Warrior General Games

Nighthawks want all of your good players.

Originally posted by chronoaug
I know, it's just lame because the last thing we need is more 100+blowout wins. It's part of the reason people say (it's true though) that Pro has lost its luster.

Pro lost its luster when the WL was created.

Originally posted by chronoaug
I know, it's just lame because the last thing we need is more 100+blowout wins. It's part of the reason people say (it's true though) that Pro has lost its luster.

More than half of Monmouth's games last season were decided by 0ver 68 points. 7 of the Shockers. 8 for Bortsville. 13 for Minnesota. It looks just as bad if not worse this season. Maybe we have too many Pro Leagues.

Originally posted by coachviking
More than half of Monmouth's games last season were decided by 0ver 68 points. 7 of the Shockers. 8 for Bortsville. 13 for Minnesota. It looks just as bad if not worse this season. Maybe we have too many Pro Leagues.

Too many burnouts. Fewer pro leagues would be a start. They should combine to 4 pro leagues and send all non-competitive teams to casual.

Originally posted by Galkuris
Originally posted by chronoaug

I know, it's just lame because the last thing we need is more 100+blowout wins. It's part of the reason people say (it's true though) that Pro has lost its luster.

Pro lost its luster when the WL was created.

Season 12 was actually pretty competitive still. There were like 5 teams with a chance to win the conf title as opposed to like 2 now

get rid of decline, plateau forever, no more boosts/training/VAs

Originally posted by coachviking
Maybe we have too many Pro Leagues.

No, we have too many teams. If you think the Pro leagues are bad, look at AA leagues. My Oceania AA team has 8 CPU teams in its conference, and another 8 teams in the other conference. This game's problem is that it's always been too easy for people to get teams. Everybody wants a team, but only a few people want to keep them.

Here is my take on the whole thing. Recruiting sucks for almost every team out there. Some teams have it easy, but most have to work really hard at it. This is the biggest part of burnout/gut/selling of teams.....no question about it. Losing might come a close second.

Retirement is really becoming an issue. Most of us who want to compete will not hang on to players past 1 full season of decline (APP is prime example). They did compete yes, but was it realistic for them to win at the end of the season? No.

So from a stand point of an agent looking at a team that only has around 20 players: They are all concerned about the roster size and can't look past the fact that you have a good organization and have competed every other season before. I am speaking from experience on this...trust me. 90% of my rejections are this......."I am interested in your team and I like the fact that it is USA Pro and I like the fact that you guys have shown you can win.....BUT.....I am a little scared of the roster size."

O.K.......I get it, but if everyone says that and no one signs because of it......where do you go from there? You may get a few agents that you can convince, but most will tuck and run for another team with an almost full roster. Most of which were filled from networking or just winning a title, or going 14-2 or 15-1 or a combination of all most likely.

Pro builds are a dying breed because of retirement, and a lot of agents go to lower tier teams just to get huge stats. I have 1 or 2 suggestions for this.

1. Have a draft for all leagues. Each league will have certain day restrictions of when the player was created, or go by the player value #'s as a qualifier (even though it is somewhat misleading in itself).

I can hear it now.......no one will want to do that because of the internet and live ties you have to some of the players. So here is my suggestion to that.

2. Allow teams to recruit players up to a certain day in the post season, but only to a certain limit, such as 30-35 players. This way the best recruiter and all the agents that are really demanding still have a choice in the matter.

From there....all players enter the draft after a certain day.......say day 46-47 for discussion sake. You have 1-2 days of down time where all of the players can enter a certain draft league by choice (but you must qualify to enter the league). The players entering the draft can be kind of like the team waiting list. First come first serve. You select this league and qualify before everyone else and your in. There would have to be some sort of script to run that allows only a certain amount of players per position based on team needs in the league. All that don't get in on time to enter the draft will be auto selected to a certain qualifying league.

How does the draft order work you ask? Sort of like the NFL.......worst team gets the first pick down to the best team gets the last pick.

Yes certain teams will be in the draft for more players than others, but once you hit your player cap (which I think is going to 50 soon) then your done with the draft. All of the other teams continue to draft until all of the players are gone, or they reach their cap.

What is the incentive for the draft? I don't know really for the players, other than some extra excitement and maybe guaranteed equipment for the first however many rounds.

What is the incentive for the league and the teams? Well that should be obvious at this point...More competition in the league and less burnout guts.

This is all off the cusp and each of these suggestions would have to be fine tuned with more detail, but I think this could really do some seriously good things for the game as a whole.

