|
TC
Dec 14, 2008 13:29:08 GMT -5
Post by Rocky on Dec 14, 2008 13:29:08 GMT -5
You want to lose nova and CF? I don't. who cares? If you're even in the position of being in your CY you shouldn't be in this league. That's a wake up call for everyone Seriously what the hell is the point of the contract year if you're just going to go to another team? That is so stupid and then sure EVERYONE is going to tank knowing theyre just going to switch teams anyways. What? No, not at all. You tank to help your current team. If nova tanked for three years and then missed 40 and switched teams, that doesn't do shit for his Pacers. I don't like the idea of people getting new teams in theory, but in this case: 1) Don did it and Nova/CF are more active members 2) We don't have a good wait list at all 3) There will be teams open So yeah, I'd much rather give teams to nova/CF rather than go give teams to some idiot who is on the wait list.
|
|
|
TC
Dec 14, 2008 13:29:50 GMT -5
Post by easy on Dec 14, 2008 13:29:50 GMT -5
i get what you're saying and actually half-agree with it but if Don got a second chance then why shouldn't nova/CF have that same opportunity? Alot of us spoke out against that move, and Spencer's reasoning was that donatello was thrown into an unfair situation and most of us agreed, that New Orleans team Don took over was unsalvagable in 3-4 seasons, no matter what. Captain inherited a semi-rebuilt NO team and had 4 more season to bring them to dominance. This has always been Nova's team. I don't see one arguement as to why they should just switch teams? Why, because we like them and don't want to lose them? Tough luck, seriously, where's the competitiveness in BBS? This is awful if this happens. If they want to stay, win, that simple.
|
|
|
TC
Dec 14, 2008 13:30:47 GMT -5
Post by easy on Dec 14, 2008 13:30:47 GMT -5
who cares? If you're even in the position of being in your CY you shouldn't be in this league. That's a wake up call for everyone Seriously what the hell is the point of the contract year if you're just going to go to another team? That is so stupid and then sure EVERYONE is going to tank knowing theyre just going to switch teams anyways. What? No, not at all. You tank to help your current team. If nova tanked for three years and then missed 40 and switched teams, that doesn't do shit for his Pacers. I don't like the idea of people getting new teams in theory, but in this case: 1) Don did it and Nova/CF are more active members 2) We don't have a good wait list at all 3) There will be teams open So yeah, I'd much rather give teams to nova/CF rather than go give teams to some idiot who is on the wait list. SO THEN GET RID OF THE CONTRACT YEAR. Those are the dumbest reasonings ever. There ARE people on the Wait List and what if one season I don't make the CY but there are a ton of people on the Wait List, what I don't get another shot? This is so stupid. Where's the competition?
|
|
Jay
Starter
Ex-GM
Bang...Bang...
Posts: 3,220
|
TC
Dec 14, 2008 13:30:54 GMT -5
Post by Jay on Dec 14, 2008 13:30:54 GMT -5
Just because he's on the waiting list doesn't mean he's a worse GM. You may like the other GMs more, so if that's what you're shooting for, then fine.
But we all know CF and Nova will get a 2nd chance no matter what we think, so no point in arguing it.
|
|
|
TC
Dec 14, 2008 13:32:02 GMT -5
Post by easy on Dec 14, 2008 13:32:02 GMT -5
Just because he's on the waiting list doesn't mean he's a worse GM. You may like the other GMs more, so if that's what you're shooting for, then fine. But we all know CF and Nova will get a 2nd chance no matter what we think, so no point in arguing it. If they don't make it, sure give them a second chance as top priority on the WAIT LIST.
|
|
|
TC
Dec 14, 2008 13:33:00 GMT -5
Post by Rocky on Dec 14, 2008 13:33:00 GMT -5
What? No, not at all. You tank to help your current team. If nova tanked for three years and then missed 40 and switched teams, that doesn't do shit for his Pacers. I don't like the idea of people getting new teams in theory, but in this case: 1) Don did it and Nova/CF are more active members 2) We don't have a good wait list at all 3) There will be teams open So yeah, I'd much rather give teams to nova/CF rather than go give teams to some idiot who is on the wait list. SO THEN GET RID OF THE CONTRACT YEAR. Those are the dumbest reasonings ever. There ARE people on the Wait List and what if one season I don't make the CY but there are a ton of people on the Wait List, what I don't get another shot? This is so stupid. Where's the competition? This is a worthless argument to have because we have different views on the contract year. I don't see it as a tool to kick people out of the league. It is there to prevent teams from tanking for 5-6 years. If a "good" member of BBS is booted because of the contract year then sure, give them another team if it is available. Why would we possibly get rid of the contract year? It is there to prevent tanking and is doing his job. I'm not saying let nova keep the Pacers.
