|
|
Post by Retired Ducks GM on Dec 20, 2012 5:15:26 GMT -5
Revisiting the archives, I miss this site. I would love to see this site reach its former glory again. And from what I have seen, there has been a bit of discussion about stagnation and a restart. A lot of people seemed interested in restarting the league to renew everyone's waning interest.
What do we think, boys?
|
|
|
|
Post by Pittsburgh Penguins GM on Dec 20, 2012 5:48:15 GMT -5
still tons of interest
|
|
|
|
Post by Retired Ducks GM on Dec 20, 2012 6:01:56 GMT -5
This thread strongly implied most members were ready for a change.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Admin Account on Dec 20, 2012 6:40:37 GMT -5
Well this certainly came out of left field.
As I said in that thread Former Ducks posted, if the majority of people actually wanted to restart the entire league for some reason then I wouldn't stand in the way of that. That doesn't change the fact though that I really have no desire (or time) to build another team up from scratch again and go through the various logistical issues of going back to square one, so if a majority did want thisto occur, I would be stepping aside and handing over the reigns to Phoenix and/or whoever wants to take my position.
I would rather leave things as is obviously because I love this league just the way it is, and considering how long we've lasted with relatively no issues whatsoever, I don't think the need is there for anything this drastic. As a result, I'm not sure why this still occasionally gets brought up (especially in this case, from someone who hasn't been a GM here since 2009).
As for the above suggestion that we need to recapture our "former glory," I was unaware we had lost it. And as Yotes noted, there doesn't appear to be any merit to the "waning interest" argument either.
|
|
|
|
Post by Retired Ducks GM on Dec 20, 2012 7:00:03 GMT -5
Long story short, I was asking around if I should come back here when a team became free, and about 4 different people said it would be pointless because the 5 best teams never move their best players, so the league was stagnant. When I saw Pittsburgh still had Ovechkin and Crosby from, as you say, my day in 2009, I figured there may be some merit to this argument. Looking into it more, I saw the epicly long suggestion about changing something, and it never looked resolved. No vote ever seemed to be posted. So, I figured, let's resolve it.
If people don't want a full restart (which would be the simplest thing to do), I have suggestions for keeping things changing so key players are not locked up for 4 more real-life years (such as putting a limit on the number of times you can protect a specific player, etc). But what I am hearing generally, which makes me sad, is that teams who are not staff feel as though staff (except PHX) have locked up key talent making the league redundant.
When I told these members to post a poll, they said, "You are on there as a Hall of Famer, why don't you do it." So I called them cowards, and did exactly that. But I guess since they would be essentially calling out admins on a site, I can see why they would be reluctant to stir the pot.
Anyways, just figured I would toss this out there. Since I don't have a team right now (since I think you are full), I obviously won't be voting to keep it fair.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pittsburgh Penguins GM on Dec 20, 2012 7:21:56 GMT -5
People get frustrated from time to time and go out and make there own leagues to get something different for a year or two before those leagues fold and there interest comes right back to here again. This site has become a chat site for alot of us over the years as well as a sim site. Everytime somebody is looking for help somewhere, I usually am able to help them to keep there interest. With getting 6 to 7 season's done a year on here people can rebuild a team very fast if they choose to.
|
|
|
|
Post by Retired Ducks GM on Dec 20, 2012 7:24:05 GMT -5
Just going by what I heard from actual active GMs from here. Hence the poll.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mike - Former Wild GM on Dec 20, 2012 7:26:14 GMT -5
I'm glad the league is full, but just because it's full doesn't mean everything is perfect. I got bored of the site and barely did much with my Hawks team when I realized I'd only be able to make moves through the auctions and then lose most of the players I liked due to the keeper anyways, and the top picks in the draft were the same guys over and over. Would definitely also refresh the site if you make legends the top picks so that teams whose best players are rated 83s can still improve and not remain in perpetual purgatory. And you have some excellent, dedicated members I think a change could be fun and would be embraced. People shouldn't threaten to quit the site, especially an admin, because people had a debate on how to refresh things. Might be a good time to make a left turn for a bit. Nothing is permanent, but it definitely keeps the excitement going  |
|
|
|
Post by Retired Ducks GM on Dec 20, 2012 7:28:05 GMT -5
I got bored of the site and barely did much with my Hawks team when I realized I'd only be able to make moves through the auctions and then lose most of the players I liked due to the keeper anyways, and the top picks in the draft were the same guys over and over. Would definitely also refresh the site if you make legends the top picks so that teams whose best players are rated 83s can still improve and not remain in perpetual purgatory. Although the above poster was not one of the 4 active PMs I talked to from this league, these sentiments quoted here are exactly what the other 4 echoed to me when I inquired about this site. |
|
|
|
Post by Pittsburgh Penguins GM on Dec 20, 2012 7:39:12 GMT -5
There is a new league starting up right now with basicaly the same style if people want to try a restart. We would loose 4 or 5 long standings members to change now, as they are too busy with Univerisity.
