|
|
Post by xx - Camp Cannon on Dec 21, 2015 15:06:37 GMT -5
no me and phx arent havinga fight to retire anyone and 2 no i dont believe in a roster change at this point in time..
|
|
|
|
Post by The West Coast Knockouts on Dec 21, 2015 16:02:17 GMT -5
Well, despite the rampant fear of being called an ass-kisser to anyone that doesn't agree with Kruze, I do think that rosters should be lower, like a cap of maybe 15 or 16, around there tops, basically enough for everyone to have like 3 fighters per division (your top guy, your up and comer, and a project fighter). Good on Ducks for actually giving an approximation of how many fights there are per season, and to which teams those fights are mostly going. Essentially on a 12 team league, and Kruze having twice the amount of fighters, sometimes 2 and a half times more than others, he is gaining roughly 20-23% of all fights for his guys. Doesn't seem to right to me. #sharethecage For the most part I agree with this and the percentage is more or less accurate. The problem with that top paragraph there, is that a number of teams, including KO's & Ducks, that have literally only 1 or 2 in some weight classes and they generally don't take more in those weight classes when the opportunities come up to do so; ie. the seasonal draft, mid-season draft, add/drop. This past season, and the one coming up, are the first time in ages that KO's has had more than one woman on his team. That being said, they've chosen to do that all on their own and have smaller rosters, just as I have chosen to have a larger one. It's just as much about team building styles as it is a numbers game at this point. It's just as frustrating for me to have to go through this crap every off season whether it be due to my roster size or PPP, which now has been rectified, but at the same time, any time my team shows any inkling that they've dug themselves out of the cellar, some jerk has to come in and shit on me or me team and suggests placing more limits on me, when the problem they're having would easily be rectified if they looked at their own team and increased their numbers in some weight classes that they're weak in instead of trying to attack someone else's team. As I told you privately, I'm not concerned about the women. Our female numbers are fine. A growing concern for me now, however, is the number of men. I would be content to drop about 7-10 men. That would give us very workable numbers. I mean, ideally, what I would like to be able to do from a league/booking perspective is put a cap on the number of fighters we can have in each division. That would make my life easiest. But I'm not sure there is a fair way to do that, since there is no way of really fairly determining where the decreases would come from. And that's fair enough, from a booking standpoint, however, was it not 2 seasons ago that you said we were short on LWs? And you asked a bunch of us to take on LWs? This season it was FWs. Maybe we should be looking at this from a standpoint of how many fighters are in each weight class as opposed to just separating it into men & women. I mean, I'll be the first to admit that I'll more than obviously have an issue with a BW cap, since those 6 gals are of some of my favorite fighters ever, and are somewhat of a foundation of my team when you get past Lesnar & Cruz. I've also told you privately that I didn't want to go over 25 fighters, but due to what you claimed the league needed, I waived that self-imposed cap and went to 27; I'm actually sitting at 26, for those keeping score. So, if folks wanna trade, let's do it, but from what I've encountered most, it's really no one but you, Mike & Byron want to or will trade with me. That's partly my own doing because certain fighters aren't available for trade, but I do have other fighters that are actually good that would help teams out if they'd just inquire about them too. Stfu. How was i bitching? I just said i agreed with ducks you goofball. |
|
|
|
Post by The Sandmen on Dec 21, 2015 16:31:55 GMT -5
i dont believe in a roster change at this point in time.. This was not the question. The question was if you have a problem with your fighters fighting 2-3 times a season instead of the 4-5 we have been doing up until now. |
|
|
|
Post by xx - Camp Cannon on Dec 21, 2015 16:34:11 GMT -5
i dont believe in a roster change at this point in time.. This was not the question. The question was if you have a problem with your fighters fighting 2-3 times a season instead of the 4-5 we have been doing up until now. i dont care hiow many times they fight aslong as they fight |
|
|
|
Post by xx - Former Phoenix Fight Club on Dec 21, 2015 16:51:46 GMT -5
