BuzzerBeater Forums

I am not sure this qualifies as tanking. You promoted into d. III for season 17 and then relegated. You bought Zebin, Thomas, and Xiros that season. In fact, you spent more than you sold in season 17. There is a difference between losing and tanking.

I think that the size of the country you play in makes a difference with regards to how successful tanking can be. My team is aging and it won't be long before I am no longer competitive. I will, most likely, begin rebuilding when it happens. Training and being competitive in D.I is very difficult so it makes sense to drop down when rebuilding. I don't see anything wrong with it. I do agree that fielding a team of less than five guys is bogus and should carry heavy financial penalties. Add to this a higher salary floor and there is a decent solution.

tanking is one business decision you could do to plan for your team's long term direction. i am personally opposed to it because you may want to rebuild your team through other means without tanking, but it increases the chance of you getting quality picks. but i wouldn't judge anyone who does so. this may be prevalent it lower tier leagues.

I think it's also important to highlight that there's two different forms of tanking...

1. Tanking to save money and get relegated at the end of the season.

2. Tanking with the aim of finishing 7th and saving up enough money to buy in mercenaries for a relegation series.

I do agree that type 2 tanking is worse than type 1 - (as described by Matt)

After 14 seasons in the game including 2 promotions to Division 1, for the first time this season Ive tanked.

Reason I opted to tank this season (my 4th in div 1) was that I was getting bored and wanted to start training players again. (and wanted to even things up a bit between the conferences as there was a bot in the other conference)

No way I could be competitive in div 1 whilst training properly 3 x 18 year olds to become quality small forwards.

I think that the fan survey the way it is currently calculated, promotes type 2 tanking.

I've always had a problem with

"I am familiar with the star players, and am not afraid that they will be transferred"

because I dont think it adeqautely recognises and rewards the "occassions" that you might have several long term quality players on your roster whom your've trained. (never seems to go passed 2 or so balls).

The other criteria I dont like is

"The general manager is doing everything he can to try to improve the team"

I currently have 5 balls for this despite throwing my last game by over a 100 points by purposely bringing in dud players and playing them in their worst positions to make sure that I wouldnt lose 1st pick in the draft.

Perhaps part of the calculation methodology for this criteria should recognise teams whos players salaries are less than 2 and a half times the weekly tv money, and then penalise those teams severly. (Dont make it "proportionally rewarding" for teams being way above this figure as this would help the old gaurd established teams- increasing the gap between new and old teams)

Its an absolute joke that I can get a 5 ball

"The general manager is doing everything he can to try to improve the team"

, with a team near the salary floor and after buying in duds and then purposely playing them out of position to lose a game.

Perhaps even "take away" the early draft picks for teams who have not for every week of a season, spent more than 2.5 x weekly TV contract. (starting from next season - would stuff me up if you did it this season)

First round of draft picks is only for teams who have spent 2.5 x weekly TV contract for every week of a season.

This would effectively take away the first round pick for those teams who dont spend 2.5 x weekly TV contract for every week of a season, and give them a 4th round pick instead

I do also like the "eligibility rule for finals" as raised previously and repeatedly in this forum.

Perhaps newly acquired players should have to be on your roster for two weeks prior to the finals and even longer periods for 2nd and 3rd players acquired before finals.

Last edited by Sid Vicious at 7/9/2012 11:10:18 AM

I think the general manager is doing everything he can to improve the team refers to trades, not tactical decisions. Those are covered by the questions relating to games.

I think the general manager is doing everything he can to improve the team refers to trades, not tactical decisions. Those are covered by the questions relating to games.

Currently you could be correct

Again if I can get 5 balls for this criteria, after buying in dud players and then playing them in their worst positions in order to gaurantee that Id lose a game, then there is a problem with the way this criteria is measured.

And if it is just for making trades then whats the point of having it at all as it just directly opposses the other fan survey criteria "I am familiar with the star players, and am not afraid that they will be transferred".

Fixing up the way these 2 criteria are measured as I suggested, will go along way to reducing the financial incentives to tank.

IMO something also needs to be done to get rid of the bots out of leagues.

Having a bot team in your conference enables teams to sell off their rosters, free from any concern that they can be auto relegated. i.e bots encourage tanking

Perhaps if a team goes bot, either through lack of interest or from being suspended for cheating, then that team can be immediately dropped down to division 5.

The top team from a league lower can immediately be promoted to the league from which the bot team was relegated from and be given promotion money as well.

