Warrior General Games

When team "a" loses their good players and they predominately go to team "b", for WHATEVER reason, I consider that gutting. Team "a" lost basically everything and team "b" gained everything. THAT is gutting because it was a one way street. How many times do you see a staff leave a team in the NFL and before doing so, they ship all their best players to another team? NEVER! The players stay put and the new staff has something to work with whether the players like it or not. It amazes me that people try to justify there gutting by saying they didnt want to be an owner anymore. Fine, dont be an owner, but leave the team intact and dont SCREW two leagues by moving the players from team "a" to team "b".

I'm pointing fingers at anyone, but I wish GJB would get their shit together and stop this from happening over and over and over. I don't blame those owners that snake all the good players off one team, why wouldn't they? Pay the joke of a 250k fine and RAKE in the playoff dough. I just wish GLB would stop it from EVER happening again.

"Fine, dont be an owner, but leave the team intact and dont SCREW two leagues by moving the players from team "a" to team "b"."

Too bad players on team A wouldn't want to be there after the team is sold.

So......

I dont care is they want to be there or not. They should give the new owner a chance, and if the new owner is a bum then bail after their contrats are up. A season is 40 days. It is not like we are talking about them being stuck for a long period of time.

Oh well. I completely get what you mean, but I don't agree with it. It's not anything worth fighting over, though.

Rather, I should go to bed.

Originally posted by majech
I dont care is they want to be there or not. They should give the new owner a chance, and if the new owner is a bum then bail after their contrats are up. A season is 40 days. It is not like we are talking about them being stuck for a long period of time.

So even if I only play the game because I have friends on here and I want to have fun with them, if a friend decides he doesn't want to own a team and I only joined the team to be with him (+ other friends), I'm bound for some reason to the team even though I only play this for my friends? If I didn't get moved to my friend's team I honestly wouldn't even look at glb until my contract's up. This would hurt the owner due to my inactivity and it would hurt GLB because I wouldn't be getting referrals as aggressively as I do. I don't care if the team goes 0-16 or 16-0 as long as I'm with my friends.

You care about this game too much, dude. It's a text-based online game... that's it.

Originally posted by majech

I'm pointing fingers at anyone, but I wish GJB would get their shit together and stop this from happening over and over and over. I don't blame those owners that snake all the good players off one team, why wouldn't they? Pay the joke of a 250k fine and RAKE in the playoff dough. I just wish GLB would stop it from EVER happening again.

How do you force people to play on teams that they have no wish to?

Specifically, I am looking for a methodology that would work. Right now, if the owner decides to sell his team back to the CPU, it is an accepted practice to allow all the players on that team a choice to be released or not. Honestly? It is truly the only fair thing to do, as you have no idea who is coming in as the next owner. Once those players are released, they are free to go anywhere, and in a lot of cases, many people will simply move all their players to whatever team catches their interest. As long as the previous owner doesn't renegotiate the contracts and give everyone a huge leaving bonus, they have done nothing wrong.

So again, how do you stop that? and Would it be good for the game, for players to be stuck on teams that are sold to new owners?

This whining about "gutting" is getting silly. This is a Pro league, and uncapped Pro league, it is supposed to have the highest level players in the game in it. You guys sound like people were bringing USA Pro people into a BBB league.

PinTBC

I may be coming across wrong. I meant to say I'm NOT trying to point fingers. I'm also not trying to argue and I definately am not whining, just talking about a topic that I think is of interest.

Regarding the friend situation, if team "a" is full of friends and the team gets a new owner, the team would still be full of friends. I dont see the challenge of the team staying together for the new owner! If it is truly about being with friends as opposed to winning, then why should the team get gutted? Either way the group of friends are playing under a different owner so why play under a different owner AND gut a team AND dirupt the balance of two leagues? As ive said earlier, the seasons are short so it is not like the players are stuck for a long time.

I'd say the majority of owners are good, so why bail on a new owner?

Originally posted by majech
I may be coming across wrong. I meant to say I'm NOT trying to point fingers. I'm also not trying to argue and I definately am not whining, just talking about a topic that I think is of interest.

