|
Post by James on Aug 13, 2007 1:23:45 GMT -5
Discuss.
|
|
KG
Starter
Timberwolves
Posts: 1,204
|
Post by KG on Aug 13, 2007 1:27:03 GMT -5
As long as there is no concrete termination rule, and the decision is down to the owner/commissioner, Spence. I have no problem with it.
It does keep the league on their toes.
|
|
|
Post by Lumley316 on Aug 13, 2007 1:37:38 GMT -5
It used to be based off of activity on the most part.
|
|
KG
Starter
Timberwolves
Posts: 1,204
|
Post by KG on Aug 13, 2007 1:38:09 GMT -5
I think it kind of still is.
|
|
|
Post by Lumley316 on Aug 13, 2007 1:43:55 GMT -5
Well Im 1st on the list and one of the top active by far so it isnt really true there lol. But all well what can you do.
|
|
|
Post by Spencer on Aug 13, 2007 1:55:14 GMT -5
It used to be based off of activity on the most part. When has the contract year had to do with activity?
|
|
|
Post by Lumley316 on Aug 13, 2007 2:54:27 GMT -5
It used to be based off of activity on the most part. When has the contract year had to do with activity? Im talking about before this rule came into affect. Where you used to oust gms if they werent active at all or if they pissed you off.
|
|
|
Post by GP on Aug 13, 2007 3:45:01 GMT -5
I think the rule is fine but I still dont get why making the playoffs is not the same as 40 wins. it
|
|
|
Post by duce on Aug 13, 2007 12:18:13 GMT -5
it..................
|
|
|
Post by The X-Factor on Aug 13, 2007 14:37:37 GMT -5
I think the rule is fine but I still dont get why making the playoffs is not the same as 40 wins. it If we're basing this sim in being as "realistic" as possible realistically wouldn't you think a team would oust a coach after 4 straight 40 win seasons but no playoff appearances?
|
|
|
Post by GP on Aug 13, 2007 14:42:34 GMT -5
I think the rule is fine but I still dont get why making the playoffs is not the same as 40 wins. it If we're basing this sim in being as "realistic" as possible realistically wouldn't you think a team would oust a coach after 4 straight 40 win seasons but no playoff appearances? yea i do think so.
|
|
|
Post by Spencer on Aug 13, 2007 16:30:56 GMT -5
When has the contract year had to do with activity? Im talking about before this rule came into affect. Where you used to oust gms if they werent active at all or if they pissed you off. Things change. If the BBS is to go to the next level, it has to be because all of the GMs are elite. Its quite obvious rules that reward winning, will make the league more competitive. And the best GMs want to be in the most competitive leagues. Lums, you seem to think you make deals to "keep the activity level high". Well guess what, you cant do that. You need to make smarter deals, that make your team better. Im quite positive the activity level of the league will be high even if you dont make bad trades, so why not try making some good trades, and building a contender?
|
|
|
Post by Spencer on Aug 13, 2007 16:33:27 GMT -5
I think the rule is fine but I still dont get why making the playoffs is not the same as 40 wins. it Well, first off, I told you in the other thread no too worry too much. On the other hand I dont want to hear excuses. I posted last year that the 500 mark would be crucial as well. So ya, if you dont make the playoffs, or if you dont win 40, or both, any Gm would be in danger of getting canned. Thats the reality of BBS at this point.
|
|
|
Post by ducky on Aug 13, 2007 17:34:52 GMT -5
Naw, it's nice.
|
|
|
Post by Dan on Aug 13, 2007 17:37:45 GMT -5
its great for the league, this is one of the reasons why bbs is the best.
|
|