BuzzerBeater Forums

I know maybe the opions here are to extreme, but in my eyes the advantage is to big from the teams who finished first/make it to the finals compared to the 5th placed teams.(and also the teams who fly out with 33% of the income after the first round)
I think even with a smaller difference of income, i would target to finish the season as succesful as possible.

It is my theory that this has been such a squeaky wheel issue for so long that sooner or later something will give. The Powers That Be just haven't told us if they're thinking about doing anything different about this issue. I sometimes see the forum as a sort of public petition, and when I see a whole lot of griping about the same things over and over again, a change tends to get made. We have so much more time to spend extra time griping about 5th/8th place this season now that the one of our old favorite complaint topics, the draft, has been addressed. From what I can tell, other issues also get addressed when they they consistently get a ton of Forum chatter (day trading, market inflation, etc.). Maybe the right solution hasn't been hit upon yet, or maybe it's secretly in the works, who knows. I have faith.

But in the meantime, the wise will figure out that Free Throw training can net a team an average a few points per game if not neglected, and that could mean the difference between winning an losing a couple of times each season. Embrace Free Throw training!

I know maybe the opions here are to extreme, but in my eyes the advantage is to big from the teams who finished first/make it to the finals compared to the 5th placed teams

If you are talking about the point of view that you can train during scrimmage whatever you want, thats why I can see 1 scrimmage in advance after 1 PO match as a contribution. You didnt do whatever you wanted in the PO match, maybe you did, because you knew about that there is not much chance to make PO finals..

So afterall - winners will be only these who make a PO finals and losers (from the training perspective) would be only these who tought that will make finals and failed.

8th placed teams do not deserve more than they actually have.
5th placed teams do.
I think one nice feature would be both 5th teams play one game on neutral court (or 3 games A-B-A) and the winner would be given the option of switch conferences or stay where he currently is. So 5th placed teams would have something to fight for, and won't be so doomed economically as they currently are.

I rather like this one. One game, neutral court, split revenues 50/50, or maybe 67/33 to the winner. Three games would make 5th significantly more attractive than 3rd or 4th, which is not what we want either.

At the same time, I think something should be done with the relegation games to make fans less interested in them. Nothing dramatic, just turn down attendance a little bit.

I don't like it.The possibility to choose their own next season conference could be a too great advantage over the 3rd and the 4th team in the league

An estabilished revenue in friendly match is more easy and more fair to do

I think it's not about making place 3-5 place more attractive, it's about making 6-7 place less attractive.

Relegation games should not award any money at all. It should be only about staying in the division.

Only PO should award money and right now the situation is fine. The better you were in season the better you get from arena income.

All manager should know that at least you have 11 home game and so you have to be careful about your salary because if you don't make to the playoff you have 2 weeks without any game income. For PO team it's like little bonus they deserve for being the best team in the division.

I actually sort of agree with this notion, even though part of me thinks it's evil.

Here's a direction (not a solution since I don't actually like it as a suggestion): What if the ticket sales of the relegation playoff had to be shared with the 5th place teams. Perhaps the home team gets 50%, the visiting team gets 25%, and the 5th place team gets 25%. The 5th place team would get the cut from the games either of the 6th place team in its own conference or home games in conference arenas (probably the latter). This idea would both give the 5th place team a sliver of income while taking that sliver from the income of the 6th and 7th place teams.

I personally don't like this idea specifically (even though I'm throwing it out there), but maybe there's a thread of the idea to pull on that might lead to some brilliant revelation.

I think it's not about making place 3-5 place more attractive, it's about making 6-7 place less attractive.

Relegation games should not award any money at all. It should be only about staying in the division.

Only PO should award money and right now the situation is fine. The better you were in season the better you get from arena income.

All manager should know that at least you have 11 home game and so you have to be careful about your salary because if you don't make to the playoff you have 2 weeks without any game income. For PO team it's like little bonus they deserve for being the best team in the division.

Why worsen 6th and 7th place teams economic situationwhen you can more easily improve the condition of the 5th place teams(incomes in friendly matches between the 5th teams)?

Because making 5th place better will make 3-4th weaker then you have to make them better and then 1-2. It's a dead end.

Why it's so hard to understand that at the beginning of the season you know how many home game you are sure to have, how many weeks of merchandise,tv contract, staff and player salary you also have. You can easily calculate your limit. Giving money to correct mis-management is not for me a good solution. They spend too much ? they have to correct it.

the problem is that the limit are so different, and your final placement isn't so determistic.

And loosing one spot could make a big different, in positive way(from 5 to 6) or negativ way(2 to 3).