2022 Offseason 7 SIM Complete - Next SIM Sunday 9/3 - Spring Training 1!

[Delandis]

Agreed, if that realism also didn't allow a team to construct that roster by going $50, $60, or $70 million dollars in debt.

I would agree but most don't purposely overspend and there are pretty harsh repercussions to that method . Limited scouting and PD, no FA, no stadium mods and no extensions on current stars. Some pay the piper now in hopes for the future (tanking) and some mortgage their future for the chance now. I don't think either is wrong, just a preference.

Plus, IMO it's not like there is any real incentive to turning a profit when you lose 3-8 MM every season to rev share and there is a 10MM cap on year over year profit.

[mike]

Agreed, if that realism also didn't allow a team to construct that roster by going $50, $60, or $70 million dollars in debt.

Mets, Marlins, and Dodgers of the late 2000s disagree

[umd]

I would agree but most don't purposely overspend and there are pretty harsh repercussions to that method . Limited scouting and PD, no FA, no stadium mods and no extensions on current stars. Some pay the piper now in hopes for the future (tanking) and some mortgage their future for the chance now. I don't think either is wrong, just a preference.

Plus, IMO it's not like there is any real incentive to turning a profit when you lose 3-8 MM every season to rev share and there is a 10MM cap on year over year profit.

I agree on everything above except scouting. No need to spend as much there as has been discussed forever. We as a league haven't done a good enough job of keeping up with the game mechanics and it's starting to show. Still the best league around but we can't pass any significant improvements to our settings/rules due to lack of voting participation and reluctance to makes changes to a good thing - a successful enduring league.

We've discussed the financial aspects of turning profits vs deficits for real life years with virtually nothing accomplished one way or another.

[Sharkn20]

I would agree but most don't purposely overspend and there are pretty harsh repercussions to that method . Limited scouting and PD, no FA, no stadium mods and no extensions on current stars. Some pay the piper now in hopes for the future (tanking) and some mortgage their future for the chance now. I don't think either is wrong, just a preference.

Plus, IMO it's not like there is any real incentive to turning a profit when you lose 3-8 MM every season to rev share and there is a 10MM cap on year over year profit.

+1 I am down to get rid of the caps in profit as there are no caps in deficit, that's more realistic.

I have been suffering revenue share for years and even with deficit I still had to pay. I don't think will get enough votes to be removed though.

[Delandis]

+1 I am down to get rid of the caps in profit as there are no caps in deficit, that's more realistic.

I have been suffering revenue share for years and even with deficit I still had to pay. I don't think will get enough votes to be removed though.

For the record, I'm not advocating for or against any changes in this instance. Just pointing out the differences in team building and why I think it has gotten to this point.

[Carlos]

I agree on everything above except scouting. No need to spend as much there as has been discussed forever. We as a league haven't done a good enough job of keeping up with the game mechanics and it's starting to show. Still the best league around but we can't pass any significant improvements to our settings/rules due to lack of voting participation and reluctance to makes changes to a good thing - a successful enduring league.

We've discussed the financial aspects of turning profits vs deficits for real life years with virtually nothing accomplished one way or another.

There have been so many conversations about changes. Can you remind me what settings you would like seen changed?

Maybe I can offer some input on what those settings have looked like in other leagues.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk

[Sharkn20]

There have been so many conversations about changes. Can you remind me what settings you would like seen changed?

Maybe I can offer some input on what those settings have looked like in other leagues.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk

Having some insight about the changes in other leagues would be good.

[funclown]

Yeah that's another problem of this league, but it seems that it happens in real life, you can't be good and be profitable... It's the nightmare of all the Owners in the world, they enjoy a year or 2 of their teams until they have to spend $50M+ every year to watch them winning or tank and start all over.

Ummm, the real world teams are making money hand over fist.

[Sharkn20]

Ummm, the real world teams are making money hand over fist.

What that means for the ones that have english as a second language? :)

[Z]

What that means for the ones that have english as a second language? :)

It means they are making a lot of money easily.

[umd]

There have been so many conversations about changes. Can you remind me what settings you would like seen changed?

Maybe I can offer some input on what those settings have looked like in other leagues.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk

This could turn into a huge post. I kind of feel like I'd be beating a dead horse...

1. Scouting - widening the range of our 2-8 scale so that out 4-6 ranges are not "created equal" - maybe this would make investing in scouting more "valuable"? Would decreasing scout accuracy reward teams who invest in scouting? Or is scouting just "broken" in some way in terms of money invested related to accuracy?

