Warrior General Games

as a former owner and still a player, I would love not only this but to allow the coordinator to be able to change my tactics if I allow

with so many players it is a pain to check and change tactics all the time - why would any OL give a shit whether they got switched from run to pass block focus?

Originally posted by alindyl

If one side or the other is so disagreeable that things have to go to the point of someone being removed from depth then it's better to find this out and get on a different team.


I believe you and I aren't on the same page here. I'm concerned about if there are 2 open attribute builds that are relatively equal, and one of them has their tactics open while the other doesn't, the open tactics will be used as a tie-breaker to determine the starter. I'm not saying they'll be removed from the DC, I know that's not going to really happen at all. But I believe it will be used to determine the starter/backup to some degree.

When I set my current team's DC, and if I have 2 players of similar caliber, one having an open build while the other has a closed build, I'll start the one with an open build. A similar concept will apply with tactics.

You may bring claims that you or other agents keep their builds closed and still play on teams. But I am no widely known agent nor am I a household name. I can't sign with any team in free agency and have a closed build, because people have no idea who I am and how I build my dots. Why should I presume that I will be able to find a team with closed tactics then? What will make me feel that having open tactics won't become just as mandatory as having an open build?

Originally posted by dbreeze
You haven't even been following the thread. All of your imagined issues have already been addressed ad nauseum.
You haven't checked my background before making accusations but I can see that you've boosted only maybe a half dozen dots to completion for as long as you've been in the game. A page full of lolGM teams.....
Go away kid. Your fear of boogeymen is gettin' in my way. If you can't handle the big boy games then go find a nursery to play in.


i love how i'm a kid. i would love to be 30 years younger. i find dot building extremely boring so i only build dots when people ask me to build for their team. my lolgm are almost all ST related i have a great st reputation for a reason, but i bow down to someone with a whooping TWO team trophies and a dozen players. and feel free to continue to talk out of your ass so that the mods will close this bad idea of a suggestion. as for imagined issues, every one listed is something that i have seen done on teams. these are not imagined unfortunately.

why the hell would i need to do a background check on you ? i never accused you of any thing. perhaps you should unbind your panties and READ the words and stop assuming that what is said. i never said that YOU were the bad owner. whether you are a good or bad owner is irreverent to topic. the fact is that there ARE lots of bad owners out there. if you fall into that category, fine, if you dont fall into that category, equally fine. but stop saying that they dont exist. there's a reason that allowing owners to control tactics is ngth and this falls under the same reasoning.

Originally posted by Guppy, Inc
the fact is that there ARE lots of bad owners out there. if you fall into that category, fine, if you dont fall into that category, equally fine. but stop saying that they dont exist. there's a reason that allowing owners to control tactics is ngth and this falls under the same reasoning.

Well said.

Originally posted by Guppy, Inc
i love how i'm a kid. i would love to be 30 years younger. i find dot building extremely boring so i only build dots when people ask me to build for their team. my lolgm are almost all ST related i have a great st reputation for a reason, but i bow down to someone with a whooping TWO team trophies and a dozen players. and feel free to continue to talk out of your ass so that the mods will close this bad idea of a suggestion. as for imagined issues, every one listed is something that i have seen done on teams. these are not imagined unfortunately.

why the hell would i need to do a background check on you ? i never accused you of any thing. perhaps you should unbind your panties and READ the words and stop assuming that what is said. i never said that YOU were the bad owner. whether you are a good or bad owner is irreverent to topic. the fact is that there ARE lots of bad owners out there. if you fall into that category, fine, if you dont fall into that category, equally fine. but stop saying that they dont exist. there's a reason that allowing owners to control tactics is ngth and this falls under the same reasoning.

So your almost as old as I am and you still don't even understand the damn suggestion. Nor can you count trophies or players. No wonder I'm getting hot under the collar.....

No one is suggesting that the owners should control the tactics and the coercion angle is just unfounded. Still not 1 damn name of an owner who'll bench a player!

Just let those of us who can handle it open our tactics for viewing if we want to. You want your stuff hidden... fine. I might want mine open. So does the great majority here.

I'm done here, got too much else to do, I've made my arguments for the suggestion and there's plenty of great reasoning available here for anyone who will consider the issues. Nothing left but for users to cast their votes and Bort to decide what customer base he desires as the game goes forward. If he ain't figured it out yet, he ain't gonna please everyone. Just gotta do what any of your old coaches would do Bort... that's FOOTBALL!

Originally posted by jetsown09
Originally posted by alindyl


If one side or the other is so disagreeable that things have to go to the point of someone being removed from depth then it's better to find this out and get on a different team.


