than more games but no detail.

I should add, that dependant on the format we go with MVPs, I'm willing to help out, though I would rather do the writeups for a league I'm not in (I enjoy reading what other people write about my own players, which I lose if I do the writeups for my own league!)

Didn't mean to say you were selfish. I'm just saying it's a selfish mentality. After saying the PL needs a change to have that opinion would just be counter-productive.

i think in the past we had 2 many games which we wanted done in 2 much detail & is was being done by 2 few people making it work not fun

people that have done mvps & i assume would do it again
yoda
mllama
tremell
whitebeard
bainsy
matty
skyhook
leeroy
ezyfrag
naker
robhoe
me

if we all agreed 2 do it on some sort of roster that is 5-6 peeps per league which means most people would only have 2 do it 2 times for an entire seaon

id certainly be happy 2 do it 2 times a season

yeah, good call Big Fish. Twice a season is very managable. I'd be happy with the roster idea.

Great discussion everyone. I admit a lot of these problems are my fault but I did announce that I would be snowed under with school work this season and had to cut down my responsibilities. Still it is awesome to see so many great ideas going about. A couple of things seem fixed. Two equal leagues of 12 teams each. With just 24 teams in total I think shrinking to three Federations is a logical consequence, does anyone object?

I also don't think anyone would object to the Calamari and Sharks continuing (although the Sharks will need to create a new Federation as no-one has admin rights for the old one apparently).

Mllama are you happy to be the boss of the new proposed Platypi?

Agree with pretty much everything here.





...yup, there's a first for everything ;)

d certainly be happy 2 do it 2 times a season

Me too.

i see ur points about change being needed.. but i still think unless you change the attitudes of the people in the leagues, mixing up the calamari guys is not the solution...