Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 21, 2015 6:51:16 GMT -5
At this point I'm fairly confused on what number to look at. Derek, can you post a list of every team and say how much they are over or under budget?
Also as a new owner who didn't sign the FA my team signed how much of a time period do I have to fix a problem i didn't create but got thrown into?
|
|
|
Post by Derek _ Red Sox on Aug 21, 2015 7:22:35 GMT -5
Yes, Sean egos aside. I'm getting to the point where I am almost done with running online leagues because a handful of people ruin it for me and I got way to much shit going on in the real world right now to actually care about the opinion of a few. No offense but take it if you want but you have never once been on the positive side of a debate since you joined the PBL. You look to find the crack so you can burst through it. I get your schtick. That being said, the PBL has an issue and its NOT a bullshit coverup going on for teams to willingly spend then claim ignorance. A question I have is how come teams are being allowed in game by their owners to sign over budget? I thought when you had no money the game says you cannot afford to sign this guy, or you cannot negotiate an extension with him, etc. This isn't just about me, I am working to fix my situation before I worry about everyone else. Hell, at this point I could really care less. I'll make a deal with you Sean, pick any two players that come out to $24m (which one report shows Im over budget) and I will immediately suspend them until I am under budget. I know how you think, 'so you can get a better draft pick?' I will also be willing to drop my draft slot 10 spots to cancel out that benefit. Two points though real quick: 1) "The bigger question is why have people stopped following the rules?"
This is where you and I clash so much. You immediately go to there is a reason people intentionally stopped following rules and its in a malicious way they are doing it to gain personal benefit. If I see one or two teams doing it then I consider that as my option but when its a handful of teams struggling with this then I look at it as some sort of confusion that should be addressed before I stone them in the center of town. 2) "It's not that hard to check your financials. Why should you or any other gm for that matter get the benefit of out bidding other gms for players or the ability to keep a player instead of following a rule?" Valid point, you should definitely be the one to cast the first stone here because you do everything right to make sure you do not get a competitive advantage. But wait a minute, if the number we are looking at is "projected budget room" then why are the Reds one of the teams in the red?
|
|
|
Post by Derek _ Red Sox on Aug 21, 2015 7:24:59 GMT -5
Don't make it a battle man. People are obviously confused by the rules. And by The new system in the game. A solution will be found it always is. Don't make this a battle? There is no battle. You either enforce the rules or you don't. No one should be above following the basic rules of a league. There's a difference between being $3.5 over because of the scouting budget and being higher than that.
You can't argue that the teams that are over budget don't have an advantage over the teams that are under. Nope, I'm not allowing this either. Lets run this like it should from this point forward. If you are over budget you are over budget, no exceptions. You should of factored in scouting budgets because we all knew it was coming. You are over budget then you will be subject to penalty. That $3.5m could of been the difference in signing a big FA or acquiring a star in a trade so you are gaining a competitive advantage with an excuse built in to your logic. You want me to play hardball Commissioner, then consider me Roger Goodell and don't get mad when you see results for everyone.
|
|
|
Post by Derek _ Red Sox on Aug 21, 2015 7:26:48 GMT -5
At this point I'm fairly confused on what number to look at. Derek, can you post a list of every team and say how much they are over or under budget? Also as a new owner who didn't sign the FA my team signed how much of a time period do I have to fix a problem i didn't create but got thrown into? Since you're new, I don't want to confuse you too much with these financials YET. The bad news is you do not have money to sign players right now but the good news is you have a projected budget room of $8m so you're safe from this discussion.
|
|
|
Post by Derek _ Red Sox on Aug 21, 2015 8:03:54 GMT -5
A 'pm' has been sent to every team over their 'projected budget room' and teams will have until Sunday to get under budget in order to avoid discipline by the league (reference: league rules > budgets > e. Teams in the red at Opening Day or during the season will be subject to sanctions by the Commissioners’ Office.)
.
I will now also monitor each situation much more closely (as much as I can) and if you are over budget we will issue warning immediately and expect the same level of commitment in return to remedy the situation so sanctions do not have to be handed down.
|
|
|
Post by Sean_RedsGM on Aug 21, 2015 8:34:12 GMT -5
Yes, Sean egos aside. I'm getting to the point where I am almost done with running online leagues because a handful of people ruin it for me and I got way to much shit going on in the real world right now to actually care about the opinion of a few. No offense but take it if you want but you have never once been on the positive side of a debate since you joined the PBL. You look to find the crack so you can burst through it. I get your schtick. That being said, the PBL has an issue and its NOT a bullshit coverup going on for teams to willingly spend then claim ignorance. A question I have is how come teams are being allowed in game by their owners to sign over budget? I thought when you had no money the game says you cannot afford to sign this guy, or you cannot negotiate an extension with him, etc. This isn't just about me, I am working to fix my situation before I worry about everyone else. Hell, at this point I could really care less. I'll make a deal with you Sean, pick any two players that come out to $24m (which one report shows Im over budget) and I will immediately suspend them until I am under budget. I know how you think, 'so you can get a better draft pick?' I will also be willing to drop my draft slot 10 spots to cancel out that benefit. Two points though real quick: 1) "The bigger question is why have people stopped following the rules?"
