BuzzerBeater Forums

BB Global (English) > The truth about the FA debacle

The truth about the FA debacle

Set priority
Show messages by
This Post:
00
278082.24 in reply to 278082.22
Date: 4/3/2016 6:50:36 PM
Arsenal 98
II.3
Overall Posts Rated:
282282
Second Team:
Stamford Snow Leopards
I don't know who disagrees with this.

I mean, obviously some of the official decision makers do, but what exactly is the logic behind leaving those FAs behind? Especially as they acknowledge there's too much money in the game seen with the tax on the highest bank balances. It's contradictory.

This Post:
00
278082.25 in reply to 278082.22
Date: 4/3/2016 9:22:53 PM
Delaware 87ers
II.3
Overall Posts Rated:
308308
The teams that get hurt are those up and coming teams and newly promoted ones that need to improve their rosters, but are unable to since they can't afford high skilled players.


It would help if those high division teams / long term managers viewed the Div III and IV teams as anything more than farm teams to do their out-of-position training for them.

Right now the training system is such that those newer/lower division owners are stuck in yo-yo land bouncing back and forth between III and IV because:

1) They can't afford to upgrade their rosters through FA's, and
2) They can't build players fast enough to compete with those long established teams.

Not to mention the fact that a lot of this focus on removing money from the game seems a lot like some people saying "I got my bankroll now we're gonna change the rules so no one else can and I can rule forever."

From: Phyr

This Post:
33
278082.31 in reply to 278082.30
Date: 4/4/2016 12:02:09 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
654654
I think you are taking that one step too far. Any rational individual wants to pay the lowest cost for the thing that they want. It doesn't matter if that player is owned by a FA or real team.

With all of the inflation all FA sales would be help the market correct itself because as you said the money goes to no one and money is taken out of the economy. Less money = lower prices.