|
Post by The Sandmen on Apr 4, 2015 0:39:25 GMT -5
Think solutions here guys. I've had 1 champion and no gp win since I have been here which is a few seasons now... Not much success with my team. Yet look at how many champions other teams have had. It seems to me, it USUALLY (not always) is the same teams being successful. You have had 1 reigning champion, but you have 5 former champions on your team. So, where does that leave us? We are the top two in former champions on our teams, you and I, and I only have 1 more former champion on my team than you do (thanks to Ben's crazy upset today). How much does/should history play a role here? The problem is there is still that we have a whole bunch of variables that level out the league. We have charity, and we have the preference in game-changer auctions. If we did not have those things, and if they were not making a huge, notable impact, I would say a change absolutely must come about. But I am still seeing the charity trades, and I am still doing the weighted-preference in auctions.
|
|
|
Post by xx - Former Phoenix Fight Club on Apr 4, 2015 12:41:18 GMT -5
Think solutions here guys. I've had 1 champion and no gp win since I have been here which is a few seasons now... Not much success with my team. Yet look at how many champions other teams have had. It seems to me, it USUALLY (not always) is the same teams being successful. You have had 1 reigning champion, but you have 5 former champions on your team. So, where does that leave us? We are the top two in former champions on our teams, you and I, and I only have 1 more former champion on my team than you do (thanks to Ben's crazy upset today). How much does/should history play a role here? / The problem is there is still that we have a whole bunch of variables that level out the league. We have charity, and we have the preference in game-changer auctions. If we did not have those things, and if they were not making a huge, notable impact, I would say a change absolutely must come about. But I am still seeing the charity trades, and I am still doing the weighted-preference in auctions. Allot of that stuff is all well and good Justin... it is, but it also doesn't address anything being discussed here in that we always have the same teams at the top and at the bottom of the league. The weighted auction preference isn't of much relevance here when you consider that can be a crapshoot too as we saw with my acquisition of Franklin through auction, who, at the time, was considered a game changer and it ended up not being as huge of help as you're trying to make it out to be, unfortunately. It just ends up being one small aspect of the larger spectrum. As for the former champion ratio, that doesn't hold much weight unless you're talking about Carano or one of the Silvas now... I have former champions too, but Brock hasn't won a single title since the first one he won back in season 1 or 2 and Cruz could possibly win his 3rd; 2nd under Phoenix colors, but that's no guarantee either. Or say Diego now that he's an MW... is he a former champion here? Yes, but he's now in a different weight class and hasn't been champion there yet. When it comes to former champions, there's really only a few that you can say that have been champions with any consistency. As for charity trades, you really need to stop using them as an excuse not to do anything. We don't see them with enough frequency for them to be much of a factor, especially when you consider that it's not usually the bottom teams that are receiving these deals and more often they're being given to new teams or as a friendly gesture not as a team booster... generally, there have been execptions.
|
|
|
Post by The Sandmen on Apr 4, 2015 13:20:19 GMT -5
1) You got Franklin after the auction in a free-swap. 2) If former champions hold no weight, then a single team winning belt after belt carries no weight. Once they lose, they are all former champions, whether they are still on one's team or not. 3) If the above is true, we should be looking at CURRENT champions. We have 4 champions from 4 different teams. That sounds like diversity to me. 4) If you think a couple extra points each year to the last place team would help new teams more than giving them a fighter they really like right off the hop, poll it on up. From experience, though, I can tell you most people are much happier receiving a good fighter they like instead of having some points to work with junk left-overs. Here's what we are left with. We have 11 teams now, with Underdogs. 4 of them have a title. a 5th team won the GP this past season. So of 11 teams, 5 have had noteworthy accomplishments just in the past year. Not 1. 6. There is diversity at the top. xx - Team GAP and xx - Former Phoenix Fight Club, you keep saying the same team is at the bottom. What team is that? It's not Team GAP, who you both thought should have been a contender for Team of the Year, as he was 1st and 2nd much of the season. We've factually established if it was xx - Former Phoenix Fight Club, and if his goal was to have a GP team, that problem could be resolved by dropping some weaker fighters and having an average-sized team. So who else is left out of the "problem" here? What I see, if I am being honest, is 2 people who are walking their own unique ManMMA paths (which is great, don't get me wrong) but they are not getting the success that comes with doing it the way everyone else does. GAP wanted a champion at one point, I gave him Zoila to upgrade, so instead of upgrading Zoila, he put about 25 points into Carmouche. Cool, Carmouche is good, but 25 into Zoila, she would have been a champion. Kruze wants a team of guys he likes. Great! Buuut...you can't have a team of 10 project fighters and expect them not to bring down your core. So, who else does the problem affect? Byron? He was second place and has a champion now. Cannon? He's got 3 maxed out fighters and a champion now. Ducks? Rocketmen? Ferocity? I donno, guys, I am just not seeing any unexplained pattern. Now, if Phoenix had a team of 15 people and was last for the next 2 seasons, then I could definitely see a problem and we would fix that on up. But with dead weight laying around, and a refusal to accept good fighters from the top teams, I don't see any reason to give out charity points in the draft for teams that make the choice to be an inferior team.
