Select a country: |
![]() |
USA |
I disagree TC. I think it's easier to change the variables later and have decent numbers that make sense now than the current way. It just doesn't make sense.
Long term, I don't see what difference it makes. Either they go and roll back salaries in the future like they did earlier last season, and people whine and moan, or we have a lower operating player cost for now.
Having people complain about not having to pay their players enough seems like the lesser of 2 evils to me
Having people complain about not having to pay their players enough seems like the lesser of 2 evils to me

to be honest if you have a staffie trained evenly between their 2 stats they make much less $$$ than someone trained lopsided. You can save money buying guys with equal Q's and training both.
im thinking about firing my staff and having my 1st line center drive the zamboni. times are rough!
random stat...I have 7 players left from my original roster...6 starters, and my backup goalie.
I still have 11, and all played significant number of games for me last season, including my starting GK. This season, only 4 are in my 20 player lineup.
I have 5 players left, but only 2 starters, and one of those is slipping downwards. Of the 3 non-starters, I'll probably get rid of at least 2 this season.
Somewhat annoyingly, my best original player in terms of qualities (Moreland) is worse than both Fairchild and Vickers, and IMO only marginally better than Starkey. Makes you wonder how the starting teams are generated, and how much variation there is between teams.
Somewhat annoyingly, my best original player in terms of qualities (Moreland) is worse than both Fairchild and Vickers, and IMO only marginally better than Starkey. Makes you wonder how the starting teams are generated, and how much variation there is between teams.
I have 4 originals. Starting goalie and 3 skaters on 3 different lines. Non are what I would call "impact" players.
I have one winger from my original (I have several overall, but him specifically) who has been surpassed and has been my star sub the last season or two.
For whatever reason, whenever he gets in a game, he scores goals. I can't figure out why, but it's like he takes advantage of every game he gets at this point
For whatever reason, whenever he gets in a game, he scores goals. I can't figure out why, but it's like he takes advantage of every game he gets at this point

Vickers is only a 71 AQ - not that great. He was my highest OR guy when the team started and he was center 1 for about a full season before some of the others caught up to him...
Starkey's a 78 but he's pretty balanced - no Q over 89, but his P qual is only 60...
he'd be awesome if I could swap his completely useless Q in GT for P.
Starkey's a 78 but he's pretty balanced - no Q over 89, but his P qual is only 60...
he'd be awesome if I could swap his completely useless Q in GT for P.
I don't get it either, my soccer team is freaking horrid, a team in my league Phoenix is stacked with high OR and AQ guys. They'll be in the top league before too long.
On top of it he's pulled a coach and two physio's - some people get the luck, my irish ass just keeps getting feces.
On top of it he's pulled a coach and two physio's - some people get the luck, my irish ass just keeps getting feces.
there was a team in my league who started with 3 guys in the 180OR 80AQ range and they're gone now - he went noname and the new team got new guys.
Your favorite threads
Newest posts