|
|
|
|
Post by Wynne - Retired Flyers GM on Dec 20, 2012 7:39:28 GMT -5
I'm glad the league is full, but just because it's full doesn't mean everything is perfect. I got bored of the site and barely did much with my Hawks team when I realized I'd only be able to make moves through the auctions and then lose most of the players I liked due to the keeper anyways, and the top picks in the draft were the same guys over and over. Would definitely also refresh the site if you make legends the top picks so that teams whose best players are rated 83s can still improve and not remain in perpetual purgatory. And you have some excellent, dedicated members I think a change could be fun and would be embraced. People shouldn't threaten to quit the site, especially an admin, because people had a debate on how to refresh things. Might be a good time to make a left turn for a bit. Nothing is permanent, but it definitely keeps the excitement going We have the same arguments on this everytime a restart is brought up. Sure you could do that, give them an easy way out, but then you will be back square when when said team trades their top guy away for depth. Yotes changes up his team just about every season, trading superstars for depth, vice versa, and helping the bottom feeders get top guys, only to see them trade the superstar away for what they originally began with. |
|
|
|
Post by Retired Ducks GM on Dec 20, 2012 7:48:43 GMT -5
We have the same arguments on this everytime a restart is brought up. Sure you could do that, give them an easy way out, but then you will be back square when when said team trades their top guy away for depth. Yotes changes up his team just about every season, trading superstars for depth, vice versa, and helping the bottom feeders get top guys, only to see them trade the superstar away for what they originally began with. This is exactly what the members tell me comes up every time. And it sounds to me, the objective outsider, like the "Haves" telling the "Have-Nots" it's their fault their teams are weak. Yet the "Haves" started with teams like Detroit, Pittsburgh, Philadelphia, etc. Has anyone ever had a problem building THOSE teams into winners? Especially Pittsburgh, which is a sure-thing on any EA NHL game sim site. So if someone new comes to this site, they will literally never get a chance in hell at Crosby, Ovechkin, or anyone else good because of the keeper system. Though designed to share the wealth, it really just ensures that the ELITE wealth stays where it is, and the medium talent moves all over the place. Again, just echoing the sentiments of those too afraid to speak out against the "Haves" in this league, as people have been banned from here for speaking out against them. |
|
|
|
Post by Pittsburgh Penguins GM on Dec 20, 2012 7:53:42 GMT -5
I could trade away my whole team and build a playoff team from just the players in draft every year. The players are there to do it and I have usually sent a PM out to every new teams letting them know that I am here to help them and there are zero stupid questions. I will guide them and them turn a team into a contender. But yes I have on many occasions traded higher rated players to bad teams to only have them move then for same depth type players they once had.
|
|
|
|
Post by New York Islanders GM on Dec 20, 2012 7:54:21 GMT -5
We have the same arguments on this everytime a restart is brought up. Sure you could do that, give them an easy way out, but then you will be back square when when said team trades their top guy away for depth. Yotes changes up his team just about every season, trading superstars for depth, vice versa, and helping the bottom feeders get top guys, only to see them trade the superstar away for what they originally began with. This is exactly what the members tell me comes up every time. And it sounds to me, the objective outsider, like the "Haves" telling the "Have-Nots" it's their fault their teams are weak. Yet the "Haves" started with teams like Detroit, Pittsburgh, Philadelphia, etc. Has anyone ever had a problem building THOSE teams into winners? Especially Pittsburgh, which is a sure-thing on any EA NHL game sim site. So if someone new comes to this site, they will literally never get a chance in hell at Crosby, Ovechkin, or anyone else good because of the keeper system. Though designed to share the wealth, it really just ensures that the ELITE wealth stays where it is, and the medium talent moves all over the place. Again, just echoing the sentiments of those too afraid to speak out against the "Haves" in this league, as people have been banned from here for speaking out against them. I've build two seperate teams into Stanley Cup champions in 2 season here, one in which my best player was Bill Guerin 79 when I got them. Mind you a 79 had more value then compared to now. Nucks did the same, and the Wild did as well. Could you see why I'm not sold on the idea on giving a member who rarely came on in the past 3 years Wayne Gretzky for depth in which I would just lose? |
|
|
|
Post by Wynne - Retired Flyers GM on Dec 20, 2012 7:54:53 GMT -5
Agreed, obviously it's easier when you start with a top team, but at season 26, and I think the 3rd different NHL game, I don't see that as an excuse anymore. Sure some teams will still suck at this point, that's because nobody has taken care of them.
And I partially agree with the elite wealth staying put, but at the same time, how many leagues that last a long amount of time have Ovechkin or Crosby moving to every team every other season?
We've got probably over 50 legends, minimum rating 87 on all of them I think, they aren't the hardest to get. You'll be hard pressed to get a team to move a big named guy, like a Crosby, Ovechkin, Giroux, etc. but for the most part, it's the legends that seem to be better producers.
|
|