For the most part I agree with this and the percentage is more or less accurate. The problem with that top paragraph there, is that a number of teams, including KO's & Ducks, that have literally only 1 or 2 in some weight classes and they generally don't take more in those weight classes when the opportunities come up to do so; ie. the seasonal draft, mid-season draft, add/drop. This past season, and the one coming up, are the first time in ages that KO's has had more than one woman on his team. That being said, they've chosen to do that all on their own and have smaller rosters, just as I have chosen to have a larger one. It's just as much about team building styles as it is a numbers game at this point. It's just as frustrating for me to have to go through this crap every off season whether it be due to my roster size or PPP, which now has been rectified, but at the same time, any time my team shows any inkling that they've dug themselves out of the cellar, some jerk has to come in and shit on me or me team and suggests placing more limits on me, when the problem they're having would easily be rectified if they looked at their own team and increased their numbers in some weight classes that they're weak in instead of trying to attack someone else's team. And that's fair enough, from a booking standpoint, however, was it not 2 seasons ago that you said we were short on LWs? And you asked a bunch of us to take on LWs? This season it was FWs. Maybe we should be looking at this from a standpoint of how many fighters are in each weight class as opposed to just separating it into men & women. I mean, I'll be the first to admit that I'll more than obviously have an issue with a BW cap, since those 6 gals are of some of my favorite fighters ever, and are somewhat of a foundation of my team when you get past Lesnar & Cruz. I've also told you privately that I didn't want to go over 25 fighters, but due to what you claimed the league needed, I waived that self-imposed cap and went to 27; I'm actually sitting at 26, for those keeping score. So, if folks wanna trade, let's do it, but from what I've encountered most, it's really no one but you, Mike & Byron want to or will trade with me. That's partly my own doing because certain fighters aren't available for trade, but I do have other fighters that are actually good that would help teams out if they'd just inquire about them too. Stfu. How was i bitching? I just said i agreed with ducks you goofball. If you agree with Ducks and think he was on point with his argument: Nah , i gotta agree with ducks here. He's on point with his argument. Then really, you're bitching just like he is, when you're almost as idle as Ducks is in making roster moves and making the efforts yourselves to acquire more depth, then you blame me for picking up for your own roster's shortfall... goofball. I'm not going to apologize for adding to my roster to help the league out when it was said that we needed fighters in certain weight classes. If you need depth or want to add a fighter or two, then do it... but don't sit there and tell me that I have to downsize my roster because you can't be bothered half the time to fill up your own roster's holes. |
|
|
|
Post by The Sandmen on Dec 21, 2015 16:54:57 GMT -5
Moral, The West Coast Knockouts - if you disagree with PHX (or if you ever do or have in the past agreed with Sandman) you are either bitching or deserve to be called names (like being called a sheep). You are not allowed to have an independent opinion unless you are Kruze, in which case you are a site-saving rebel who stands up for the little guy against the big evil simmer (who spends almost every spare second he has working on the site - by which we mean TURNING IT INTO A SITH LORD!!!) |
|
|
|
Post by xx - Former Phoenix Fight Club on Dec 21, 2015 17:00:36 GMT -5
Moral, The West Coast Knockouts - if you disagree with PHX (or if you ever do or have in the past agreed with Sandman) you are either bitching or deserve to be called names (like being called a sheep). You are not allowed to have an independent opinion unless you are Kruze, in which case you are a site-saving rebel who stands up for the little guy against the big evil simmer (who spends almost every spare second he has working on the site - by which we mean TURNING IT INTO A SITH LORD!!!) Sounds more like your philosophy than mine Sandmen.. He's the one that started in on the name calling on me... check his quote. I have no problem with him having an opinion... what I do have a problem with, is him and Ducks blaming me for having a bigger roster when they don't even have 2 fighters in some weight classes. That's not my fault, nor is it my problem... they know how to pick up fighters or trade for them. If they're both honestly that concerned with my roster size, they can approach me via pm and try to make a deal with me or buy a fighter from me to fill out their team depth and solve the problem they have on their own. |
|
|
|
Post by The Rocketmen on Dec 21, 2015 17:06:33 GMT -5
What if Ducks simply just didn't want to make trades and liked his adequate, short roster? What then?
