Warrior General Games

i don't think gutting is very good for the game, if you're doing it once the season starts i think the fair thing to do is try to keep the majority of your team intact and either work out trades for people you have signed for multiple years or give them new contracts that end after the season.

that way the new owner doesn't have to start from scratch and has a chance to prove himself to the team, but nobody will be stuck on the team for a long time if he ends up sucking

I agree, all contracts should be reset to Day 40 once the Roster minimum of 40 is reached. But until they do that it will go on like it has. I inherited my gutted Pro team with only 5 human players and about 10 low lvl cpu's.

I think seeing teams get gutted sucks. It's hard to take over a team that's been gutted. I'd rather start off in a new league if I were going for a new team. That's a lot better than taking over a team in a Pro, AAA, or even AA conference. Of course, the USA BBB League's quite brutal as well.

The worst thing you can do for a new owner is to release everyone and leave the pantry bare and no cash in the bank. The best thing for the owner is to keep everyone around. However, that might be the worst option for the players on the team. One option is to redo everyones contract to expire at the end of this season. That way if the new owner does a good job, he can retain a lot of people. If he sucks, then the players aren't stuck for long.

Trading people for cash is reasonable since it allows the new owner something to try to get talent on the team.

Originally posted by tomcollins
The worst thing you can do for a new owner is to release everyone and leave the pantry bare and no cash in the bank. The best thing for the owner is to keep everyone around. However, that might be the worst option for the players on the team. One option is to redo everyones contract to expire at the end of this season. That way if the new owner does a good job, he can retain a lot of people. If he sucks, then the players aren't stuck for long.

Trading people for cash is reasonable since it allows the new owner something to try to get talent on the team.

Now THAT's a good idea! Tom is a man of infinite wisdom.

Alot of people on the waiting list already have a bunch of players lined up for when they get their teams. So sometimes they come in and ship players from the old owner all over like what happened on the Seattle team. Which is a big reason why outgoing owners give players a chance to jump ship before the team is sold back.

Originally posted by kenscott86
Originally posted by tomcollins

Sorry to see you go, but looks like you are doing the right things for your players and the new owners.

Apparently I am not doing the right thing...I got a PM from a MOD and he said I have to stop making trades. He said it is not fair to the new owner taking over the team to have no players. I think its more unfair to the players that will now be stuck on a half ass team. Don't you guys agree that it is better to just start over fresh? I have had a couple people contact me already about wanting to take over the team once it had been gutted. I thought that this was the best and fairest way to go about things but apparently not.

I think what isn't fair, is accepting a trade, allowing the owner to trade another player, announce new additions, potentially piss off people who are being replaced on the depth chart, and then retract the offer because you suddenly think it's wrong to trade all your players, yet the ones currently traded is just "damage done" and we'll let it slide by.

That is 100% bush league.

What is the Mods name, I want to know why he interferes with a deal to my team but sits by and watches several other teams benefit. It should be all or nothing.

I mean what difference does it make now that the team is 90% CPU? If this trade stays retracted, consider the Minnesota Fire the next gutted team in the west. Because I am 150% sick of the bull.

Originally posted by x21times20
i don't think gutting is very good for the game, if you're doing it once the season starts i think the fair thing to do is try to keep the majority of your team intact and either work out trades for people you have signed for multiple years or give them new contracts that end after the season.

that way the new owner doesn't have to start from scratch and has a chance to prove himself to the team, but nobody will be stuck on the team for a long time if he ends up sucking

You know what? I'd agree. If Laurier couldn't handle the losing anymore, Kenscott should have sold the team and went from there.. but he allowed 90% of his players to leave or be traded, including sending three of his own best players to EZC in a Dallas Orangebloods esque move (how ironic) then one of his agents agrees to come to the Fire, and a trade is accepted, and SUDDENLY it's a bad idea to move players, and the trade is retracted?

That's worse than anything Dallas ever did, because they just added a few players. They didn't turn around and then screw with the competition's team at the same time.

Can someone please explain to me why keeping that agent's players on the Laurier team that is now 90% CPU is in anyway doing the right thing or fair? It seems to me like it's only fair to Kenscott and his new stake in the EZC franchise.

Trading people to teams he knows will take care of his players doesn't seem like a bad move in my book. The mod who had a problem with it is likely clueless and has no authority other than banning people from the forums and deleting threads. Mods != Admins.

