Post by David_ExposGM on Dec 12, 2017 13:23:14 GMT -5
THE FACT
The top two contracts in PBL ($40 & $40M) would exceed my entire team budget ($71M), the lowest of 32 teams, for the coming season (and it's actually gone up a couple of consecutive seasons I recall).
In fact three of us would have the same issue.
The upside is that, even if I could afford the two, thankfully one is a pitcher and one is a batter, so there's that!
THE THEORY
I have read some financial items regarding OOTP in general and have chatted with a couple of the testers that lean heavily toward the financial part of the game and have learned a couple of things over the years. In point form...
1) The MLB model, on which PBL was obviously based many years ago, is supposedly inherently biased toward the rich teams.
- Everyone wants to play their favourite team in MLB (solo or online), so any flaws/failings are often overlooked.
- And I would bet a great majority of solo games and even online leagues start and end very, very quickly.
2) Apparently the "magical number" where the difference between the haves and have-nots is beyond the point of no return is roughly 75% - budget of highest to lowest.
- After that threshold is breached the lower budget teams can no longer consistently compete of course, but are also no longer able to dig themselves out.
- The have-nots can no longer expect to generate enough revenue and resources to even close the gap, they will be forever weak.
Presently, using HTML numbers as I write this post, the top budget is $264M - happens to be LAD, but certainly not picking on them, just stating the facts. 75% of that number, if you believe the "threshold" theory is $198M. Eeek!
What is truly staggering and kind of the reason why I am writing this, is that the math shows that every other team in PBL is below that 75% "threshold!" HAHAHA!
Now obviously the entire league cannot be beyond the point of no return as it continues to function and people and teams are competitive. but a huge red flag might be the 237% difference (if my math is correct, please double-check it) between the TOP budget and the BOTTOM budget in PBL.
ANother factor that ties into this is the market size and the fans, but when you have no hope, those needles are again not going to move far enough and fast enough to impact your profitability any time soon, so you are locked into your fate, if you believe this.
A FIX?
Most often the finances are tweaked as the league begins to provide some competitive balance and stability and obviously it would be easier in a purely fictional league from the start, where you could run some simulations and see if all of this pans out OR, better yet, your initial figures do indeed provide a thriving and stable long-term league with a top to bottom disparity in the 75% ballpark.
I am honestly not sure if there is a "fix" for a league such as this?
If anyone has one that would be guaranteed to work, feel free to post it below.
And remember the intent of this post is just information I have come across, it would be counter productive to just toss out quick fixes and get into a divisive argument over a course of action, but again if you POSITIVELY know concrete action that might be entertained to right this ship, feel free to explain.
In the meantime I will go back to my Expos. I love the idea of being GM of the Expos, and will continue beating my head into the brick wall that is the NL East, let alone the team with the highest budget in PBL. But I fear I, and not just my team, may be well beyond the point of no return.
Thoughts?
The top two contracts in PBL ($40 & $40M) would exceed my entire team budget ($71M), the lowest of 32 teams, for the coming season (and it's actually gone up a couple of consecutive seasons I recall).
In fact three of us would have the same issue.
The upside is that, even if I could afford the two, thankfully one is a pitcher and one is a batter, so there's that!
THE THEORY
I have read some financial items regarding OOTP in general and have chatted with a couple of the testers that lean heavily toward the financial part of the game and have learned a couple of things over the years. In point form...
1) The MLB model, on which PBL was obviously based many years ago, is supposedly inherently biased toward the rich teams.
- Everyone wants to play their favourite team in MLB (solo or online), so any flaws/failings are often overlooked.
- And I would bet a great majority of solo games and even online leagues start and end very, very quickly.
2) Apparently the "magical number" where the difference between the haves and have-nots is beyond the point of no return is roughly 75% - budget of highest to lowest.
- After that threshold is breached the lower budget teams can no longer consistently compete of course, but are also no longer able to dig themselves out.
- The have-nots can no longer expect to generate enough revenue and resources to even close the gap, they will be forever weak.
Presently, using HTML numbers as I write this post, the top budget is $264M - happens to be LAD, but certainly not picking on them, just stating the facts. 75% of that number, if you believe the "threshold" theory is $198M. Eeek!
What is truly staggering and kind of the reason why I am writing this, is that the math shows that every other team in PBL is below that 75% "threshold!" HAHAHA!
Now obviously the entire league cannot be beyond the point of no return as it continues to function and people and teams are competitive. but a huge red flag might be the 237% difference (if my math is correct, please double-check it) between the TOP budget and the BOTTOM budget in PBL.
ANother factor that ties into this is the market size and the fans, but when you have no hope, those needles are again not going to move far enough and fast enough to impact your profitability any time soon, so you are locked into your fate, if you believe this.
A FIX?
Most often the finances are tweaked as the league begins to provide some competitive balance and stability and obviously it would be easier in a purely fictional league from the start, where you could run some simulations and see if all of this pans out OR, better yet, your initial figures do indeed provide a thriving and stable long-term league with a top to bottom disparity in the 75% ballpark.
I am honestly not sure if there is a "fix" for a league such as this?
If anyone has one that would be guaranteed to work, feel free to post it below.
And remember the intent of this post is just information I have come across, it would be counter productive to just toss out quick fixes and get into a divisive argument over a course of action, but again if you POSITIVELY know concrete action that might be entertained to right this ship, feel free to explain.
In the meantime I will go back to my Expos. I love the idea of being GM of the Expos, and will continue beating my head into the brick wall that is the NL East, let alone the team with the highest budget in PBL. But I fear I, and not just my team, may be well beyond the point of no return.
Thoughts?