BuzzerBeater Forums

Oh The Enlightenment.

Do they know how to win at the highest level? They need to know their tactics especially in the GDP era.

Do they know how to train in the most efficient way possible? Do they know how to design player builds to play multiple tactics successfully? Do they have experience training top level players? Can they effectively communicate all of that to managers in in our prospect pipeline?

Do they have the work ethic and know how for the huge responsibility of maintaining and scouting all of the 22+ players in the pipeline as well as the oppositional research needed to be successful? No database makes this difficult.

I don't think that the manager has to be from the offsite either if they meet those characteristics. I hope everyone is voting for the best manager possible not just because said candidate is from the offsite. I hope those people that voted for me did so because I was the best choice for U21 not just because I am from the offsite.

With that being said, I think the offsite needs to be as inclusive as possible. The purpose of the offsite is to help the NT/U21 managers run the program, not for the offsite to run the program and excluded everyone else.

Isaiah is definitely right. The offsite community will support one candidate so much that no one else has a chance to win the election.

You realize how ridiculous this sounds, right? "So many people vote for one candidate that no one else has a chance to win the election." This how elections work - candidates win by getting a vote from a lot of different people. Maybe I'm reading too much into this, but is your criticism that offsite members don't think for themselves, and just blindly vote for whoever others think is the best candidate?

There are over 1400 American teams. RamQ got 38 votes. To say that no one else had a chance to win the election is ridiculous, when less than 3% of eligible voters voted for him. It's not the offsite community's fault that the other candidates couldn't get 38 votes.

As for the voting, the last few elections in particular have been when I have seen it most, the more well known managers stating on site to get others to rally behind a certain manager. Is it legal? Yes. Is it smart? Maybe. But it is what can lead to this outcome. In all seriousness though...I'm just completely irate over the situation.

Understand you're upset, but your criticism is really unfounded. I mean, you just said:

I agree 100% that he had the most impressive resume at the time. He trained Bowens who is one of the best and was active in conversations.

So you agree RamQ was the best candidate at the time. He was elected. This is typically a good thing. Yet now that it didn't work out, you're criticizing the process of electing the best candidate because it lead to something bad.

This term didn't work out. 38 of us, myself included, made the wrong choice. But I don't understand why you're criticizing "more well known managers" for this. What should they have done differently?

I will say that the whole idea of having people write comments in debated forums like "Vote for manger X, we is the best, no one else even comes close" is quite frustrating to be on the other-side of, but its a standard election tactic.

Agree, but I don't think this really contributes much (which is why I haven't done it). People can think for themselves.

Either 80% of the managers who vote for NT elections are active offsite managers or else they back the offsite nominee blindly based off the past success the offsite has delivered. Either way your relationship with that community will be a huge factor in any USA election

There is no "offsite nominee." You were a part of the offsite for the previous NT election, so please show me where this "offsite nominee" was discussed. Thanks.

Hey Magiker, thanks for chiming in.

I've cooled off a little bit on the situation but still a little irritated.

I think my main beef with the situation was the fact that RamQ was persuaded into running. This to me just means that he didn't originally want to do it but did to make others happy. And the outcome, as we can see, wasn't the best.

I agree 100% that he was the best candidate on paper. He was active on discussion when I myself wasn't. He has been a long time member of the community and manager on BB, which was more than Knowledge. He had us beat on those aspects. But it still goes back to being persuaded. Why did this happen? Why, when there are others willing to do everything they can for the NT, did others persuade another manager to run instead?

In the end I just hope this doesn't happen again. If there were brand new D.V managers running and nobody else then I can see the argument. But that wasn't the situation.

Also, I just want it to be known that I voted for RamQ as well because I knew he was a great manager. So I was one of those that made the wrong vote too. But after all that has happened, I will not be voting again for a manager that has to be talked into running.

Last edited by Isaiah at 8/26/2015 10:30:03 AM

I agree RamQ was persuaded into running, and he might not have run without persuasion. But RamQ has run for NT coach before (without any persuading), so it's not like he had no interest in it himself. I think your jump from him being persuaded to run (he did agree to it) to the disappointing results is a huge stretch. And to not vote for someone on that basis is silly.

We agree at the time that he was the best candidate. Why should we have settled for a lesser candidate if we can get a better one? The reason he was persuaded to run, despite others willing to do everything they could for the NT, is because he was better! Saying that you're willing to do everything doesn't qualify someone as a better candidate. This is such a weird criticism. "We should have settled for a worse candidate because they said they were willing to do everything for the NT."

I was persuaded to run. I didn't want to do it originally, but no one else who was involved was really stepping up to the plate. Being persuaded has nothing to do with it.

In this thread you've blamed the people who persuaded RamQ, the voters, the election process, the offsite, and "well known managers." Stop it. None of these criticisms have any merit.

There are a lot of people on the offsite who spend a lot of time contributing. They train U21 or NT players, delve into upcoming game plans, help scouting and bb-mailing managers with top prospects, or even just give advice to other members on training potential future NT/U21 players. But everytime things don't go perfectly, people who contributed literally nothing to the NT start stamping their little feet and are indignant about something. We made 5 world's finals over the past 5 seasons, and people who contributed nothing to that are critical when the streak comes to an end. If you didn't care to contribute before, why do you care to criticize now?

This whole thing is kind of silly. The persuasion of someone running in the election is only good or bad with Hindsight. If someone persuaded a coach to run for the election and he turned out to be a great coach with great results, does that mean all future coaches should have to be persuaded? Of course not.

This whole thing is kind of silly. The persuasion of someone running in the election is only good or bad with Hindsight. If someone persuaded a coach to run for the election and he turned out to be a great coach with great results, does that mean all future coaches should have to be persuaded? Of course not.

Are you trying to persuade me to run for the NT? All you have to do is ask.