BuzzerBeater Forums

when we will get rid of farm teams, then in the market good players would cost way more than their salaries, wont be no problem at all. For now market is sick cause of farms flooding all those "Talent" there. I think even if it would be fair to pay atleast one salary for a player it is unnecesary.

As i said before i see the problem in farming and salary uneficient guys training, not in using them and the fact we getting rid of them is aplausible.

Last edited by Gajus Julijus Cezaris at 1/20/2014 12:31:22 PM

Having to pay one week salary would not change the life of those players, they would one day or another retire,

well, thats what i want, unwanted players retire. Nts dont have monster trees under the basket anymore. everyone happy. And if you would really wanted to sustain his salary you could. we have great example in lithuania atgrubnagiaii there sustained paulius jovas vaidvila monster 320k salary multiple seasons, basicly he started and will end career on that comand. didnt got droped from lbbl, saved some cash and now sustaining another 2 nt players.

basicly if you say you cant sustain salary you say you actually dont need him, and if he isnt needed for anyone, he must retire:D

Last edited by Gajus Julijus Cezaris at 1/20/2014 12:43:28 PM

If you quote a half sentence, read the other half as well.

but at least it would be less tempting to abuse the system with them and have an unfaire advantage

Here's the point.

the fact those junk players are worth nothing is of NT FARM TEAMS, who grew them. DO you expect to take care of ur farmed trash? You farmed, you take care, dont whine. Thats my point of view.

Wolph! You finally made it out of Japan?!


Anyway, I don't think anything should be changed. Most of the time, when you fire a player, you're either on the brink of brankrupty, or you're just firing your newly acquired useless rookies. In those cases, paying one week of salary would be unfair in my mind.

Actually the problem is when you buying a 250k salary player for 10k, play him on 2-3 games then fire him just before salary.

Rookie salary is not a big amount. When you go bankrupt, you don't buy 250k salary guys.
Anyway, the rule could be this: you can't fire a player who played a game on your team, before giving him a week of salary.
This way, rookie salary doesn't count as they didn't play a single minute for you. When you sell a player who was part of team for weeks, months, years, the rule doesn't affect you, because you already paid a week of salary earlier. The only case that this rule counts is the case mentioned in the top row.

Well, that's a way but an NT coach won't call in 10-12 NT caliber players with 7 and lower shape. Also it makes teams go bankrupt.

And the real problem is not that (they are "ready" to be retired) but that someone gets an unfair advantage on buying them and then firing before Sunday evening and avoid paying salary. Lots of cases the buyer spends 10-20k on a player with 250k+ salary and play him on 2 games. That means he gets a 2-game boost that woth 250k+ and pays only 20k.

Well, that's a way but an NT coach won't call in 10-12 NT caliber players with 7 and lower shape. Also it makes teams go bankrupt.

And the real problem is not that (they are "ready" to be retired) but that someone gets an unfair advantage on buying them and then firing before Sunday evening and avoid paying salary. Lots of cases the buyer spends 10-20k on a player with 250k+ salary and play him on 2 games. That means he gets a 2-game boost that woth 250k+ and pays only 20k.

The simple solution would be that purchasing a player means that you have to keep him on your roster (no sale / no firing) for seven weeks.

Seven weeks is maybe too much. It would be enough to just pay one week before firing to avoid system exploiting

Mate,

Even if we all, or at least 90% of the players are agree on that farming is not good the way how this guys is doing (and there are many others already) and actually makes advantages is not fair. Not fair with the others. Probably this is not against the current rules as it looks there are no rules to cover this at this point of time (as Charlie mentioned he found a backdoor ) but it is still not the way how this should be.

I think that is obvious you can`t hire someone to work with you then fire him/her without paying salary.
The only difference is that we do not have a proper rule for this in BB, but it does not change the fact this is not correct.

You can not pursue and punish all bad guy just because the police could not get them, even if the people may feel sympathy with you. He is not doing a good job, neither for the community nor him/herself.
Using common sense we can not say that this is OK just because we do not have a rule or policy for this.
If we would have a policy in place this will be unacceptable? Come on....