BuzzerBeater Forums

You failed to address any of the points I raised. And you even acknowledge one of the ways in which this loan system is guaranteed to be abused by unscrupulous owners in the higher divisions:

The system can’t be abused so much unless you have two teams you’re controlling and you use the second one only to benefit your loaned players.

You also fail to realise - or are ignoring - the two-part purpose of training: to improve your team by improving its players, and to improve your team by selling players you have trained and using this money to buy better players. The loan system would cause teams to use up valuable (financially valuable) training minutes for absolutely no gain.

IIn real life, yes it can be very good for both teams. But this is not real life. A loan system in a game of this sort only ever benefits the owners of players being trained by others.

i answered all of your points. Yes their is a way that it can be a problem the sae way the teansfer list is now and i have seen teams abuse it already. You can make sure it cant be abuse by only allowing teams to loan players to other coountries. Since you cant sign up in a different country that already cuts out some of the problems. My team i take care of except the players on loan. I cant teain them if they are not with me. The point of loaning a player is not to then sell him it is to get him ready to be in my rotation either because i have an aging star or or see more upside with him than a urrent player. There are pplayers who are not always going to be ready and need time to devolop. why should i always sell them and then buy someone else when i am ready. Why cant i keep him and let someone else train him on my money. How is that abusing the game.

The point of loaning a player is not to then sell him it is to get him ready to be in my rotation either because i have an aging star or or see more upside with him than a urrent player. There are pplayers who are not always going to be ready and need time to devolop. why should i always sell them and then buy someone else when i am ready. Why cant i keep him and let someone else train him on my money.

I think this sums up your position nicely. You want someone else to assume all the early risk of training up your unwanted, unplayable young players for you, so you can profit from them, rather than focusing on training players they own to benefit their team.

How delightfully selfish.

that`s what I said (=

However, to contribute in a positive fashion, I think I can add a few modifiers to the original proposal making it fairer for the team receiving the player

1. A team may only loan 1 player per season
2. A team may only recruit 1 player on loan per season
3. A team may not recruit a loan player from another team in the same country (good point, OP)
4. A player can only be on loan for one season in his entire career. The minimum and maximum loan length is one season
5. The teams involved in the loan must agree terms under which the loaned player plays, ie. minutes per week, positions played, skills trained.
6. The team making the loan pays a fee, eg. $250,000, to the team receiving the player in return for services rendered. This fee is held in trust for the duration of the loan and is payable when the loaned player returns to his original club if the playing terms have been met.
7. The team who own the loan player must pay the player's wages
8. If the loan player is sold at any time after the loan period ends, 33% of the proceeds is paid to the team who took the player on loan.

Opinions?

Pointless. Just buy and sell, that's what the transfer system is for.

It is pointless to tell the team loaning the player how to train them when I don’t always know how I am going to train my players in a month time. Also why should I pay the team for taking a player and pay his salary for the duration of the year when they are getting a player that might make them a better team or not. As being accused of being selfish. If you think that than you have never played a game where you were a team with no money in a lower league. You get a player who is in your rotation or a starter where I don’t have to pay their salary or a transfer fee. That player might be the difference in them getting promoted or not. All of those things help me out allot. All I get is a player with better game shape and more experience and slightly improved in certain categories that I don’t get to choose. Oh yeah very selfish.

Go drop down to division 4 where you cant afford good players on the transfer list and your not making any money. Now you can have a player from the top division for free to help you out. Yeah horrible idea. This idea also will cut down day trading as teams will loan a player insted of buying someione they cant afford which will lead to them going bankrupt and them leaving the game.

You don't understand what i'm saying. Go back and read through my proposal again.

On second thoughts, I'll highlight some key points for you:

5. The teams involved in the loan must agree terms under which the loaned player plays, ie. minutes per week, positions played, skills trained.

So you, the owner, get to decide what sort of thing happens to your player. Nobody is going to train a centre without outside skills as a guard when training them as a centre will earn them $250,000. So if you have a spare centre from the draft, you can get him trained in inside skills. But there's a catch, for both teams. And as for not knowing in advance what you'll be training from week to week....sheesh. Proper planning and preparation prevent poor performance. Good luck with your unplanned system!

6. The team making the loan pays a fee, eg. $250,000, to the team receiving the player in return for services rendered. This fee is held in trust for the duration of the loan and is payable when the loaned player returns to his original club if the playing terms have been met.

So let's say that your loaned centre doesn't get any playing time, or enough time, after you and the receiving team agreed that he would get at least48 minutes per week in a training position. He has not improved at all. Therefore, the agreed playing conditions have been breached and your money, held in trust, is returned to you.

If he does get trained, then you get a player who is improved at a set of skills decided in advance by you and the receiving team for a knockdown price of $250,000. I estimate that under a well-thought out regime, you could turn a centre with average IS, ID and RB into a centre with strong in those three skills. Bargain!

Ah, you say, what if the player is injured? Then the amount of money to be paid is reduced by the percentage of the season he has missed.

Now it seems your main concern for having a loan system is

That player might be the difference in them getting promoted or not.

It is for lower teams to get better players and help them with out paying their whole salary and you get your 18 year ols 2nd round pick aa chance to play and prove his worth to you before you decide to sell him

The system I proposed allows for this. Let's say that you don't want the player to be trained and don't want to pay the loan fee: the solution is simple: set the playing conditions to be something that cannot be fulfilled eg. a guard to be played as a centre. Your generous sense of philanthropy is fulfilled! You might have helped a poor little Div IV team to promote! And you lost no money! Awwww! Except here's the problem: this is where the system is ripe for abuse. Bummer.

To DemonHoosier: point taken. ksach's point is that teams receiving a loan player can't afford trainees. Hence the need, he believes, for a loan system.

Go drop down to division 4 where you cant afford good players on the transfer list and your not making any money.

Isn't that the whole point of having different divisions? That the best players are in the top divisions?

This will never happen - the cheating potential is too great.

Totally agree...

Steve