To sway or not to sway? That is the question.

Discussion in 'The Experience' started by jello1717, Jan 28, 2012.

?

Should we change the rules and NOT allow ANYONE to be swayed, or stick with our current rules?

  1. No more sways for ANYONE

    81.8%
  2. Continue with our current rules where can sway anyone EXCEPT for 90+, and guys that won an award

    18.2%
  1. jello1717

    jello1717 "Those who stay will be champions." -- Bo

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2009
    Messages:
    13,617
    See poll.
     
  2. Masler

    Masler Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2009
    Messages:
    12,961
    Im going for no sways AT ALL. This will prevent stat whoring as well if you want to keep your players all 4 years ;)
     
    Last edited: Jan 28, 2012
  3. Big Suge Knight

    Big Suge Knight Walk On

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2009
    Messages:
    6,237
    Featured Threads:
    1
    Nicely done (y)
     
  4. jello1717

    jello1717 "Those who stay will be champions." -- Bo

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2009
    Messages:
    13,617
    Then make your vote!
     
  5. Masler

    Masler Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2009
    Messages:
    12,961
    Yeah yeah I thought that would work.
     
  6. UofCWildcat

    UofCWildcat Bear Down!

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2011
    Messages:
    8,580
    I wanted to say stick with our old rule but i see the reasoning for the no swaying. But i think we should go to that stage anyway cause i wanna know who the fucking is ditching the Zona Zoo
     
  7. dakota7

    dakota7 Former Blue Chip Recruit

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2009
    Messages:
    12,443
    The one exception I might put in there would be players who try to transfer to another user. We should be able to fight amongst ourselves.
     
  8. Big Suge Knight

    Big Suge Knight Walk On

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2009
    Messages:
    6,237
    Featured Threads:
    1
    Since there is that sporadic error that randomly prevents users from being able to sway players I'd say no swaying period.
     
  9. GoGators

    GoGators GT: KSherm

    Joined:
    May 19, 2009
    Messages:
    7,893
    I agree with you here, but Suge's counter point is better. It's not really fair that some get to talk back transfers while others don't. We should strive for competitive balance here and that's one way to achieve it with the product we're playing with.
     
  10. GoGators

    GoGators GT: KSherm

    Joined:
    May 19, 2009
    Messages:
    7,893
    My vote was the swing vote to push us to 7. The 99% have spoken.
     
  11. GoGators

    GoGators GT: KSherm

    Joined:
    May 19, 2009
    Messages:
    7,893
    Also, like I posted in the other thread. Hopefully this will have a two-fold effect by helping take care of the redshirt issue as well.

    I think next year we need to start and be ultra-aggressive with the rules. No talk backs, limit redshirting, limit 5 stars etc. Then, if the CPU is out pacing us, we can soften the rules. Same with gameplay. I'm tired of seeing the CPU become completely irrelevant by season 6.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  12. dakota7

    dakota7 Former Blue Chip Recruit

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2009
    Messages:
    12,443
    Good point.
     
  13. blLL flo

    blLL flo BTFU!

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2009
    Messages:
    2,655
    Should we consider allowing teams to make an additional cut if they are bombarded with guys leaving and have to end up taking a walk-on or shit player because of need?

    For example, right now I only have 65 guys on my roster because 4 guys left without being able to be swayed (would have been 5 under new rule). I didn't sign any crap players after that because we can only cut 1 guy and I don't want people taking roster spots if I can sign better players the next year.

    Also, for players transferring to other user teams. If the receiving team does not want the player, I think we should allow the team who currently has him to try and sway him back if he is just going to be cut by his new team.
     
  14. dakota7

    dakota7 Former Blue Chip Recruit

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2009
    Messages:
    12,443
    I agree with that. Any walk-on should be cut.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  15. GoGators

    GoGators GT: KSherm

    Joined:
    May 19, 2009
    Messages:
    7,893
    I guess I'm not understanding what you're saying. Currently we are required to cut all players that are added to our team that we didn't recruit (CPU added scholarship guys and walk-ons). The only time we would be required to keep walk ons is if we needed one of them to meet a position requirement.
     
  16. dakota7

    dakota7 Former Blue Chip Recruit

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2009
    Messages:
    12,443
    I think bill means that if your SS goes pro, and you are forced to sign a 1 star shitty SS to fill a "need", then the following year you should be able to cut him.
     
    Last edited: Jan 29, 2012
  17. Masler

    Masler Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2009
    Messages:
    12,961
    Should we be allowed to try to keep underclassmen from transferring?
     
  18. JCspartan2

    JCspartan2 Sparty Party

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2009
    Messages:
    4,967
    I'd agree with this.
     

Share This Page