BuzzerBeater Forums

Irrelevant. My team doesn't deserve a manager like me. They're all slackers.

Question for potential managers.

If you could choose what the team would be, a rng team, or a li team, what would it be?

My goal isnt to limit the team to only one tactic. I have always been a type of manager to keep the opponent guessing. FoWhat we run will depend on not only the teams we play but also our personnel. If i look into the pipeline and see we are weak in depth in scoring bigs then i might run more RnG than LI. Same goes with the guards. If I see we are weak in depth there then I might run more LI. I have spent some time though looking into the pipeline and have a.pretty good idea where we stand for the next two seasons so if you would like I can talk to you about it on the offsite.

Would u have a problem if I changed my name to BIG or SUPERSIZEfries?

Not at all because we all know who had the name first :).

Couple questions for every candidate:
1. Let's say you start with 12 players on the roster. How do you plan on choosing those 12 players?
2. Name two goals for your term that don't include: win the Americas, win the Worlds or avoid repechage.
3. Lets assume you had two of the best big men in the world. Give me two ways you could try to get their managers to stay in good GS?

Rambo- my number 4 answer is below the initial post.

1. With the initial players, I would pick not just talent, but GS. Good players are only effective in good GS. If a manager can't keep a guy on the bubble of making the team in good GS, I'll be more likely to pick someone with GS I can trust.

Talent wise, I would look for flexible players in terms of what they can play, whether it be inside or outside. If we have enough adequate guards, I might lean towards a certain number of those players so that I can play them in a certain tactic if need be. Another important thing for me is potential. If they have room to grow during the season, I'll be more apt to pick them over someone that could cap earlier.

2. A couple goals for my term would be 1. To increase community involvement. An active community is a much better breeding ground for good players and good discussion on tactics before a game., and 2. To encourage safe building of players for club teams. Our managers with long term prospects (HoF NT possibilities) would be much better suited to hold onto their players after becoming U21ers. A goal for me if elected would be to work with them to make players that are not only effective at the U21 level but able to be kept in the States after they turn 22.

3. Bribes. :) Otherwise, I would stress how important to his team keeping the player in good GS would be. Players play better across the board with good GS, and it would be bad for both club and country to be in below average GS.

Question for all candidates:

What is your vote on Rambo's approval rating? (Did you approve of him or not)

Did you ever change your vote on him?

I have attempted in the past to be a proponent of PTB and if possible, may want to use it in a U21 game if need be.

My vote was yes, and it stayed yes. Nothing Rambo did during his tenure even made me question my approval of him. Was he perfect? No. However, you can't argue with our country's first Worlds win of anything. He did a lot of things well and it worked out well for everyone involved in the end.

My vote for Rambo was yes from the beginning because I knew he had what it took to win akd he proved it. Had he messed up i would have changed it to no.

Wozz lately has opened a lot of us (at least me) to a lot of what driving can do. I now value it pretty highly depending on the player and the system. Driving isn't necessarily crucial for a 15/14 JS/JR player in Motion.

As to your first question, it'd go: OD/PA/JS/HA/DR/JR, with DR being basically tied with HA. JR is low on the list I guess because all those other skills are crucial, whereas depending on the system, JR isn't absolutely necessary. I have no prejudice against it.

As for a strategy, the game seems to be moving in a direction towards balanced players, and I would aim to build players that are versatile and can do everything well. Eventually, it'd give us tactical flexibility and would allow us to give our opponents absolutely no clue what we'd do.

I see a lot of talk, not from every candidate, but in general, about using these niche players, and even one went as far as to say he would not have 2 guys with the same skills on the team. I guess I am pretty much of the opinion, through watching and chatting with Jelme when he was coach, that niche players really serve a very small role on the u21 team. Sure, you might have the scenario where you need one, but generally speaking, they will contribute very little.

Convince me why we need niche players on the u21 team, and how a guy that has better 2ndaries but -3 on the primaries is going to compete with the guy across from him.

If you agree with my line of thinking, explain to me how you would build a team knowing that we would not be adding niche players (again, generally), and that likely we would not need to really hold a spot for such a player.

National teams are way different than club teams. Many people think "niche players" and good secondaries on players are important. I'm going to strongly disagree with that. The more primaries, the better. If you only have a few seasons training a player for U21, we need all that to be primary training. Sure the big with terrible subs is not good for anyone's club team, because you can have a big for the same price with much better subs. But the U21 and NT aren't paying salaries. We need as many primary pops as possible.

I don't really understand this notion of "niche" players. When we look through the pipeline, there are players that are clearly better than others. Merrill, Hammond, Moreland, Felder, Brown, Luther, and Carlson were all clearly better than the other players. That's why they were on the team. Not because they fit a certain offense or system, or had good subs. We'll go through the pipeline and look through the different players. Not that many will have the requisite OD for guards or ID/RB for bigs to play, regardless of subs. But I'll for sure weigh primary skills much more heavily than the others.