This is where you and I clash so much. You immediately go to there is a reason people intentionally stopped following rules and its in a malicious way they are doing it to gain personal benefit. If I see one or two teams doing it then I consider that as my option but when its a handful of teams struggling with this then I look at it as some sort of confusion that should be addressed before I stone them in the center of town. 2) "It's not that hard to check your financials. Why should you or any other gm for that matter get the benefit of out bidding other gms for players or the ability to keep a player instead of following a rule?" Valid point, you should definitely be the one to cast the first stone here because you do everything right to make sure you do not get a competitive advantage. But wait a minute, if the number we are looking at is "projected budget room" then why are the Reds one of the teams in the red? First of all, I don't have an advantage. I just signed two fa's with cash available to do so. My owner allowed it. There's a huge difference between $24 mil and $3.5 mil but the question remains on why so many aren't following the rule. Is it deliberate? Is it something the game is causing? Do the owners now allow teams to go for it all and spend more? Instead of arguing further, how do you want to handle this? My
|
|
|
Post by craigWhiteSox on Aug 21, 2015 13:19:59 GMT -5
Both of those players that you signed were comp eligible. pick 18 is lost and not sure what happens when you sign a comp eligible free agent when you don't have another 1st rounder to lose.
The argument of, I signed two free agents with cash available because my owner allowed it so it doesn't matter that I went over budget, doesn't hold any water. That is the same thing Derek said. That his owner has allowed him to add Perkins salary while being over budget. But the rule states that you cannot make ANY transactions that would put you OVER budget after opening day
I see Derek's frustration with someone pointing the finger at him when the guy pointing is in the same boat
|
|
|
Post by NickP_Marlins GM on Aug 21, 2015 13:36:16 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Sean_RedsGM on Aug 21, 2015 13:41:56 GMT -5
Both of those players that you signed were comp eligible. pick 18 is lost and not sure what happens when you sign a comp eligible free agent when you don't have another 1st rounder to lose. The argument of, I signed two free agents with cash available because my owner allowed it so it doesn't matter that I went over budget, doesn't hold any water. That is the same thing Derek said. That his owner has allowed him to add Perkins salary while being over budget. But the rule states that you cannot make ANY transactions that would put you OVER budget after opening day I see Derek's frustration with someone pointing the finger at him when the guy pointing is in the same boat I'm not in the same boat. If I did go over, it just happened this past sim. Generally, you get a short period to make corresponding moves to balance your budget, which I am working as we speak. Big difference in being over budget for one sim vs multiple but regardless, Derek is right when he says the owner allowed it (the FA acqusition). That's not all of the reason his team is over but it does contribute.
|
|
|
Post by Tim_GiantsGM on Aug 21, 2015 13:46:26 GMT -5
Yes, Sean egos aside. I'm getting to the point where I am almost done with running online leagues because a handful of people ruin it for me and I got way to much shit going on in the real world right now to actually care about the opinion of a few. No offense but take it if you want but you have never once been on the positive side of a debate since you joined the PBL. You look to find the crack so you can burst through it. I get your schtick. That being said, the PBL has an issue and its NOT a bullshit coverup going on for teams to willingly spend then claim ignorance. A question I have is how come teams are being allowed in game by their owners to sign over budget? I thought when you had no money the game says you cannot afford to sign this guy, or you cannot negotiate an extension with him, etc. This isn't just about me, I am working to fix my situation before I worry about everyone else. Hell, at this point I could really care less. I'll make a deal with you Sean, pick any two players that come out to $24m (which one report shows Im over budget) and I will immediately suspend them until I am under budget. I know how you think, 'so you can get a better draft pick?' I will also be willing to drop my draft slot 10 spots to cancel out that benefit. Two points though real quick: 1) "The bigger question is why have people stopped following the rules?"
