BuzzerBeater Forums

Man, just think. If Buckeye could rally EVERY D5 manager, or close to it, he would win in a landslide!

Go gophers!!!!! :(

So, I always ask the same question, but I'll put a slightly different spin on it this time.

It's the worlds. Getting into the semifinals requires us to win the last game. With a normal it's 55/45 in our favor. With a TIE it's Y/(100-Y), with Y<50.

What is the largest Y such that you'd rather normal?

I think this largely depends on on what our goals are, and who our possible opponent will be in the next round. I would kind of need more detail to give a clearer answers. However, if the goal is simply to get the semis, then obviouls you normal. If we are in this for bigger aspirations, than Again, based on the the possible opponent in the next round would determine this answer. If its two big powers, and you want any chance at all to win, then a Tie and the risk that comes with it woud be the way to go. However, its two teams fighting in the other bracket that we match up with, have poor game shape, etc, a Normal would be appropriate to get there, and still have a legit chance to win that next game.

So in a normal scenario, the largest Y would be 49, but other variables could change that. Studying the offsite forum the way I have, it looks like we have a great system of tacitcal advisors. This would be one of those situations I would want to really gain as much information as possible to know what the risks/rewards really are. I think if its one of those times that there is a collective feeling of hey, we got this far, let's go for the Gold! Then you role the dice and go with the Tie and hope your tactics get the job done.

That's actually pretty disturbing because that probably would be a HUGE blow to our slowly improving NT. Buckeye seems like a good guy(not really he is an Ohio St. guy) but he's unqualified. Jason and Namssor or the only two guys running that can improve the NT. I know that D.V and some D.IV managers think they're making a statement by voting for the "little guy" but actually....

If you have seen my many posts throughout this thread then you would know I'm with you, bud.

Yeah of course.

What no love? And I was going to even offer you a NT spot....

To namssor and Jason- we both know you are qualified, and that you could both handle this job well. My question is besides experience at the NT level or in federations where everyone knows everything about BB, what quality sets you apart from the other? Please no mudslinging. And also, what role would you put the other candidate in should you win?

Individually- Namssor: You have used box and 1 in league games occasionally. Would this be an option ahead of a zone in gameplanning? (which no one answered right. It's the weekends, so that the GS update takes place and you can assess your options. Most would pick Medrano in 9 GS over Bronson in 7 GS. GS is critical at this level)

- I'm a hard worker. Like I've said, I took over a fledgling NT team in New Zealand with no structure whatsoever, and busted my ass to get people involved in the forums with weekly NT threads and training threads and tactics help. I created an offsite forum that is used in the same way we use ours. I sent and answered a million BB-mails involving questions about Game Shape, training regimens, potential caps, and tactics.

- I don't think it's an exclusive option ahead of zone, but it's something worth looking into. I was wondering when someone was gonna ask me about my use of the zones. I've noticed that virtually no one else uses it so last season I thought, hey why not give it a shot and do some test runs? Honestly, through the many times I've used it, I still don't know how effective it is versus a zone. I have to do some advanced metrics or something to measure its effectiveness, but it seems pretty similar to the zone. I don't know how useful it would be at the NT level because I used it since I had one big/guard with higher ID/OD than the rest of my team, which is what the box-and-1 supposedly takes advantage of. With everyone so awesome at the NT level, it seems like it would effectively neuter that advantage.

p.s. I have no clue what you're referring to in your sentences in parentheses.

From what's being said here it seems that the consensus from all the candidates is that a main obsticle to success is the lack of a 18/18/18ish big man. And that such a big man is not likely to be trained in the near future since foreign owners don't want to train the prospects, and USA I.1 is too competative for an owner to take on the financial risk and train such a player.

So, let's say that, without a big dollop of luck, such big men will not be a reality for the team anytime soon. My question to the candidates is,
1) What are the ideal G / SF prototypes to cover/compliment for our existing frontcourt deficiancies?
2) If such players don't exist now, how would you encourage their training by U21 grads or others so that they exist a few seasons down the line?

Candidates, what is your view on giving Half Time speeches? This is likely the most important part of the game. Whenever we get a good halftime speech we usually win!

double post, but I just want to give congrats to Buckeyefan for at least making this interesting. You're putting up a good fight. Not saying your my vote, because I do want evidence, but congrats for starting a lot of debate and making it interesting.