BuzzerBeater Forums

Damn. I was hoping I could get some useful tips. You seem to be operating under the assumption that an NT manager makes all the decisions by himself, and has zero accountability or transparency. I know this isn't the case at all for the US, and I'm fairly sure it's not the case for most of the top teams in the world.

A: There's almost never two players that are so equal that this happens. Even if skills are equal, some players are training, some managers are better at game shape management, etc. Your top reason assumes that some players are equally good for the final selection spots, they both will receive equal training, and their managers are equally reliable for game management. And then you assume that the NT manager happens to have 1 of these guys. Or you assume that he chooses his own player despite the guy being a worse choice, and no one holds him accountable.

Most importantly, if the NT manager ends up winning gold, it's a pretty difficult argument that he took a suboptimal selection to benefit himself.

B: Correct! I know the skills of the major US players in the NBBA. Except, uh, so does everyone else. If the NT manager went around adding all the players of his opponents just to check their skills, don't you think they'd be annoyed? Don't you think they would vote for someone else the next election? If a player is close to selection, everyone knows his skills anyway. I don't have any more info than anyone else in the NBBA can get.

C: I'm doing a terrible job. I somehow haven't been able to force managers to tell me when they're selling players. Winning worlds gold was good, but I could do better by reading the minds of other managers to I know when players are going to be listed. I also don't see how I get an advantage here, how does this help me win a D1 title? You're assuming here that a D1 competitor wants to purchase a certain type of player, but they, for some reason, aren't prepared for it. They'll never be prepared to purchase anyone if that's the case.

Look - if you abuse the privilege of being NT manager, you can certainly get a small benefit. But you won't get elected again. This isn't a systemic problem, and definitely not a problem with managers like rwystyrk, or any others that you're considering knocking accomplishments from because they were NT managers. I know it's not easier to win D1 titles as NT manager because if it was, NT elections would be flooded with D1 candidates. And they're not.

This doesn't make any sense to me. NT managers get to know how different builds work with different tactics? Should we also start docking people who play in private leagues? You get to experiment with your own team! We should also start docking people with utopia teams, because they get to test more builds with more tactics too.

And just so you're aware, you just called a B3 winner and 12 time Czech D1 winner "not one of the greatest club managers."

And just so you're aware, you just called a B3 winner and 12 time Czech D1 winner "not one of the greatest club managers."

To be fair, he's never won the NBBA title so clearly he's not as good a manager as, say, Hassan Donnelly.

Look - if you abuse the privilege of being NT manager, you can certainly get a small benefit. But you won't get elected again. This isn't a systemic problem, and definitely not a problem with managers like rwystyrk, or any others that you're considering knocking accomplishments from because they were NT managers. I know it's not easier to win D1 titles as NT manager because if it was, NT elections would be flooded with D1 candidates. And they're not.

I'm not gonna go over every point. Everybody can read what I wrote and your rebuttal and can form his/her opinion. I don't think A is widespread, B is a concern and C is a real issue, because a NT manager can impose builds on managers (linked to point A) and should have a conversation going with the managers about both training and GS. Point C has happened and people mentioned it openly on the forums so it's not an hypotetical issue.

I'm not judging anybody nor knocking down anybody, but perhaps we shall ask NBBA managers if they'd feel comfortable with someone competing for the title and being the NT at the same time. We could do the same exercise with the ipercompetitive Polish D1 guys what they think now that one won the election (and another came in second).

All I'm saying is that being the NT manager gives you an advantage over the competition. Large or small (are you're now trying to make it look like) it is still an advantage and it is not nonexistant (as you tryed to imply before, if I understood you correctly)

Ok, according to the points system using the names mentioned the list looks like this:
1) BC Torooo: 64
2) Asingratitos BC: 49
3) rwystyrk: 49
4) BC Hostival: 43
5) ESV Laim: 32
6) I Love Tehran: 26
7) Dionysus: 24
8) Mloty Stargard: 20

This is just a rough draft but throw out some more mangers and their stats.

are you sure rwystyrk and BC Hostivar have diffrent point ? :D

I'm not gonna go over every point. Everybody can read what I wrote and your rebuttal and can form his/her opinion. I don't think A is widespread, B is a concern and C is a real issue, because a NT manager can impose builds on managers (linked to point A) and should have a conversation going with the managers about both training and GS. Point C has happened and people mentioned it openly on the forums so it's not an hypotetical issue.

I'm not judging anybody nor knocking down anybody, but perhaps we shall ask NBBA managers if they'd feel comfortable with someone competing for the title and being the NT at the same time. We could do the same exercise with the ipercompetitive Polish D1 guys what they think now that one won the election (and another came in second).

All I'm saying is that being the NT manager gives you an advantage over the competition. Large or small (are you're now trying to make it look like) it is still an advantage and it is not nonexistant (as you tryed to imply before, if I understood you correctly)

Please do ask the other NBBA managers if they feel comfortable with the NT manager in D1. Go do that. You didn't understand me quite correctly. I'm arguing being the NT manager gives you no competitive edge over other D1 teams. If you abuse it (look at everyone's skills, call up only your guys for scrimmages, etc) then you can gain a small benefit. But using your NT capabilities in that way is quite rare, and certainly has nothing to do with rwystyrk or any other top manager who has been involved with their NT that we're discussing here. You said this:

No, the gold is obviously a great achievement, but for the D1 titles it should be considered that he managed the NT for over 10 seasons and that gave him a significant advantage. Unless someone can confirm he didn't have nor bought any NT prospect/player during his tenure.

I'm arguing that it didn't give him any advantage that was unavailable to him as a regular D1 member. You're arguing that it was a significant advantage that we can only let slide if he didn't have an NT player in 10 seasons.

If there was a "significant advantage," D1 teams would be lining up to be NT manager. They're not - not even close.

Yes unless the manger has won a World Cup or Continential I don't know about.

I said different elite builds.Unless you have 14 150k plus players on your roster, you can't reproduce that.
Yes, I do know who he is, and which club he manages.

rwystyrk is the manager of BC Hostivar. So either the 49 points or the 43 points are wrong.

Just so we're clear. I think you should change the points system to reflect what the top managers think.

I also think Darkonza should be in the conversation despite having won less than others.