BuzzerBeater Forums

I think getting the fifth spot is not tanking. Managers sometimes need to lose a game on purpose to be able to keep themselves in the cup or manage game shape for a chance to win the next game. If you manage to pull out fifth spot you actually have a team that is able to compete. Don't you agree?
About the walkovers. I think walkover should be any game, that has less than five players in lineup. It's unreal to just pick fans from attendance to be your starters. I can understand, that perhaps the GE needs a spot filler and can't run with 4 vs 5 simulation, but that should only happen if someone get's injured, ejected or fouled out. Sure you can suit up one injured player and have him limp off after the game starts, but I prefer 5 healthy players start the game rule.
After every walkover, the club not coming to compete should get fined by the league by a sum equal to player salary floor. This way they can collect their income and pay atleast some of it away as fines. League player salary floor should be somewhat raised. I think the negative effects of a team tanking and relegating, negates his one seasonal income as a higher league team.

Last edited by Kukoc at 12/6/2011 4:47:51 AM

And just for the record, I wasn't screaming "I got robbed!".

This wasn't directed to you, but to the OP. Thanks for respecting my opinion, I try to be fair as much as possible

I'm going to ignore the first two paragraphs, as they're little more than sarcasm and innuendo.

I'm well aware of existence of other teams who do the same thing, so there is really no reason for you to bring them into the conversation when I'm really trying to discuss Edju.
Yes, I know about Heatcoatmen, and yes, I agree, his case is even more absurd; but I already addressed that in one of my previous posts, didn't I? So, why do you talk about him again?
Yes, I know about Jason - I play in that league, you know; I know who my leaguemates are and what they do - and yes, I agree, he should be penalized for it, too; but again, what does he have to do with the point I'm trying to make about Edju? Yes, I know about Jason - I play in that league, you know; I know who my leaguemates are and what they do - and yes, I agree, he should be penalized for it, too; but again, what does he have to do with the point I'm trying to make about Edju?
Do you see where I'm going at with this? Does this help you to see why I said what I said in that last post of mine?

I brought up Heathcoat and Jason to show what I see as the true definition of tanking. I could have searched through other leagues to find another tanking team, but his was the most readily available choice. Jason's ultimate goal is to stockpile money and a high draft pick through relegation, while Edju's primary goal seems to be to avoid both the playoffs and relegation series through a fifth place finish.

You'd like to lump these two forms of losing together, that's fine. I see a key difference, and they both highlight different problems with the current setup of the game. First: teams trying to relegate, like Jason is currently, make way too much money because the salary floor is too low. Second: savvy users like Edju can throw their home matches, win their away games and still make a lot of revenue through attendance.

Raising the salary floor and tweaking the attendance formula would fix both of these issues. To some extent.





Last edited by Arthur Monay at 12/6/2011 6:48:44 PM

Those are 2 good posts, Wolph. I could only plus the 1st.

There are plenty of problems with the economics of this game. 11 home games to 12 financial updates every season, away games affect on the following game, the ability to successfully tank, making less money in the 3rd game of the finals series because you lost the 2nd on the road (i know that falls into a previously stated category but it pisses me off), the salaries of the best players in the game, etc...

There is a reason why the transfer list has degraded into the crap hole that it is. Obviously we have problems with the economy of this game. Most people can see this. However, there is a reason why things won't change...the BB's are arrogant enough to think things are perfect and that nothing is currently wrong with the economic state of this game or with how teams make/lose money in certain situations. It's idiotic, but it won't change. It's a pity...

There are plenty of problems with the economics of this game. 11 home games to 12 financial updates every season, away games affect on the following game, the ability to successfully tank, making less money in the 3rd game of the finals series because you lost the 2nd on the road (i know that falls into a previously stated category but it pisses me off), the salaries of the best players in the game, etc...

There is a reason why the transfer list has degraded into the crap hole that it is. Obviously we have problems with the economy of this game. Most people can see this. However, there is a reason why things won't change...the BB's are arrogant enough to think things are perfect and that nothing is currently wrong with the economic state of this game or with how teams make/lose money in certain situations. It's idiotic, but it won't change. It's a pity...

Arrogant or not, it's clear from a business standpoint that the BBs must assuage their user base or their customers will leave. And right now, it seems like the paying customers are complaining the loudest. While Charles' claim that tanking is a sup-optimal choice may in fact be true, the perception of a lot of users is that tanking is an economically viable choice. Raising the salary floor and punishing teams more severely for massive blowouts would go a long way towards fixing this problem in the eyes of many users. Wolph has some good ideas above for tweaking attendance.

There's no easy fix to the salary issue. Drastically decreasing the salaries of top players would widen the gap between upper and lower division teams, as the increased affordability of these players would drive transfer prices up, making it nearly impossible for teams without a stockpile of money to purchase them.

The 12 economic updates/11 home games is a non-issue for me. The Cup more than makes up for the economic difference and I think it adds a bit of strategy to the game.

You said a lot of good things. Again. I'm pretty sure this is how the vast majority of users feel - well, those who use their own head anyway - but will something change in this respect(?) unlikely, unfortunately.
From my experience, BB will admit that something is not working as it should only if it is so obvious that even a blind person could see it. Which is rather sad, of course, but hey, it's their game - I suppose they have a right to do whatever they want with it.

Gday Mate

maybe you can assist on this?

I am sitting undefeated in my league, i am in the final 32 teams in the cup

i just recently played a team in our other conference who was also undefeated at the time at my HOME court

attendance of that game was: 6085

a week before that game, i played a team who was sitting LAST in our league at my HOME court

attendance of that game was: 6230

so my question is: how can less people turn up to a game where i am playing an undefeated team, compared to a team that is last where i get more people attending? you would think that if 2 undefeated teams are playing against each other, more people would come

thoughts?