|
|
|
TC
Dec 14, 2008 13:33:47 GMT -5
Post by Rocky on Dec 14, 2008 13:33:47 GMT -5
Just because he's on the waiting list doesn't mean he's a worse GM. You may like the other GMs more, so if that's what you're shooting for, then fine. But we all know CF and Nova will get a 2nd chance no matter what we think, so no point in arguing it. If they don't make it, sure give them a second chance as top priority on the WAIT LIST. That's EXACTLY what I'm saying. They'd get fired. They'd become top priority on the wait list. There would be two teams available. They'd fill in. If one of them gets fired then the guy who is fired is now tops on the wait list and doesn't get a team immediately.
|
|
|
TC
Dec 14, 2008 13:34:20 GMT -5
Post by easy on Dec 14, 2008 13:34:20 GMT -5
SO THEN GET RID OF THE CONTRACT YEAR. Those are the dumbest reasonings ever. There ARE people on the Wait List and what if one season I don't make the CY but there are a ton of people on the Wait List, what I don't get another shot? This is so stupid. Where's the competition? This is a worthless argument to have because we have different views on the contract year. I don't see it as a tool to kick people out of the league. It is there to prevent teams from tanking for 5-6 years. If a "good" member of BBS is booted because of the contract year then sure, give them another team if it is available. Why would we possibly get rid of the contract year? It is there to prevent tanking and is doing his job. I'm not saying let nova keep the Pacers. How does it prevent tanking? LOL explain to me how it prevented Nova from tanking 3 straight seasons?
|
|
|
TC
Dec 14, 2008 13:35:06 GMT -5
Post by easy on Dec 14, 2008 13:35:06 GMT -5
If they don't make it, sure give them a second chance as top priority on the WAIT LIST. That's EXACTLY what I'm saying. They'd get fired. They'd become top priority on the wait list. There would be two teams available. They'd fill in. If one of them gets fired then the guy who is fired is now tops on the wait list and doesn't get a team immediately. They get fired, those people on the wait list, get their teams, and THEN they become #1 and #2 on the Wait List.
|
|
|
TC
Dec 14, 2008 13:35:40 GMT -5
Post by cjmjones008 on Dec 14, 2008 13:35:40 GMT -5
I think we came up with the contract year to get rid of D2A
|
|
|
TC
Dec 14, 2008 13:36:14 GMT -5
Post by Rocky on Dec 14, 2008 13:36:14 GMT -5
This is a worthless argument to have because we have different views on the contract year. I don't see it as a tool to kick people out of the league. It is there to prevent teams from tanking for 5-6 years. If a "good" member of BBS is booted because of the contract year then sure, give them another team if it is available. Why would we possibly get rid of the contract year? It is there to prevent tanking and is doing his job. I'm not saying let nova keep the Pacers. How does it prevent tanking? LOL explain to me how it prevented Nova from tanking 3 straight seasons? Are you serious? Do you understand the rule? You CAN tank for three years... obviously. The point is, you CAN'T tank for 5-6 years. The fourth year you need to win 40 or you lose your team and are fired. In this case, there could be two teams available because two didn't win their 40. I'd have no problem if Spence gave 1 or both new teams for next season.
|
|
|
TC
Dec 14, 2008 13:36:44 GMT -5
Post by Rocky on Dec 14, 2008 13:36:44 GMT -5
That's EXACTLY what I'm saying. They'd get fired. They'd become top priority on the wait list. There would be two teams available. They'd fill in. If one of them gets fired then the guy who is fired is now tops on the wait list and doesn't get a team immediately. They get fired, those people on the wait list, get their teams, and THEN they become #1 and #2 on the Wait List. Which is not "top priority" (your words) at all, but OK.
