Points Cap, Query, Discussion, Debate

[Nige]

I do agree with ele that the BXVs method of trade approvals is great. I think it works the best.

In regards to those on the committee not taking into account the state of team lists... I think it's suffice to say I think whoever would in fact be on the committee would be competent and genuine enough to consider team lists as well as the talent involved in regards to the deal. 

[Jay]

I do agree with ele that the BXVs method of trade approvals is great. I think it works the best.

In regards to those on the committee not taking into account the state of team lists... I think it's suffice to say I think whoever would in fact be on the committee would be competent and genuine enough to consider team lists as well as the talent involved in regards to the deal.

I'm all for it as long as we find absolute stars to be on the committee. :)

Would be stoked if we could get a system similar to that running in WXV!

[Master Q]

It's fine how it is Jay.

You just seem a little butthurt  :P

If a trade gets negged when it improves both the lists of the teams involved then there is something wrong with the voting system.

Yep, definitely butthurt.

[nrich102]

#BXVisBest4trading :P

[Vinny]

#BXVisBest4trading :P

Yep! No cap and 10 movements of 2 periods to be used at any time. Only thing we need is to get rid of 1 for 1 trading for more freedom.

[Jay]

It's fine how it is Jay.

You just seem a little butthurt  :P

If a trade gets negged when it improves both the lists of the teams involved then there is something wrong with the voting system.

Yep, definitely butthurt.

No, I honestly think the system is not right atm.

[Holz]

#BXVisBest4trading :P

Yep! No cap and 10 movements of 2 periods to be used at any time. Only thing we need is to get rid of 1 for 1 trading for more freedom.

euro 10 movements max of 6 in one period, no one for one trading.

[Vinny]

Thats good as. When we get rid of one for one , BXV will be better cause we have unlimited movements for the period out of our 10. :P

[DazBurg]

i think it's fine the way it is
i mean how many of you are in 2 or more of the comps?

my point being is they all offer their own differences to keep it different otherwise change it and make them like each other but reall y don't think there's any point of you keeping more then 1 team :P

[Nige]

i think it's fine the way it is
i mean how many of you are in 2 or more of the comps?

my point being is they all offer their own differences to keep it different otherwise change it and make them like each other but reall y don't think there's any point of you keeping more then 1 team :P

Fairly sure half the coaches in Worlds are haha.  :P

[Purple 77]

i think it's fine the way it is
i mean how many of you are in 2 or more of the comps?

my point being is they all offer their own differences to keep it different otherwise change it and make them like each other but reall y don't think there's any point of you keeping more then 1 team :P

Fairly sure half the coaches in Worlds are haha.  :P

Not me! And proud of it  ;)

Me having only one team makes up for me being a sole coach when it comes to community sharing.

I have no problems with the current system. I haven't had a trade negged in all of the two years at the helm of the Brewers

[nrich102]

The rule is - If 6 or more coaches vote against it, it is blocked. I'm against coaches voting on if a trade should pass, but it should be at least a majority who god against it, not just 6.

[ossie85]

The rule is - If 6 or more coaches vote against it, it is blocked. I'm against coaches voting on if a trade should pass, but it should be at least a majority who god against it, not just 6.

16 coaches vote (assuming only 2 involved the trade).

As my vote is worth 3...  6+3=9, which is a 'majority'.

Also the other way, if 8 coaches vote against it, I can reduce it to pass....


I like giving coaches some say! I don't want to be Andy D :P

[Holz]

The rule is - If 6 or more coaches vote against it, it is blocked. I'm against coaches voting on if a trade should pass, but it should be at least a majority who god against it, not just 6.

16 coaches vote (assuming only 2 involved the trade).

As my vote is worth 3...  6+3=9, which is a 'majority'.

Also the other way, if 8 coaches vote against it, I can reduce it to pass....


I like giving coaches some say! I don't want to be Andy D :P

I definately have no issue with that system, while it may have cuased a few trades that should have gone through to be rejected a vast majority of the rejected trades are within reason, I know from experience its impossible to make a rule that everyone is happy with.

the only isssue for me is the injured players in the cap, the rule will actually hurt me next year when im over the cap. With the current rule i will just pick up injured players and still have a strong team.

[Toga]

The only problem I have with the system is the way in which people's opinions on the value of draft picks varies so much.

Some people rate draft picks super high, which causes confusion as to why trades get negged... Not sure how this can be improved though.