Asunto: Questions & Answers

IF (!) they are the reason is simple:
To make a player a good goaly you need to train just 3 skills instead of 4 or 5 (shooting for wingers, tec for defenders, shooting for defenders,...). Just that makes a GK relatively strong compared to players on any other position...

you see...most of people complain about stuff when they are in position to feel it on their skin. Blame it on them because they've noticed it? Too much mouning and whining for you ?
I've seen guys that were in a position to defend something here (including me) and as the time goes by they turned into critics of that same thing.
That doesn't mean they are hypocrits or dumb asses, they just couldn't see right away because of so much nice features that PPM has. And PPM has some flaws too. It is not strange and it's not blasphemy. Why would PPM programmers make "to do list" and in it: Improvement of tactical options and Game engine improvements ?
I don't know will they work on goalkeepers influence in the game, but In My Opinion - they should.

Goalies aren't overpowered at all. They are just too fluctuant. A relatively bad goalie can become a superman and ruin a match for a better team. On the other side a good goalie in a strong team tends to have too many bad days and save percentages in 70s.

in RL Brodeur started the last NHL season with a bunch of empty nets but after that he just had a drop of form and his team struggled with him between the pipes. i belive the goalies form is more visible on the ice that other players form so we need to have at least two goalies in the same range to overcome the form drop.
as the NT coach I won my first game against a team with a 77 GK and my team scored 7 times. the explanation was that the goalie actually exploded in that game, reaching the lowest possible form lucky me.

I'm certainly not calling anyone a hypocrite or a dumbass, I'm just trying to understand a more logical reason for the argument.

After all so far all i've seen is "look, this guy beat me, so goalies are too strong"

Something like this, for example, would make sense to me, and it's obviously been a while since this study was done but look at the following here

"As we see, the variance grows slower than the scoring efficiency, hence the bigger your S+/G- advantage, the less likely gets the chance for the great upset. It is difficult enough for an average goalie to stop a much stronger offence. However, and I want to emphesize this, the stronger the goalie, the larger the relative fluctuations in his game!"

http://glanvalleyeaglets.wordp ress.com/2009/11/06/advanced-p pm-o-metrics/

Maybe if GlanValley wants to look at the issue again now that goalies have been training for 4-5 seasons we can put some hard #'s behind this argument?

Yes, some of us call that situation - random.

@taloncarde you didn't called anybody dumbass, it's just when you explain someones thougths it goes like this: "oops, i lost a game, it's not fair that I lost, something must be wrong, let's blame the goalies this time." and "look, this guy beat me, so goalies are too strong".

Ah, yes, i am guilty of going overboard with sarcasm sometimes. Let me rephrase that sentence w/o sarcasm

"So far the only thing that people have said as evidence for goalies being too strong has been that they lost games. "

You can rephrase it but still you can't say that I'm speaking of my lost games. It was the general feeling on our forum (and in my head also) that goalies are just powerful and important.

If you go back and read my post, you just might spot the part where I said his GK won him a really high position in the league and he caused many upsets throughout the season.

Let me assure you that I'm not whinging, nor moaning that I got beat... I would have posted my grievances immediately after that game if this was the case...
So lets move away from that line of thought straight away, shall we!

I observed the team I mentioned in my post throughout the season and noticed that the only reason I could find that he was being so successful was because of his GK...
Quite simply put, my problem isn't with a handful of games that his GK stood on his head, rather the entire season, and so far this time around, he has continued his heroics because of his high rating, albeit in a lower standard league.

There was an excellent point made above about just how easy it is to train a GK into a superstar as they only have 3 atty's one needs to work on.

Another point, made by yourself taloncarde, was that the GK spends most time on the ice and therefore should have a bigger say in the game.
While I wholeheartedly agree with this line of thought, you must also consider the errors a player makes during a season having so much time on the ice!
Your line of thinking on this is flawed because you think the GK can only have a positive influence... well, yes... but every player is prone to bad form, bad judgement, etc, etc...
Every player in every sport has a dip.

If the GK has so much positivity on the ice, why is it that top, top offensive players cant beat him???

You cannot have one without the other, and therein lies the problem.

kind of an odd question here...anything over 12 players starts getting penalized with higher sales fees. how many player transfers is average? and any tips on managing that fee level...other than hope you have enough to cover all the fees?

main tip - try not to sell for low money. for example that guy who recently was sold for 250k should be fired instead becouse he get in your sold list for 112 days.
and over 10 players starts raising sales fee

my mistake looked at buying list
anyway don't sell low skilled players for 100k and so on. its not worth when you will get to sell some good player for big cash and nearly half of money would go on taxes

bad mystake.i dit it aswell.

tryd to sell 50 staff

sold them for 110mio but payt taxe for about 35 to 40 mil.
im not shure enjmore cause i dlike to forget that moment as i realissed that i just throw 40 mil away.

but now i now it.

got that part. unfortunately some guys i've sold went for way less than what i thought the market would bring. i just had a thought. i wonder if that's part of the sell off of big name players form no-name teams.

and thanks for the input.

by the way...this is what that $250k bought...unscouted, of course...

19 20 19 15 92 50 26 29 34 65 36 51 32 72