This is where you and I clash so much. You immediately go to there is a reason people intentionally stopped following rules and its in a malicious way they are doing it to gain personal benefit. If I see one or two teams doing it then I consider that as my option but when its a handful of teams struggling with this then I look at it as some sort of confusion that should be addressed before I stone them in the center of town. 2) "It's not that hard to check your financials. Why should you or any other gm for that matter get the benefit of out bidding other gms for players or the ability to keep a player instead of following a rule?" Valid point, you should definitely be the one to cast the first stone here because you do everything right to make sure you do not get a competitive advantage. But wait a minute, if the number we are looking at is "projected budget room" then why are the Reds one of the teams in the red? First of all, I don't have an advantage. I just signed two fa's with cash available to do so. My owner allowed it. There's a huge difference between $24 mil and $3.5 mil but the question remains on why so many aren't following the rule. Is it deliberate? Is it something the game is causing? Do the owners now allow teams to go for it all and spend more? Instead of arguing further, how do you want to handle this? My Sean, earlier in this thread you stated that: "If you're over budget, you are at a clear advantage over the teams that are following the rules." and "You can't argue that the teams that are over budget don't have an advantage over the teams that are under." Now your position is that even though you are over budget you do not have an advantage. Why is that? I don't understand your reasoning.
|
|
|
Post by craigWhiteSox on Aug 21, 2015 13:53:26 GMT -5
You don't get to go over, and THEN make a move to get back under. You can only do that in the offseason. Technically any transaction (trade or signing) that puts you over gets vetoed. I have seen it in trades around the deadline in years past.
And then there's the, both guys were comp eligible. If you're allowed to keep one or both you lose one or two 1st rounders.
Just going off of the rules. I have been penalized in year's past. Hope that it remains stern and consistent with the rules. This not to single anyone out, or make anything personal because it is very far from it, just a stalwart for the PBL league governance
|
|
|
Post by Sean_RedsGM on Aug 21, 2015 13:57:15 GMT -5
First of all, I don't have an advantage. I just signed two fa's with cash available to do so. My owner allowed it. There's a huge difference between $24 mil and $3.5 mil but the question remains on why so many aren't following the rule. Is it deliberate? Is it something the game is causing? Do the owners now allow teams to go for it all and spend more? Instead of arguing further, how do you want to handle this? My Sean, earlier in this thread you stated that: "If you're over budget, you are at a clear advantage over the teams that are following the rules." and "You can't argue that the teams that are over budget don't have an advantage over the teams that are under." Now your position is that even though you are over budget you do not have an advantage. Why is that? I don't understand your reasoning. Earlier in the thread, I posted what my financial screen showed before last night's sim. During the sim, I signed two free agents. According to Derek, I am now over budget. So what am I doing? Making a move to balance that out. The two free agents I signed combined salary wasn't more than what my projected positive budget was, so it doesn't make much sense how now I am at a negative. Anyway, I am working to balance that budget, which again went over this past sim. That is completely different than going into the year at Opening Day and being over by $5 mil or more.
|
|
|
Post by earlweaver on Aug 21, 2015 14:15:15 GMT -5
Let me just use my situation for a minute. This is a argument that we should let the game handle the finances. I have a budget, I planned and made moves all offseason with that budget in mind. I then set my scouting budget to $1 and my development budget to $1,000,000. On the July 21st sim, my budget magically changed to the following. Scouting- 3.75 mil. Development- 5 mill. That's a total of 8.75, which is 7.75 more then I planned. I commented on this happening HERE. I also included a small warning for teams to check. I was able to change the numbers back. On the July 23rd sim, my budget magically changed again to the previous 3.75 and 5 mil numbers. Again....WTF... I commented on that HERE. I was not able to edit those numbers again however. Today, i stand 7.531 million over budget. Obviously, if my situation had not been altered by the CPU, i would be within the rules. If it happened to me, it happened to others, and can happen again. This is a huge reason why the old budget rule is now obsolete. We clearly all don't have the same control anymore. The game is supposed to be capable of handling budgets now, I really hope we can move to letting the game prove it next season. Derek should not have to manually check budgets all the time, it's work, and the second this becomes work, it's a big problem. This is a game. I think some people forget that. I will do whatever is in my power to comply with our commish's ruling this weekend. I just hope we agree to change the rule this offseason.
|
|
|
Post by Derek _ Red Sox on Aug 21, 2015 15:18:59 GMT -5
HA HA HA HA HA HA This got me to LOL.
|
|
|
Post by Dustin Ackley on Aug 21, 2015 15:24:23 GMT -5
Im suggesting next year that...
1) We let the game handle the financial side of things. Derek does have to be careful as the game allows the commish to spend over budget.
2) As soon as the regular season stars, remove all compensation on any remaining free agents. This way it wont screw up the draft order.
|
|