A formula would need to be worked out to position "the promoting replacement team" fairly on a ladder of that higher league part way through a season, something like the number of wins of the bot team and the replacement promoting team are added and divided by 2.

i.e. Team "Fat Boy" is caught cheating in the Division 1.

A time period is allowed for appeals etc, but at most the team will officially go bot in 5 weeks from being caught.

(For a team suspended for cheating I would like this time period reduced to about 2 weeks)

Team" Fat Boy" is now bot and it is round 8 of a season and they have 2 wins and a points difference of -100

A top team from division 2 who had 10 wins and a points difference of + 150 , is instantly promoted into division 1 with promotion money.

They come into the conference from where the bot team was removed with 6 wins (2 +10)/2 and a points difference of +25 (-100+150)/2.

No bot team in div 1 exists and hence there is less enticement for teams in that league to tank. It is then also fairer for the teams in the other conference and plus also less boring for all concerned.

Naturally a team from div 3 would have to be promoted (using the same methodolog) to replace the team in div 2 that was promoted to replace the team that was promoted to div 1.

This "arrangement" would actually make the lower leagues more interesting as well, because it could "open them up for more even competition" by allowing a team that was going to promote anyhow, to be promoted early.

Removal of the bot teams and the promotion of teams that were going to promote anyhow, during the course of a season would certainly freshen up all of the leagues and probably by doing so, keep the interest of managers up so that less teams go bot in the first place.

Good idea?

How many season supporter am I rewarded with?







Last edited by Sid Vicious at 7/9/2012 7:19:08 PM

If you expect season supporter for this idea, I would retire you six months if you ever buy one. I'm totally against this idea, because all of the problems this would cause in many leagues and unfairness.

I hope its just a language problem , but in English IMO it almost sounds like your threatening me which I believe to be very "un GM like" behaviour.

Yes I put forward an idea and I joked about being rewarded with free supporter.

If you want to reduce the occurance of tanking then you have to address the root causes.

One cause is the financial incentive and another cause is the presence of bot teams, which take away the threat of auto relegation.

How about you come up with some ideas to address these problems rather than ridiculing mine

I think this would cause a lot of issues. For example, how would scheduling work? Would the promoted team inherit the other teams schedule? In the situation you proposed, they would have to edit or discount past schedules in order for your for solution to work. Also, What about in small nations? How would they field full divisions?
Also, I doubt the promotion money alone covers the cost of buying new players (at least in the USA, I can't really comment about the state of other nations). Teams spend seasons preparing for promotion. Prematurely promoting them can destroy their plans and possibly make them relegate and start over. They might even go bot themselves. I agree with Perpete when he says that it will cause more problems then it solves.
Also, when I am making a joke that could be misconstrued, I usually add a winky face [ ;) ] to avoid people tajing the remark seriously.
So, how many balls do I get for this post ;)

Last edited by lamchops at 7/9/2012 9:18:56 PM

After numerous seasons in div 2, in Season 15 I backed a hunch that players would be cheap during the Allstar week.

I sold players 2 or 3 weeks before the Allstar week who whilst being good players, they werent good enough to get me to Div 1, and the week of the Allstar game I spent 5 or so million on 3 players.

I ran a huge loss for that season and whilst winning the final, would have been declared bankrupt if I had of failed to sell one of my brought in guns on the Sunday that the last final was played, just a few hours before the financial update on the Monday that would have ruined me.

I proceeded to fight Season 16 in Div 1 and from memory got six wins and finished 7th and got relegated.

Experienced Managers were saying that I forced my way into getting promoted "before i was ready" and then by not laying down and tanking, that the experience would set me back several seasons.

I started season 17 back in div 2 with a negative bank balance but through a lot of experience that Id learned through seasons 15 and 16, managed to repromote straight back up.

Therefor my opinion that the argument that

"Prematurely promoting them can destroy their plans and possibly make them relegate and start over"

is not always true.

I believe that until round 14 or so it is feesible to promote teams to replace bots, with the system I proposed in my post 218937.440.

If I hadnt of rolled the dice I wouldnt of got out of div 2 and I probably would have lost interest and gone bot

With regards to the fan survey issue and the need to financially penalise teams by reducing attendances, what about the ideas I put forward in my previous post 218937.438 ????

Last edited by Sid Vicious at 7/9/2012 11:03:36 PM

Honestly I feel like the league salary floor should be increased first. That takes away possible cash to get a star from TL before relegation games start. Then fix the fan survey so you are hurt for a bad losing streak. Also, why don't we have a deadline for playoff and relegation buys so you can't buy a guy for a series. Just make a deadline for all competitive league games(playoff and relegation), and there shouldn't be that much of a problem