BuzzerBeater Forums

That's the point, they should not only be compared but treated absolutely the same.
OR
Not even appear on the market.

You ain't getting my point here. No, they should not be treated absolutely the same, because they aren't. Players who don't get sold still stay in the team, while free agents retire - hence the current system ensures that the good players stay while the bad players disappear. Or are you suggesting that teams will lose their players shall no one bid on them before the sale ends? Doesn't really make sense does it?

But yes, I would be more in favor of the removal of free agents (save for those on the NT). I do recall reading such suggestions before, and if I recall correctly it was mentioned that free agents were supposed to counter inflation or something, but with player prices very much lower than when it was back then, I don't really see the need for free agents anymore, unless of course, removing it might cause multiskilled players to have inflated skills (but we wouldn't really know unless it happens right?).

Sorry for the assumption, but yes, you do come across to me as too excited, although it wasn't meant to be taken negatively. It's more of like saying that you have a lot of enthusiasm, so hope you know that I do not mean any offense. I might have not been on BB for a couple of years before creating my current account, but based on my experience, I can see that this topic largely stems from your lack of understanding of the game. Yes, you are really sharp and can come up with some good points, but I believe you might have a different perspective once you understand the game better.

Last edited by BuzzRBeater at 2/5/2020 7:28:00 AM

Thank you very much Perpete, replied as well.

Why doesn't human's player have it's value estimated the same way?
"Players like XX have been selling for around $ 1 000 to $ 2 000."
Whilst his salary is $3500. Why then the above text doesn't loo like:
"Players like XX have been selling for around $ 35 000."?????

The estimate is based on prices of sold players. Not on the starting prices on the transfer list.

This had been done on purpose. Purpose is to retire once and for all junk players, do lower skilled players prices not to get deflated, and to prevent buy-ins for one game.

People used to buy quite decent players, play 1 or 2 games, and before the monday, when they need to pay their salaries used to fire players. Or play 1 game and resell. This was possible because game shape didnt dropped after purchase and cheap players were more than abundant, also there was no minimum 3 days time on a roster before resell.
And it works great, there are not so many junk players on the market. And if there are, they just retire because nobody wants to pay 10x their salaries, like in your example 35k for 2k worth guy is ridiculous.

Basicly it was decision in conjunctions of: minimum reselling time, game shape after purchase drop, free agents market changes.

Why they even appear on the market in the first place?
What is the real reason for that? I don't see one.
Except getting the in-game money permanently out of the human's wallets.
Because when they trade mutually it goes from one to another and when player is bought from free agency or retired it goes to system.

Furthermore, it just shows us how many people at early stage stop playing the game. market is packed with those players meaning lot of people have quit. That's sad and bad PR.


If they were not on the market. Player's value in general would inflate.
Quality of the players in clubs would drop, but that would be for everyone so competition toughness would remain the same. Scouting would have more sense as finally it's cost would be justified as even only a good rookie would have some value. Overall it would be much more realistic.

Because we dont want player prices to be too high either. There are good free agents who meet the criteria and get sold for the 10x salary or more. Bad ones wont get sold and retire. Free agents also take money out of the game which is important.

That's called market regulation = not free market.\

"Because we dont want player prices to be too high either. " - What does that mean? What is too high? Who doesn't want that?

"Free agents also take money out of the game which is important." - Why? People in this game don't buy in game money for real money. If they reach financial peek to quickly there are many other ways to regulate that. Fixed costs, then tickets sold, injuries I could go on and on.

Let me tell you what you are doing here.
Most of the quitters are relatively young mangers hence most of the free agents are just semi good.
With them on the market you are keeping 1 -3 seasons old managers in check. They cannot get their investment in training young talents back, because value of their trainees in depreciated by free agents and as someone already mentioned training is not feasible. This way gap between old managers and new ones is just getting bigger.

The above effect is obvious, There is hidden effect too. "The addiction" to game is largely created with Tamagochi syndrome. Taking care about something and watching it grow develops addiction like nothing else. That's completely pushed aside. Largest success would be watching own draftee to do well in your leagues. That's currently pointless because it is not feasible.