BuzzerBeater Forums

I see what your saying about tanking but I don't think you should take such a hard line approach to dealing with it. You mentioned that tanking undermines the competitive nature of the game, which is true, but tanking can also be a strategy for long term continued success at the top level.

I started the game around Season 23. Each season I competed to the best of my abilities with winning the league championship being my main goal. I managed my finances well, built up my arena and made what I thought were good purchases. This strategy worked reasonably well until I got to the Div 1. Attempting a championship run, I managed to put together a financially sustainable roster with 4 NT players, and only 1 player older than 32, but I was only able to make the semis. I just didn't have the financial depth to compete with older teams run by strong and experienced managers. Some of those teams, who didn't even seem to be competing for the championship, probably had many millions in the bank while at the same time fielding better rosters than mine.

At that point I could have stayed on the same path, remaining reasonably competitive, but probably not winning anything for the foreseeable future. I choose to tank however, because I thought it a better long term decision that would allow me to come back stronger and be a future perennial title contender in Div 1.

Also, taking away tanking as a strategy at this point seems a little unfair seeing as so many older teams have already benefited from it, some doing it even before there was a salary floor.

So in the midst of all this... you're hitting the nail right on the head.

Why is it, that it is more profitable to an organization to intentionally take yourself out of playoff contention, lose games, and then buy a superstar team?

Why is that more profitable than being a team that makes the playoffs 3-4-5-6 years in a row, and does a little better each time?

That's the real issue.

I have 21.5 mil.
If you make me to buy some players, and other teams like me- you will totally ruin the market.

We are not the problem in the market. We are sleepy teams. I don't have time in real life to study the game, but I like the people here and the game- as the best basketball game in the net.

If teams like me will buy players because you force them- the market will be really really crazy. We and our money are not the problem.

And off-course, there are other reasons to declare this offer- especially about training.
Bigger teams will not sell 1-2 player from their roster to find place for young players to train. if they make 5 mil for example, and they will have for example at least 5 mil, so you make them for example to pay 50k per week- or 25k- you will make them to pay hundreds of k $ per season- mil for couple of seasons because they tried to training.

Let every one play as we want or can.

*Just want to add that my plan was to buy 2 extremely talented players next season, and then train them + buying the best players I will be able.
It's a basket ball, but money is a big important part too.

Don't kill the players that want to play but can't do that well as the others.

Last edited by Noam Zaig at 11/18/2015 2:57:57 AM

All you guys threatening to quit are beyond ridiculous.Panicking because of nothing, really.You have no clue how this tax will look like and yet you are handling this situation as if you were burning alive...

I expect this tax to hit teams above 20-30 million and only the money above this line being taxed, so we are talking about five digit losses... Uuuuuuh, big deal! Lets jump out of the window. Or spend some more on better staff, bench players, scouting or whatever and you will be fine...

You have no clue how this tax will look like and yet you are handling this situation as if you were burning alive..

I think it's funny that you chastise owners for their reaction when they know not how this tax will look but then:

I expect this tax to hit teams above 20-30 million and only the money above this line being taxed,

How is it you have a clue what this will look like

your assessment may be the right one but your speculation is as good as theirs
Just saying

Last edited by Headless T Gunner at 11/18/2015 4:23:54 AM

Good reply!

You have no clue how this tax will look like and yet you are handling this situation as if you were burning alive..

I think it's funny that you chastise owners for their reaction when they know not how this tax will look but then:

I expect this tax to hit teams above 20-30 million and only the money above this line being taxed,

How is it you have a clue what this will look like

your assessment may be the right one but your speculation is as good as theirs
Just saying

Just an educated guess from various statements. I don't know if Marin or Perpete mentioned it, but it was said, that there was a certain treshold and the money above that would be taxed. Plus only a handful of teams will qualify for that. The richest teams I know have about 20 million, so...

Lucky that none of the persons complaining now, works in Formula 1 or some other competitive/regulated environment - where every season teams have to deal with new rules and regulations...

@Lemonshine: I like the suggestions and we'll consider them next time we discuss solutions for tanking. As you also admit, your solutions aren't perfect. That's why it's so hard to take any route: each one has holes and needs exceptions, etc...

@Mike Franks: It would probably be less stressful for you if you accept the way training works in BB and not try to push change in a fundamental part of the game. It's not going to happen. Also, try not to post 4 posts in a row, rather use the @ sign to reference other managers.

@Everyone: Seems like the only thing we can all agree upon is that the fans response to tanking is inappropriate. Actually, seems like fans don't punish extremely bad results (like 0-22) with enough disdain, which makes tanking a financially viable option. So, it would make sense to change that fan response. It would't affect teams in bot leagues, and that's fine, there seems to be no solution that addresses that atm. We just need to figure out how to implement it

The discussion here has been helpful and I think you should all be commended for that. I understand that things can get heated and that sometimes we veer off topic but all in a all, I think it was constructive.