Regarding the friend situation, if team "a" is full of friends and the team gets a new owner, the team would still be full of friends. I dont see the challenge of the team staying together for the new owner! If it is truly about being with friends as opposed to winning, then why should the team get gutted? Either way the group of friends are playing under a different owner so why play under a different owner AND gut a team AND dirupt the balance of two leagues? As ive said earlier, the seasons are short so it is not like the players are stuck for a long time.

I'd say the majority of owners are good, so why bail on a new owner?

On my USA Pro team we got a new owner, and almost half of the best players immediately wanted out. I agree that it sucks, but it is a fact of GLB that new owner equals major flux.

Originally posted by majech
I may be coming across wrong. I meant to say I'm NOT trying to point fingers. I'm also not trying to argue and I definately am not whining, just talking about a topic that I think is of interest.

Regarding the friend situation, if team "a" is full of friends and the team gets a new owner, the team would still be full of friends. I dont see the challenge of the team staying together for the new owner! If it is truly about being with friends as opposed to winning, then why should the team get gutted? Either way the group of friends are playing under a different owner so why play under a different owner AND gut a team AND dirupt the balance of two leagues? As ive said earlier, the seasons are short so it is not like the players are stuck for a long time.

I'd say the majority of owners are good, so why bail on a new owner?

The owner, in this case, could be a friend and the main person that got everyone to try out GLB.

It's not out of disrespect to the owner, but I mean, would you rather be with all of your friends or just some of them?

Originally posted by majech
I'm pointing fingers at anyone, but I wish GJB would get their shit together and stop this from happening over and over and over. I don't blame those owners that snake all the good players off one team, why wouldn't they? Pay the joke of a 250k fine and RAKE in the playoff dough. I just wish GLB would stop it from EVER happening again.

I was going to try and stay out of this thread because its pointless. But, why would we get fined. All we did was sign free agents?

Soapbox is exactly right. I agree with almost everything youve said. Kudos to you sir. Were all just friends, some of us were on team a, some were on team b. We all wanted to play together, team b went under. so the players from team b wanted to sign with team a. All we want to do is have fun. Everyone always has to find something to bitch about, especailly since its offseason...

I dont think it matters, they got some good players but they will still have to play their asses off to beat the top teams here in Africa Pro.

I agree, I hate it when people just find things to bitch about.

I'd rather be on a team with all my friends as opposed to just some. Actually that is what the Bugeaters team is. The vast majority of our players are friends in real life. The sole reason i got on the list was so all of us football friends could be on a team. The majority of our players stayed in the D-leages until we got our team. There were a few players that were already on teams, and we had to trade for the majority of those players. There were a few cool owners that did release some of our players though.

I think there is a balance that could be found to allow friends to play together while not letting teams get gutted. Look at the "Gut Coast" situation. It wasn't a big deal and I don't know of anything shady happening in that situation, but it lessened the conference, ruined the league stats, and caused challenges.

Originally posted by majech
I agree, I hate it when people just find things to bitch about.

Then why are you doing just that? You're throwing around words like collusion and the such? It isn't even collusion in any sense of the word.

Don't get me wrong, I have no hard feelings with anyone here and it takes a lot to make me mad, it's just that you're saying you don't like bitching but if you're not bitching I don't know what word can describe what you're doing.

And I have respect and almost a little envy for the Bugeaters as you guys must all be at least semi-active and you all obviously know how to make builds.

IMO, this is not "gutting". There really is no such thing as "gutting" to me. Now that's just my opinion, and I'm not sure how the rest of my teammates feel.

Here's a question to majech/anyone else complaining: if the players/friends did indeed wait one season (or if mid-season, wait until the end) and THEN all move, is it still "gutting"? If you're friend owns a team and decides to discontinue ownership, you should just assume that the new guy knows what he's doing? How do you know that he doesn't already have guys in line to replace you? Most people are just looking to keep their experience FUN. After all, that's why we're playing this right? I have no problems with people protecting their own interests.

I think most people buying teams these days know that their getting a team at ground zero, and they have been recruiting way before the team is officially theirs. I don't feel too bad for them ... they know what they're getting into.

EDIT: I read a little more of this thread, saw that it was actually a decent conversation. Maybe that came across a little bitchy. I agree that it sucks when a team gets "gutted" and it ruins competition. I just look at it as "part of the game" though. I don't think that putting more restrictions on the game is in the best interest of everyone. I would rather be able to move on easily if a situation happened to me (in fact it did in season 1).

In before Lock.