BuzzerBeater Forums

I don't know, I think it's tricky to play teams from both sides equally while keeping them separated. It can lead to weird things. Imagine you're fighting your rival for playoff position, and you get to play all the top teams from the other side twice while he plays them only once (and at home!). It's a huge swing...

The all-star game is really the only thing that needs the east/west separation, but honestly I don't think it is that important for users. And you can still have it. Just have the voting as usual, then the most voted PG goes to team 1, the 2nd most voted PG goes to team 2, the most voted SG goes to team 2 and the 2nd most voted to team 1, etc.

A proposition based on NFL scheduling:

Division Home/Away +1 : 9 games
Same Conference, Other Division: 4 games (2 home, 2 away)
Other Conference Other Division (alternates by season): 4 games (2 home, 2 away)
Same Division rank last season: 3 games

Big N---Big S---Great E---Great W
--A-------E---------I----------M
--B-------F---------J----------N
--C-------G--------K----------O
--D-------H--------L-----------P

Sample schedule
wk 1 Sat A @ B;
Tue A vs C;
wk 2 Sat A @ D;
Tue A vs E;
wk 3 Sat A @ F;
Tue A vs G;
wk 4 Sat A @ H;
Tue 8 A vs B;
wk 5 Sat A @ C;
Tue A vs D;
wk 6 Sat A @ I;
Tue A vs J;
wk 7 Sat A @ K;
Tue A vs L;
wk 8 ALL STAR GAME
Tue A @ E;
wk 9 Sat A vs I;
Tue A @ M;
wk 10 Sat A @B;
Tue A vs C;
wk 11 Sat A @D
Tue Wildcard/Rel1
wk 12 Sat QF/Rel2
Tue SF/Rel3
wk 13 Sat C1/Rel4
Tue C2
wk 14 Sat C3
Tue Scrimmage


Playoff teams: Best overall record (TB=division record, then PD) in division (seeded 1-4, by overall record then PD), + next 6 best records (PD) (seeded 5-10, by overall record then PD)

PLAYOFF BRACKET
bye---- 1
7-------vs winner
vs winner--------|
10----------------vs winner
bye-----5---------|--------|
---------vs winner--------|
bye-----4------------------|
----------------------------vs (3games) champion
bye-----3------------------|
---------vs winner--------|
bye-----6---------|--------|
8----------------vs winner
vs winner--------|
9-------vs winner
bye---- 2

RELEGATION BRACKET:
14h
vs rel1 winner
15 vs rel3 (3games)
11h

13h
vs rel2 winner
16 vs rel4 (3games)
12h

This would make for stronger divisional rivalries, at least 1 post-season game for everyone (either relegation or playoff), a slightly more difficult (easy) regular season for strong (weak) teams, better playoffs (since we'd take the best 10 overall teams instead of the best 4 teams from each conference) with the chance for interconference playoff games.

I'm not sure it'd be perfect, but the idea sparked, so i thought i'd throw it out there.

Last edited by rhyminsimon at 9/20/2012 1:08:52 AM

The big problem with a bye is the TS management.

Also with more and smaller conferences, it will increase the probability of high imbalances in strength.

Personally, I wouldn't mind a season to go on much longer, so you have more time to develop players.
So instead of training players for half of their BB life, it could be 1/3, 1/4 or 1/5.
I understand it's hard to increase the number of teams through all divisions in most countries. But NBBA can actually consist of 30 teams! 6 divs, one team relegated from each every season. So you'd have to have 6 divIIs.
The least games a team would have to play would be 29 obviously.
There's a 43 version (like today) or even go the full 82, though, I suspect not many users will support that.

btw, scrub cup! It's totally pointless! (consequently scrimmages as well)

and you can have 3 league games a week, ideal GS will have to be adjusted, but it's easy.

if 30 teams is too real, and BB is done by 4, you can have 20 teams.
16(4x4)div+15(5x3)conf+20(10x2)other conf=51 games
3 games a week. 17 regular season weeks.

4 winners + 4 other best ranked teams to the play offs which is more fair than now.
4 teams down.

Last edited by thylacine at 11/23/2012 8:28:33 AM

this will allow to give roughly as much training in 2 seasons, as you would now in 3 seasons.
So you will actually have more time reaping the fruits of your training.

Disagree with the suggestion of a longer season. Personally I prefer online sports games to have relatively short seasons so that the game doesn't get boring. I think what you really want is faster training, which brings with it problems of it's own.

I wouldn't mind more league games in the season (and playoffs where every round is best of 3 is also appealing), but then you'd have to have more league games in a week as well to fit the season into 14 weeks, and that means you'd have to change the entire weekly schedule and the game shape algorithm to deal with all of these extra games.

What's wrong with the cup? You don't have to play your top players in it if you think it's pointless (you can treat it like a scrimmage if you want for GS purposes), and it's another trophy besides the league for everyone to try for, a particularly good thing for those stuck in a boring league (like I probably will be in next season).

I agree that the shorter seasons are good. If a team is going through a rebuilding process that could take 4 seasons (training and arena expansion) then that process takes an entire year. Making that process take 1.5 or 2 years would discourage a lot of D3 and D2 teams from sticking around after a while.

What's wrong with the cup? ...and it's another trophy besides the league for everyone to try for, a particularly good thing for those stuck in a boring league (like I probably will be in next season).

C'mon! You might upset an ambitious DIII team, but that's as far as any of you DIV teams will go.
NBBA team can win the cup, and I'd say half of them want to. So it's a competition for 8 teams out of thousands..
But, good luck to you in the cup! I think you should try for it! :)

It's not about winning the cup for me, it's about getting as far as possible and maybe even knocking down a top team who underestimates and uses their scrimmage players.

If this is not your cup of tea you don't have to take the cup seriously, but it's there for those who do.