Warrior General Games

How do you not understand his suggestion???

The OP is saying if you are between A-age and B-age, you must fall into X-level and Y-level, if your player is in that age range, but a higher level than Y, they must sign with a team in a more competitive league. Or if their level is below A, you will have to sign in a league that supports less competitive players.

Instead of 'suggested levels' for leagues, he is asking for imposed player levels for leagues.

Sounds like a great suggestion to me, that has taken way too long to be considered implementing.


+1

+1 .. shoulda suggested this 2 seasons ago when league sorting inefficiencies became grossly evident..

Originally posted by F8n4tune
+1 to this suggestion.

You sure you belong in this game ? Way too civil.

+1 to F8n4tune for pointing out that this was probably one of the best jobs of presenting an idea for GLB that I've seen posted.

and +1 to the OP too

Originally posted by AirMcMVP
Honestly, it sounds like the OP is suggesting a system where teams promote based both on age and level. I just don't see how that will work because there will always be something come up to cause an exception or issue with the system.

Why do you say "there will always be something come up to cause an exception or issue with the system"? Can you give an example of what issue could arise?

If not, I say +1

I don't really have a strong opinion one way or another on this, but just thinking it through....

Lets say you have a team and they have a bad season. Could be due to a number issues. (Massive turnover the season before, a bunch of agents go AWOL, OC or DC quits, etc)

So you end up in non-competitive league.

Now you are restricted from recruiting the top talented FAs which is the most important criteria for getting back into the tougher leagues. Then lets say you do well, promote into competitive or elite but now you are at a disadvantage because the season before your competition could sign higher level players.

Maybe I'm missing something here and this isn't a big deal, but I feel teams in the same age based leagues should be treated the same way, and not make this an issue of the have and have-nots.

+1

the BIG issue with this is that teams in the capped leagues struggle to fill rosters now

now only certain leagues might be able to sign players with both age and level restrictions

I love it, as a non-booster, it would make me competitive somewhere...

+1

well written, and it is unfortunate that the powers that be at GLB did not think it more through before implementing the age caps originally . I have always thought it was a bad business move solely for the reason that they created a definitive day (or 2) in which a person had to create a dot in order to be competitive. This suggestion would help to fix that problem a little.

+1

that is genius.
+1

Originally posted by juane414
The whole age thing is pretty cool .

I disagree

Originally posted by
(430 votes for, 130 against)

WTF is wrong with you people? This is possibly one of the better ideas made yet.

Originally posted by Dub J
I disagree



League Championships 115 Conference Championships 131

Originally posted by reddogrw
the BIG issue with this is that teams in the capped leagues struggle to fill rosters now

now only certain leagues might be able to sign players with both age and level restrictions

League Championships 50 Conference Championships 87

I wonder why these guys don't want balanced leagues?

wat?

I hate the age based leagues, you obviously read too much into those two words I posted. I hate anything that restricts the type of players a team can sign. That's why recruiting is such a pain in the ass now. As far as not wanting balanced leagues, there will never be balanced leagues since this is a player v player game.