I am involved in a couple of other leagues, as I am sure everyone else is. The financials are different for every league of course and each has it's own "house rules" that can impact financials.
There are a couple of things unique to PBL that (in MY opinion only) may impact financials when compared to a "more normal" online league...to what degree I'm afraid I cannot quantify, I am just going by observation.
1) Zevin
As was mentioned earlier in this thread, and I strongly agree, what is coded for solo play does not always translate into online play (with all, much smarter/craftier, humans in charge).
For example, in an online league your sole motivation is to win as a single player against a league of AI. If YOU sign a sweetheart deal as either an extension or through free agency (Cy Young @ 10-years/3-Mil per, or even better) YOU feel good! You might question the strength of the AI, but when you win the World Series, all is forgotten!
In an online league (like 32-team PBL) my sense would be that 31 other humans would teach you a few new words!!!
What Zevin is doing is admirable and, quite likely, good for the online environment. But I am fully convinced that it also hinders the game from balancing itself financially. Again, in a solo league, through attrition of contracts, revenues generated by every team and other financials, the game will "ask" for huge contracts when the league is flush with cash and hand out more sweetheart deals whent he league is cash-strapped. Zevin, for ALL the right reasons, flies in the face of that. We might be feeling the effects.
And it might also explain why the "owners" (and it's not the owners, but merely one facet of the game mechanics) do what they do to budgets - also accounting for wins/losses, amount of budget used, judging what cash might be needed the next season, ticket sales, attendance, deferred contract money sent, scouting budget, development budget, ANY number of factors - not
simply the "owners suck").
My preference is to always try and utilize the "game" as intended, but I appreciate Zevin and the concept. But WE, collectively, will just have to live with the unintended side effects and NOT try and further correct outside the game IMHO.
2) GREEN and RED
I'm sure I have written this before so please humour me. I am currently in two other leagues where I have far better teams than PBL. In both cases I have a RED projected balances and will lose money in the current, even next season. BUT those teams are in a position to contend at the moment, may win their division and one recently won it all!
Again, purely anecdotally, I think the need to be "green" holds back financials, and not in a direct way, in PBL.
For SOME teams.In the case of my other teams, I have a huge payroll and good veteran talent making big bucks. Some I signed as free agents, some I traded for, and ALL of that done when I had the capacity to do that...GREEN projected balance. Once you hit RED, then you cannot acquire talent, claim waivers, sign free agents, etc.
I also have a few very good prospects that have made the leap and now are getting into arbitration. Because of that, the arb awards have taken me into RED. But I have a strong, and in fact getting stronger, team that although I do not have flexibility I will WIN!
In PBL, if/when the rules are followed, even a GREAT team will have to start shuffling the high-priced deck chairs to get back to the rule of being GREEN. This is most often done by trading the high-priced talent so you can accommodate up-and-coming high-priced talent. That first contract will go to other teams that might not benefit from them, because the deal is too good to pass up - ADDING DRAFT PICKS IS THE WORST CULPRIT but tossing in prospects is enticing to dump a salary too - and that in turn hikes their payroll, reducing their flexibility.
IF the original team (yes, strong, possibly large market, and likely winning so that they have more dollars coming in to increase their budget anyway) was able to retain that player and eventually get into the red as other players are awarded arb, then the second team (yes, weaker, possibly smaller market and likely not winning as much) would not get themselves into a pickle financially - one would hope!
The downside, eventually, to going RED is that you eventually (unless you REALLY manage things well) can go down the backside of your peak and really hurt for a few years because you cannot do anything while RED, with a bunch of dog contracts. BUT you have benefited already and deserve that pain while OTHER TEAMS start UP to their peak. Think Yankees and an A-Rod type of contract - nobody would acquire the guy, so the Yankees just have to bite the bullet until he retires or the deal runs out - but while he's there............
Would getting rid of the RED rule, and even Zevin, cure all ills? Doubtful. We'd just find other issues I'm sure.
Would getting rid of the RED rule and allowing teams to exceed projected player budget (within the mechanics of the game, as I cited above) make the Pittsburgh's, Yankees and other large market teams even stronger? Might.
Would it hold back smaller market teams? Might.
Would some GM's know how to better manipulate this than others? Most certainly!!!
Please note that I am not complaining about either point above, just offering them as a difference between PBL and other leagues and that both may be (with the best of intentions) negatively impacting the current financial situation some find themselves in??
Like I said, PBL (and Derek) have chosen this course. If we continue on this course, or frankly even if we don't, then we simply will have to continue to find a way to work through this period.That's part of the FUN!