|
|
|
|
Post by The Sandmen on Dec 21, 2015 17:10:22 GMT -5
I have no problem with him having an opinion... what I do have a problem with, is him and Ducks blaming me for having a bigger roster when they don't even have 2 fighters in some weight classes. That's not my fault, nor is it my problem... they know how to pick up fighters or trade for them. I gather what they have a problem with is your MW+HW division is larger then both of their entire rosters... |
|
|
|
Post by xx - Former Phoenix Fight Club on Dec 21, 2015 17:10:31 GMT -5
What if Ducks simply just didn't want to make trades and liked his adequate, short roster? What then? Then he likes his short roster and that's his choice... it shouldn't affect how I build my team. I have no problem with him having an opinion... what I do have a problem with, is him and Ducks blaming me for having a bigger roster when they don't even have 2 fighters in some weight classes. That's not my fault, nor is it my problem... they know how to pick up fighters or trade for them. I gather what they have a problem with is your MW+HW division is larger then both of their total rosters... So what? As I said to Mike above man, if they want to have a shorter roster and few fighters, that's their choice. I don't tell them that can't do that, so who are they to tell me I can't carry a larger roster if I choose to? |
|
|
|
Post by The Rocketmen on Dec 21, 2015 17:13:50 GMT -5
Okay, so then you shouldn't be affected by having as many fights as they receive, even if that means you get fewer fights per fighter because you elected to have a significantly larger roster.
Fair. I can agree with that.
|
|
|
|
Post by xx - Former Phoenix Fight Club on Dec 21, 2015 17:24:40 GMT -5
Okay, so then you shouldn't be affected by having as many fights as they receive, even if that means you get fewer fights per fighter because you elected to have a significantly larger roster. Fair. I can agree with that. To a point, yes, but again that still affects my team. It all really depends on whether folks fighters are winning or not. If they're winning, they fight more, if they're not, they fight less, usually. Barboza was an anomaly this season being 2-0 , but I think he had been injured or went to a TC or something. It's also always a crapshoot with the way my team is anyways... it's either really good or really bad due the size of it. So I don't think my fighters fighting less is going to make much of an impact unless they're losing, in which case they'll be supposedly fighting less anyways. |
|
|
|
Post by xx - Former Phoenix Fight Club on Dec 21, 2015 17:55:10 GMT -5
The other thing with that, and The Sandmen would have to answer this himself, but I would imagine having to keep track of how few fights my team gets over all would make booking even more difficult than it already is. |
|
|
|
Post by The Sandmen on Dec 21, 2015 17:56:52 GMT -5
It would be more complicated but if you are unwilling to drop some fighters, I'll just sit your guys for large chunks of the season so others can get fights in. Unfortunately it will mean some missed tournaments, but them's the breaks when your roster outnumbers other teams nearly 3:1.
|
|
|
|
Post by xx - Former Phoenix Fight Club on Dec 21, 2015 18:04:58 GMT -5
It would be more complicated but if you are unwilling to drop some fighters, I'll just sit your guys for large chunks of the season so others can get fights in. Unfortunately it will mean some missed tournaments, but them's the breaks when your roster outnumbers other teams nearly 3:1. Not really when you're the one that actually encouraged me to go ahead and carry a large roster yourself man.... now you're wanting punish me for it after you were all for it? That's kind of hypocritical of you, especially when you're the next one down from me in roster size at 19, yet I guarantee you that you won't be penalizing yourself any fights. Who are you dropping? |
|
x8 
Have 9 points in celebration of this monumental achievement!