• 1 Vote(s) - 5 Average
Team Moving
#11
Nick,

I have to agree with you, the only way it would work if owners were involved that were in it for the long haul. I would probably take it a step further and say that for anyone to be considered for an expansion team, they would need to serve as a co-gm to a team in the league for at least 1 full season. This would help in 2 fold, 1, it would help them familiarize them with the league (rules, players, etc) and 2, it would enable us to qualify the candidate.

Jordan,

Yeah, you got the gist of what I was going at. I would not be totally against expansion if it was done properly. If we get two owners that run another 2 teams in the ground, then we could have some issues.
#12
I don't like expansion because I always found it was hard to have 30 good owners, finding another 2 are even harder.
#13
Any news on this suggestion :o
#14
Personally I don't like expansion in leagues or teams moving. It's hard enough to find owners. Sure we are really solid now but what about when teh new version comes out or the next version after that. I'd liek to think we would still have evryone here but that's unlikley. Theres only so many actve people to go around. With moving I don't like it because it changes financials drastically. All of a sudden people are moving into the rigged markets. The less teams we have like the yankees or even boston caliber the better as far as financials go. Unless there are some strct rules on where people can move I don't see this working. I mean some teams could move to a spot where the increase there budet by 100% like if you move to New Hampshire.
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »

Users browsing this thread: 5 Guest(s)



Forum Jump: