ironman leagues would be so much more fun than other types of leagues which are getting somewhat boring
PatsFan94
offline
offline
Originally posted by Guppy, Inc
ironman leagues would be so much more fun than other types of leagues which are getting somewhat boring
Yeah iron man leagues would pretty much the require the most strategy of the leagues (assuming they use advanced AI)
ironman leagues would be so much more fun than other types of leagues which are getting somewhat boring
Yeah iron man leagues would pretty much the require the most strategy of the leagues (assuming they use advanced AI)
didymus
offline
offline
Originally posted by seayjoel
Originally posted by didymus
There is nothing really bad about this idea.
But do we really need 17 different kinds of leagues at GLB?
Not that big a deal. I mean Pee-wee and D-league are pretty irrelevant to any other type of league in terms of the players that sign. So you then all you get is Normal, Casual, and Iron Man
and then...and then...
Originally posted by didymus
There is nothing really bad about this idea.
But do we really need 17 different kinds of leagues at GLB?
Not that big a deal. I mean Pee-wee and D-league are pretty irrelevant to any other type of league in terms of the players that sign. So you then all you get is Normal, Casual, and Iron Man
and then...and then...
shimmer
offline
offline
definitely a +1 from me. I would love to build players for this. there would no longer be all of these cookie cutter builds designed for one purpose
Originally posted by didymus
Originally posted by seayjoel
Originally posted by didymus
There is nothing really bad about this idea.
But do we really need 17 different kinds of leagues at GLB?
Not that big a deal. I mean Pee-wee and D-league are pretty irrelevant to any other type of league in terms of the players that sign. So you then all you get is Normal, Casual, and Iron Man
and then...and then...
And then? I haven't really seen many posts about other types of leagues in the suggestions thread, much less 17 of them. And it's not like you would be forced to join an alternative league.
Originally posted by seayjoel
Originally posted by didymus
There is nothing really bad about this idea.
But do we really need 17 different kinds of leagues at GLB?
Not that big a deal. I mean Pee-wee and D-league are pretty irrelevant to any other type of league in terms of the players that sign. So you then all you get is Normal, Casual, and Iron Man
and then...and then...
And then? I haven't really seen many posts about other types of leagues in the suggestions thread, much less 17 of them. And it's not like you would be forced to join an alternative league.
blitz2670
offline
offline
Originally posted by shimmer
definitely a +1 from me. I would love to build players for this. there would no longer be all of these cookie cutter builds designed for one purpose
I Agree 100%, would be interesting to see how many of the players turn out. I'd definately be in for this.
definitely a +1 from me. I would love to build players for this. there would no longer be all of these cookie cutter builds designed for one purpose
I Agree 100%, would be interesting to see how many of the players turn out. I'd definately be in for this.
Kissinger
offline
offline
Originally posted by blitz2670
Originally posted by shimmer
definitely a +1 from me. I would love to build players for this. there would no longer be all of these cookie cutter builds designed for one purpose
I Agree 100%, would be interesting to see how many of the players turn out. I'd definately be in for this.
This.
Originally posted by shimmer
definitely a +1 from me. I would love to build players for this. there would no longer be all of these cookie cutter builds designed for one purpose
I Agree 100%, would be interesting to see how many of the players turn out. I'd definately be in for this.
This.
I guess we can only assume that someone, somewhere has determined that this idea would be bad for business? (fewer players per team; lower flex purchases; lower profits for the company)
Originally posted by TxSteve
I guess we can only assume that someone, somewhere has determined that this idea would be bad for business? (fewer players per team; lower flex purchases; lower profits for the company)
I'm not even willing to assume anyone has read it
I guess we can only assume that someone, somewhere has determined that this idea would be bad for business? (fewer players per team; lower flex purchases; lower profits for the company)
I'm not even willing to assume anyone has read it
Sour
offline
offline
Originally posted by haole
Originally posted by TxSteve
I guess we can only assume that someone, somewhere has determined that this idea would be bad for business? (fewer players per team; lower flex purchases; lower profits for the company)
I'm not even willing to assume anyone has read it
never assume it makes and ASS out of U and ME
nice one from the big book of terrible cliches there!
Originally posted by TxSteve
I guess we can only assume that someone, somewhere has determined that this idea would be bad for business? (fewer players per team; lower flex purchases; lower profits for the company)
I'm not even willing to assume anyone has read it
never assume it makes and ASS out of U and ME
nice one from the big book of terrible cliches there!
You are not logged in. Please log in if you want to post a reply.
