BuzzerBeater Forums

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.

@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.

Just keep an eye on new teams, that inherit the old teams record - some start at the end of a season, with really bad records. It would be horrible to punish new managers.

Yup, will do.

which generally all involve you wanting to eliminate all choice and consequence with no corresponding increase in complexity

Wow, you sure get upset when you get caught putting words in my mouth that I never said or would say (such as "I know you'd prefer the easy button mode where all you do is set one lineup and they play for you in perpetuity.") It is painfully obvious you don't have a clue what I advocate. To refresh your memory, I have consistently advocated for athletic competition rather than who-can-amass-millions-of-dollars, logical training rather than illogical Hattrick derivatives, and opportunity for lower- and mid-level teams that is sorely lacking currently.
That should sound familiar to you, because a lot of people advocate the same things I do. I sure wish you would quit your personal attacks on me. Isn't a GM supposed to set an example? A lot of us were discussing buzzerbeater and the proposed luxury tax, so please let us get back to our discussion. Thank you.

So, to sum it up, no concrete ideas (again), an attack on me (again) while simultaneously complaining that my post is an attack on you (again), and more wasted time on pointless discussion (again).

Wake me up if there's ever a time it goes from "Mike wants" (or "Mike complains about") to "Mike proposes" and I'll be happy to discuss that. Otherwise, I apologize to everyone for wasting their time responding to the latest version of your wishlist when all you have to contribute is what you want, not how you'd like to get there (again).