I believe you and I aren't on the same page here. I'm concerned about if there are 2 open attribute builds that are relatively equal, and one of them has their tactics open while the other doesn't, the open tactics will be used as a tie-breaker to determine the starter. I'm not saying they'll be removed from the DC, I know that's not going to really happen at all. But I believe it will be used to determine the starter/backup to some degree.


Starter/backup really doesn't mean anything in GLB though. Every team I have ever had dots on plays their backups as much as their starters so who starts is not really an issue.

Originally posted by merenoise
Originally posted by jetsown09

Originally posted by alindyl



If one side or the other is so disagreeable that things have to go to the point of someone being removed from depth then it's better to find this out and get on a different team.


I believe you and I aren't on the same page here. I'm concerned about if there are 2 open attribute builds that are relatively equal, and one of them has their tactics open while the other doesn't, the open tactics will be used as a tie-breaker to determine the starter. I'm not saying they'll be removed from the DC, I know that's not going to really happen at all. But I believe it will be used to determine the starter/backup to some degree.


Starter/backup really doesn't mean anything in GLB though. Every team I have ever had dots on plays their backups as much as their starters so who starts is not really an issue.

Only significance that starters have these days over backups, is that a specific build type may be used as a starter so that when "force starters" is used, the desired build type is in place..... unfortunately, force starters cannot be utilized on a per-position basis, which is another excellent suggestion that has been recently proposed. http://goallineblitz.com/game/forum_thread.pl?thread_id=4904961

support the idea of owners being able to see everything,i also would be open for coordinators to do the same.

Originally posted by Ken1
"Accountability" will mean coercion from many owners-- maybe not you, but many. True freedom is being able to set tactics without "accountability."

Just find another team. That way the winning teams can have players willing to show their tactics and the agents who like to keep things secret can move to the losing teams. Oh wait, it is already that way. This would just make it easier on everyone and get rid of a thread that asks everyone what their tactics are on and wastes everyone's time.

+1 to OP

Originally posted by merenoise
Starter/backup really doesn't mean anything in GLB though. Every team I have ever had dots on plays their backups as much as their starters so who starts is not really an issue.

Maybe you have, but I as well as the majority of the GLB population have not. Every team I've been on plays the starters more than the backups. Hence why they are called "starters". My own team plays starters more than backups and I've done that every single season I've coached. Starting is a big concern for many agents in the recruiting process. If this suggestion is added, some people may be unfairly placed as backup simply because their tactics are closed. That is a very probable outcome.

It won't be unfairly, though. They are playing for a team. The team owner/co-ordinators want to know what tactics their players are using, even if for nothing else than to work out if any fault lies in their playcalling/DPC plays or in the player tactics. So if they were placed as a backup (for whatever difference that makes), that would only be natural, since not knowing the player tactics makes the co-ordinator's job that bit harder. And agents want their teams to play well, right? That only helps their cause, surely?

Originally posted by jetsown09
Maybe you have, but I as well as the majority of the GLB population have not. Every team I've been on plays the starters more than the backups. Hence why they are called "starters". My own team plays starters more than backups and I've done that every single season I've coached. Starting is a big concern for many agents in the recruiting process. If this suggestion is added, some people may be unfairly placed as backup simply because their tactics are closed. That is a very probable outcome.

i dont know if its the majority, but i still know too many teams that dont use 98/99 for their energy setting. makes sense if the starter is substantially better, but i see starters and backups that are virtually identical, but the backup is relegated to fewer snaps and a bunch of ST. its one of the criteria i look at when someone asks for help doing ST. i dont want to be responsible for someone with a good dot mostly only playing ST.

Originally posted by merenoise
Starter/backup really doesn't mean anything in GLB though. Every team I have ever had dots on plays their backups as much as their starters so who starts is not really an issue.

For not stupid owners, yeah.

Dumb owners throw all the backups on special teams, which gets them about 15 special team plays and nothing else.

Dumb owners=dumb owners, though, right? With or without tactics sharing.

Originally posted by dbreeze
No one is suggesting that the owners should control the tactics and the coercion angle is just unfounded. Still not 1 damn name of an owner who'll bench a player!

STFU on this pretense of yours that owners won't bench or otherwise penalize players for not showing their tactics.

You're saying, "Make yourself a permanent GLB enemy by naming an owner who will bench a player for not showing his tactics" (which no one can know for sure, anyway) or I'm going to insist that there are none."

I call BS.

I'll name myself as a coordinator and former (long ago) owner that has benched players that didn't show their attributes, and would show preference, as a coordinator, for those who showed their tactics over those who didn't.

I can point to a number of posts in this thread that take a derogatory view towards agents who wouldn't show their players' tactics. Do you think those guys' playing time wouldn't be affected? No you don't. You're full of BS when you pretend that there would be no pressure to show one's tactics.