|
|
|
Post by xx - Former Phoenix Fight Club on Apr 4, 2015 14:08:38 GMT -5
@ The Sandmen: This was happening well before I started carrying a larger roster. Stop makin it about something it's not, because as soon as I drop down to even 20 fighters, you're going to have The Conquistadors and probably Cannon in your ear about PPP again, and once again, we'll be having a PPP debate and of course my PPP will end up going up to higher than everyone else's leaving me in no better position than I am currently, carrying a larger roster and spreading the points out. So I'm damned if I do and damned if I don't here cuz if I do drop to 15 fighters, my PPP will go up and Ivstill won't be generating enough points to compete even at 15 fighter; for me it's the lesser of two evils right now. So quit making it entirely abouy my roster size, because it's not the only factor that's contributing to this at all. As for champions, again you're twisting thing further away from the truth to suit your own purpose... the fact is that multiple time champions do hold weight; as in being champion more than once or twice... and you can't even really point to now as diversity because it's so rare that we ever have 4 different teams having champions around here. You've tried to make this point each of the few times we have had this situation and inevitably it goes right back to all the same teams having the belts again. If it stays like this, great... but it never has before, so trying to make that argument is moot at this point without having any longevity of it to back that up.
|
|
|
Post by The Mighty Ducks on Apr 4, 2015 15:34:26 GMT -5
oh. my god. just like leave or something? or get a tampon.
|
|
|
Post by The Sandmen on Apr 4, 2015 15:37:25 GMT -5
Stop makin it about something it's not [goes on to babble about his own PPP] Like your PPP? So, again, your proposed fix is....? Outside of increasing free points, what other suggestions do you have to solve this issue?
|
|
|
Post by xx - Former Phoenix Fight Club on Apr 4, 2015 16:13:29 GMT -5
Stop makin it about something it's not [goes on to babble about his own PPP] Like your PPP? So, again, your proposed fix is....? Outside of increasing free points, what other suggestions do you have to solve this issue? And it's crap responses like this that's the reason nothing ever accomplished with you Justin... any time anyone makes a suggestion, you bring up other issues that have nothing to do with anything, then when that person shows you why it's irrelevant or where it leads otherwise, you try and say it's that other person steering off topic... You're the one that keeps bringing up my roster size and know full well the correlation it has on my PPP. But rather than listen to anything and even try to see how it would work, all you choose to do is find ways it doesn't cuz it wasn't your idea. The fact is that raising the value of the draft picks a bit would make it allot easier on the bottom two teams and we'd give them a nice boost to start the following season as opposed to what we have now where we do have the same teams on top and the bottom most every season and all the current systems we have in place do is keep the top teams at the top and the bottom teams at the bottom... and anytime we have one of those bottom teams break through, we end up having sweeping changes across the board, whether it's to PPP or as we had this past off season with the men's cap. Every single rule and addendum made for a long time now has been either made to give top teams more of an advantage or to lut it's only one component. You can site teams like GAP & the Conquistadors all you like, but look how long it took them to get to that point. It shouldn't be that difficult or take that long when there's teams like yours that a "bad season" is finishing 2nd and not 1st.
|
|
|
Post by The Sandmen on Apr 4, 2015 16:24:41 GMT -5
Aside from more points for the 1st overall pick, what other suggestions do you have?
|
|
|
Post by The Sandmen on Apr 4, 2015 16:31:24 GMT -5
Cause here's the thing.
GAP suggested PPP change - Phoenix said no. Phoenix suggested 6 points for 1st overall pick - Sandmen said no. Sandmen suggested FiD Freeze - No one really said anything...so no. Byron suggested tradeable FiD Freeze - Phoenix said no.
Outside of that...everything else in this thread is irrelevant.So, outside of the 4 shot-down suggestions, what other ideas do we have?
|
|
|
Post by xx - Former Phoenix Fight Club on Apr 4, 2015 18:08:53 GMT -5
Cause here's the thing. GAP suggested PPP change - Phoenix said no. Phoenix suggested 6 points for 1st overall pick - Sandmen said no. Sandmen suggested FiD Freeze - No one really said anything...so no. Byron suggested tradeable FiD Freeze - Phoenix said no. Outside of that...everything else in this thread is irrelevant.So, outside of the 4 shot-down suggestions, what other ideas do we have? If you think even lower PPP is the answer, I'd be fine with that. I just think you're going to run into more problems than it's worth if I end up having the same PPP as the Conquistadors. If you're willing to deal with that, go for it. What I actually said was 4-6 points for the 1st overall pick, not concretely 6. I think maybe that's what you're stuck on, and quite frankly, it wouldn't take effect until next off season since we're already into this season. The FiD freeze was being discussed, but got sidetracked with our irrelevant banter. If that's the only recourse and the only thing we can agree upon in all this, then it's better than nothing. As for being able to trade the trade freeze, to me, it kinda defeats the purpose of it being awarded in the first place, but again, if that's something more folks want than don't, have at'er... I know I personally wouldn't trade it.
|
|
|
Post by The Sandmen on Apr 4, 2015 19:19:00 GMT -5
We shot down all the old suggestions. Come up with a new one instead of wasting time with the old ones. That's how we move forward.
|
|
|
Post by xx - Former Phoenix Fight Club on Apr 4, 2015 21:42:27 GMT -5
We shot down all the old suggestions. Come up with a new one instead of wasting time with the old ones. That's how we move forward. You brought them up and were inaccurate on atleast two of the points you made... obviously they're not finished being discussed if you're not fully understanding what's been said.
|
|
|
Post by The Sandmen on Apr 4, 2015 22:28:44 GMT -5
So FID freeze without the trade option remains the only unopposed option then. I opposed any point increase over the value of winning a GP, so...is that what we are going with, or do you have another suggestion you'd like to table?
|
|
|
Post by xx - The Underdog Regime on Apr 5, 2015 0:26:00 GMT -5
Can someone give me the Sparknotes of all this? I'd like to chime in, but I honestly don't know where to start.
|
|
|
Post by The Sandmen on Apr 5, 2015 0:34:33 GMT -5
Can someone give me the Sparknotes of all this? I'd like to chime in, but I honestly don't know where to start. Honestly...there is no short version. I would read page 1, then read page 8. You should have a hefty understanding just from those 2 pages. There is a lot of useless crap inbetween, but the gist is there, I think.
|
|