Flame if you must, but I believe this still gives the good recruiters and teams the opportunity to solidify their core roster by choice, then the rest is up to becoming a scout and drafting what you need to fill the holes.

It really doesn't seem that hard to do, but I could be way off base here. Just my thoughts.

If I get any backing on this, then we should hatch it out here in our own league and make a suggestion on this. If not, then it's all for not.

Uh I know back in the day when no one wanted to play for us a human player was still better than a CPU player. So bring in some guys for one season to fill out the roster who you know aren't that great and do the best you can with them.

Maybe you won't be competing for a championship but at least you could slowly work on bringing in the players you want.

Originally posted by Mercaptopropyl
Uh I know back in the day when no one wanted to play for us a human player was still better than a CPU player. So bring in some guys for one season to fill out the roster who you know aren't that great and do the best you can with them.

Maybe you won't be competing for a championship but at least you could slowly work on bringing in the players you want.

So I take it you don't like any part of this suggestion? What you suggest just leads to more gutting of teams and selling. They get these lower level players and start 0-4.......then boom.....you have a gut job.

At least the parity would be there a little more, considering your core 30-35 were good and you know how to draft what you need?

My suggestion also makes coaching, strategy, scouting, and organization much more important. Which is how it should be. We all want to see who is really the best right? This would incorporate every aspect much better.

I've never had a hard time recruiting.. Normally my issue is I get too many people and have to make tough decisions on who to keep.

The idea that you can wait until the Off-season to build your team is the problem. If you don't plan ahead you will fail.

There is a draft by the way.. Join the UGLB draft it's very well run.

As far as too many leagues.. I agree.. but more teams = more money for GLB. So it will be a hard sell to contract one of the leagues to improve the overall talent pool for all of the leagues. Plus do those of us who don't have issues putting together competitive teams really want recruiting to be easier? I don't as it gives me the ability to out-work other owners. Just say'n.

makes me feel good about recruiting 30+ players for 2 teams, even if they're not the greatest builds

Originally posted by Killer_Elite
I've never had a hard time recruiting.. Normally my issue is I get too many people and have to make tough decisions on who to keep.

The idea that you can wait until the Off-season to build your team is the problem. If you don't plan ahead you will fail.

There is a draft by the way.. Join the UGLB draft it's very well run.

As far as too many leagues.. I agree.. but more teams = more money for GLB. So it will be a hard sell to contract one of the leagues to improve the overall talent pool for all of the leagues. Plus do those of us who don't have issues putting together competitive teams really want recruiting to be easier? I don't as it gives me the ability to out-work other owners. Just say'n.


You can still out-work them on your first 30-35 signings.

It's one or the other really. It sounds like you don't have an issue with leagues not being competitive. Some do, and this is my suggestion.

Besides....you are not the norm. You have trophies in your last 2 seasons. That makes it way easier to resign and recruit. As I stated in my original post. I know this from personal experience as well. We recruited too easy last season, to the point where I could have easily done it all on my own.

Now we are not that team that fits the "easy to recruit" mold.

Originally posted by smittdog101

It sounds like you don't have an issue with leagues not being competitive. Some do, and this is my suggestion.


The Renegades have never had a cake walk. We have been in leagues were there are only 4 or 5 teams that had a shot, but it’s not like beating those 4 or 5 teams was easy.

Honestly, I think Parody in GLB is a bit of a fantasy. You will always have the haves and the have-nots. But you need parody at the top and bottom to make it fun. 4-6 teams that have a shot at winning the conference, 10-12 teams that have a shot at the play-offs and 4-6 cupcakes would be perfect. If I didn’t have a night off here and there for a few cupcakes during the season I would burn out.

Originally posted by smittdog101
So I take it you don't like any part of this suggestion? What you suggest just leads to more gutting of teams and selling. They get these lower level players and start 0-4.......then boom.....you have a gut job.

At least the parity would be there a little more, considering your core 30-35 were good and you know how to draft what you need?

My suggestion also makes coaching, strategy, scouting, and organization much more important. Which is how it should be. We all want to see who is really the best right? This would incorporate every aspect much better.

The problem is people own teams who shouldn't own teams.

The season before my team promoted to USA Pro we were 6-10. We mostly kept the same roster the next season. We've missed the playoffs up here before too. The problem is that too many teams are expecting too much. You don't see enough teams persevere through losing seasons.


edit: agents expect too much too, but that's a lot harder to change.