|
|
|
TC
Dec 14, 2008 13:37:45 GMT -5
Post by noves on Dec 14, 2008 13:37:45 GMT -5
This is a worthless argument to have because we have different views on the contract year. I don't see it as a tool to kick people out of the league. It is there to prevent teams from tanking for 5-6 years. If a "good" member of BBS is booted because of the contract year then sure, give them another team if it is available. Why would we possibly get rid of the contract year? It is there to prevent tanking and is doing his job. I'm not saying let nova keep the Pacers. How does it prevent tanking? LOL explain to me how it prevented Nova from tanking 3 straight seasons? I didn't tank 3 straight seasons. I tried to win 3 seasons ago, lost Curry in the offseason, and then tanked the next 2 seasons.
|
|
|
TC
Dec 14, 2008 13:40:48 GMT -5
Post by cjmjones008 on Dec 14, 2008 13:40:48 GMT -5
you tanked 3 years in a row the last time you tanked
|
|
|
TC
Dec 14, 2008 13:41:51 GMT -5
Post by noves on Dec 14, 2008 13:41:51 GMT -5
Nope, only 2 years then too.
|
|
|
TC
Dec 14, 2008 13:42:51 GMT -5
Post by Rocky on Dec 14, 2008 13:42:51 GMT -5
LOL @ everyone assuming nova tanked in the years he won 37 games, but was trying to win.
|
|
|
TC
Dec 14, 2008 13:43:42 GMT -5
Post by cjmjones008 on Dec 14, 2008 13:43:42 GMT -5
Alltime Wins 29. Pacers- 498 28. Clippers- 541 27. Suns- 543
That is pathetic nova
|
|
|
TC
Dec 14, 2008 13:47:16 GMT -5
Post by noves on Dec 14, 2008 13:47:16 GMT -5
Alltime Wins 29. Pacers- 498 28. Clippers- 541 27. Suns- 543 That is pathetic nova I'll be the first to admit I've done a bad job in this version of the league, but all-time wins isn't the best way to view a team's success. I'd look more at playoff success. I still haven't done shit in the playoffs either, I'm just saying. I'd rather completely tank then be a middle-of-the-pack team year in year out like 4-5 other teams have been.
|
|
|
TC
Dec 14, 2008 13:48:17 GMT -5
Post by Rocky on Dec 14, 2008 13:48:17 GMT -5
Alltime Wins 29. Pacers- 498 28. Clippers- 541 27. Suns- 543 That is pathetic nova I'll be the first to admit I've done a bad job in this version of the league, but all-time wins isn't the best way to view a team's success. I'd look more at playoff success. I still haven't done shit in the playoffs either, I'm just saying. I'd rather completely tank then be a middle-of-the-pack team year in year out like 4-5 other teams have been. Hahahahahaha that was hilarious
|
|
|
TC
Dec 14, 2008 13:48:32 GMT -5
Post by Rocky on Dec 14, 2008 13:48:32 GMT -5
I write LOL even when I don't LOL, but I LOL'd there.
|
|
|
TC
Dec 14, 2008 13:50:18 GMT -5
Post by cjmjones008 on Dec 14, 2008 13:50:18 GMT -5
You have done a bad job. Those years you tanked to like 10 wins kills you there
|
|
|
TC
Dec 14, 2008 13:50:40 GMT -5
Post by noves on Dec 14, 2008 13:50:40 GMT -5
I have more playoff wins then 10 other teams, including DJ & Skillz, who are two of the guys I was talking about in my previous post.
|
|
|
TC
Dec 14, 2008 13:51:11 GMT -5
Post by noves on Dec 14, 2008 13:51:11 GMT -5
You have done a bad job. Those years you tanked to like 10 wins kills you there No shit. Bad job + Bad luck + Sick conference = Fucked.
|
|
|
TC
Dec 14, 2008 13:52:17 GMT -5
Post by noves on Dec 14, 2008 13:52:17 GMT -5
According to skillz though, the reason I won't make it is because I won't trade Orton for Millsap.
|
|
|
TC
Dec 14, 2008 13:52:53 GMT -5
Post by Skillz on Dec 14, 2008 13:52:53 GMT -5
you really suck at detecting sarcasm
|
|