2. Find another way to reward profitable teams beyond the $10m cash max.

Bring back a "Stadium Fund" that allows money invested only on profit past the $10m cash max. Maybe put a $10m Stadium Fund investment max per year that can be carried over. Put a 4 year restriction between stadium modifications excluding seat purchases.

Consider alternative ways to spend profits - Some possibilities could include the International Complex that has been discussed.

Since we now allow cash in trade allocations for future seasons, why can't we allow profits to be moved forward as well in a general fund of some sort? Just a thought.

Let profits be used in place of revenue sharing. Smaller budget teams would still get support but larger budget teams could keep more of their profits if they have any.

Let extra profits be used for fun aspects like additional nicknames.

Other non thought out not sure if the mechanics even work in game could include allowing extra profits to purchase fan interest (fictional advertising points).

[funclown]

Pawtucket 7-8. Were rotating so many guys won't really get a true read on my team. First glance stsrters were solid , bullpen sucked again and you either batted .350 or .180.

Got some position battles going on at 2B, bullpen and 4th OF but 22 positions are pretty much and that sounds strange for a team that won 67 games last season.

Speaking of this version. We signed Reeves (extremely popular), Zach Cook (popular), Vinny Flores (extremely popular) no change . Fine , but we lost Dave Graves (well known) and yet I get a message saying fan interest has decreased slightly ?? Come on, say what you want about realism but this is completely broken. Any city in there right mind would draw more interest in season tickets. Why even have popularity which was used to build many teams fan bases ???? Defend it all you want but there's is a decent chance this will once again repress teams ability to increase revenue and issue that seems big right now.

Dont give me the "winning teams" crap either. We won 4 Cups and 9 straight playoffs, 10 years straight above .500 and our fan interest went down from 54-52 this offseason. We've actually only had 3 bad seasons not 12-16!! Something is dead wrong.

[umd]

Pawtucket 7-8. Were rotating so many guys won't really get a true read on my team. First glance stsrters were solid , bullpen sucked again and you either batted .350 or .180.

Got some position battles going on at 2B, bullpen and 4th OF but 22 positions are pretty much and that sounds strange for a team that won 67 games last season.

Speaking of this version. We signed Reeves (extremely popular), Zach Cook (popular), Vinny Flores (extremely popular) no change . Fine , but we lost Dave Graves (well known) and yet I get a message saying fan interest has decreased slightly ?? Come on, say what you want about realism but this is completely broken. Any city in there right mind would draw more interest in season tickets. Why even have popularity which was used to build many teams fan bases ???? Defend it all you want but there's is a decent chance this will once again repress teams ability to increase revenue and issue that seems big right now.

Dont give me the "winning teams" crap either. We won 4 Cups and 9 straight playoffs, 10 years straight above .500 and our fan interest went down from 54-52 this offseason. We've actually only had 3 bad seasons not 12-16!! Something is dead wrong.

100 Fan Interest to 33. Yeah, we suck and traded all our popular players and lost but I also signed as many as I could hoping to get a few points here and there. Nope. Only goes down as players leave. No reward for signing guys in their place.

[funclown]

100 Fan Interest to 33. Yeah, we suck and traded all our popular players and lost but I also signed as many as I could hoping to get a few points here and there. Nope. Only goes down as players leave. No reward for signing guys in their place.

It's unrealistic. Everyone saw the Cubs sign Lester and knew something was going on. Ticket sales climbed. Happens in the NFL and NBA also. Works in reverse. No way your fans leave like that. Fans are loyal and like to party. Just how Americans are.

This is by far my main complaint. The new ratings?? No, just need to adjust that a 5 really means 4.5 or 5.5. It started to get too easy to evaluate players,so neat. Prospects struggling or bombing / 10 th rounders hitting? Cool, it's nice the entire draft means something.

Scouting... yeah wish the more you pour into the more accurate it got. Today I tend to use my scout / OSA and more times then not OSA is correct. Sad,

As a league though with money we are so NHL which is a low growth regional league. It's almost a form of socialism which in theory works but doesn't. Dallas for all its high signings won twice and shouldn't be 59 ml in the hole and climbing. Shouldn't of had some buffer for one bad season. Makes no sense.

[Pat]

I think the new version has more to do with winning than it does amount of popular players.

The high popularity players can amplify fan interest but it can only do so much if you are out of the playoff race by mid-May.