Sounds like someone has sour grapes. EZ likely won't even be in BBB next season.

So as I understand it, the Fire's GM/owner is mad that Laurier traded 3 players to EZC, then had a trade to them retracted (for whatever reason).

Seems like what likely happened is he decided to get rid of his team, found a good home for his guys first, then started trading/releasing other players.

Sounds a bit like sour grapes, and a bit selfish. But what do I care? I'm just trying to win a few games.

Originally posted by REDBOSOX
Originally posted by tomcollins

The worst thing you can do for a new owner is to release everyone and leave the pantry bare and no cash in the bank. The best thing for the owner is to keep everyone around. However, that might be the worst option for the players on the team. One option is to redo everyones contract to expire at the end of this season. That way if the new owner does a good job, he can retain a lot of people. If he sucks, then the players aren't stuck for long.

Trading people for cash is reasonable since it allows the new owner something to try to get talent on the team.

Now THAT's a good idea! Tom is a man of infinite wisdom.

I Disagree. I currently have a DE on Laurier, and my contract runs out in 4 days. I've been playing it out, so I can go to a friends team when it does. To have that converted to end of the season would annoy me, as I've done the right thing and played out the contract, instead of pestering for a release. Regardless of who the new owner is, or how good he is, it'd just be a poor situation for my player, and for my friends team who have a gap saved for me

Originally posted by Drokmar
Originally posted by REDBOSOX

Originally posted by tomcollins


The worst thing you can do for a new owner is to release everyone and leave the pantry bare and no cash in the bank. The best thing for the owner is to keep everyone around. However, that might be the worst option for the players on the team. One option is to redo everyones contract to expire at the end of this season. That way if the new owner does a good job, he can retain a lot of people. If he sucks, then the players aren't stuck for long.

Trading people for cash is reasonable since it allows the new owner something to try to get talent on the team.

Now THAT's a good idea! Tom is a man of infinite wisdom.

I Disagree. I currently have a DE on Laurier, and my contract runs out in 4 days. I've been playing it out, so I can go to a friends team when it does. To have that converted to end of the season would annoy me, as I've done the right thing and played out the contract, instead of pestering for a release. Regardless of who the new owner is, or how good he is, it'd just be a poor situation for my player, and for my friends team who have a gap saved for me

If your contract ends in 4 days, it still should. Anyone who has a longer contract should have the option to leave after this season. I would never recommend someone being forced to stay LONGER than their original contract.

It absolutely is sour grapes. I'm not going to deny that. But aside from my emotional outburst, (I will not ever gut this team) I don't see how anyone would throw the negative PR hit at the Fire opposed to new EZC/KenScott partnership.

Ken did find a new home for his players, and it just happened to be the Championship favorite. That in itself is not really all that shady of a deal. He also moved the majority of his team to destinations of their choosing, allowing them to accept deals, which again is not ideal, but not that shady.

What he did recently, is allow me to PM an agent on his team, present my bid for them to come to the Fire, he clearly received the agent's blessing, and then made the trade to the fire.

That immediately facilitated the release of one of my players, the trade of another, and the near trading of two others. (Fortunately I discovered the trade retraction in time, it was NOT emailed to me, I found it on a whim when I checked my trade offer page.)

He then made a post that claimed a mod contacted him and made him change his mind about the gutting of the team, and retracted the offer after the acceptance retraction period, and said it wasn't right to move all the players, but keeping his deal with EZ in place, and all the previous deals.

How am I not supposed to be upset about this? Obviously I can't get too mad at Savage for making his team better, I always thought Ken was a good owner and wished the best for him, and if this wasn't his doing, I can't get too mad at him either, but if a mod stepped in and ordered or made these changes without Ken's approval, then I'll direct my anger to that mod and his superior.

If the change was made by Ken, then I absolutely am furious.

All pending trades from today were retracted and there is a CPU owner now. I don't know if he cancelled them or the Mods stepped in. He was sending his QB to a team I'm on in Africa so that owner traded his lower level QB to my gutted pro team. Now that all Laurier pending trades were cancelled, the Africa team needs to keep that QB but our trade can't be cancelled, what a mess!

I just want to get a response as to what is going to happen. If I find out its the wrong solution, or if it takes to long, I will seriously be angered to the point I will stop spending money on thsi website, and perhaps just to piss everyone off, gut my own team and leave.