![[DEV] ISFL Forums](http://dev.sim-football.com/forums/images/emerald/logo.png "[DEV] ISFL Forums"){kind=logo}
+- [DEV] ISFL Forums (http://dev.sim-football.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Community (http://dev.sim-football.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=5)
+--- Forum: Media (http://dev.sim-football.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=37)
+---- Forum: Graded Articles (http://dev.sim-football.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=38)
+---- Thread: *PMoney's take on Money (/showthread.php?tid=21710)
*PMoney's take on Money - PMoney - 04-27-2020
Recently, probably due to the historic draft class of S22, there seems to have been more talk about contracts and the role they play in the league. Many people (myself included) take minimum contracts in order to help out the team. This is ideal for teams as they need to worry less about cap constraints, and most players don’t really care about how much they make in contracts as most of their money comes through other means, e.g. Media, GFX, league jobs. All money ends up in the same giant pile in the bank spreadsheet and negotiating a higher contract doesn’t feel worthwhile.
The lack of importance to contracts also means there is virtually no reason to test Free Agency. Most non-simulation players test free agency because of the higher potential money they may get, even if it means uprooting their life and moving across the country. While moving to a different discord locker room isn’t quite as big a deal, leaving behind teammates and friends isn’t an appealing situation for a lot of people, for very little reward. Free Agency doesn’t feel like an important stage of the season, a couple of people changed teams, but that was partially to move from struggling teams. While a perfectly valid reason, it doesn’t help the development of all teams in the league on an equal level. Having less high-end players to pay and therefore more to spend, is a way Non-Sim teams can bounce back or improve.
A league lacking true free agency also makes team building less of an issue. Players can retire from their team and recreate at an appropriate time to fill positions of need and the plan for a roster can be set out seasons in advance. Loss of players and potential to pick up new ones would make this a more dynamic process. The expansion draft this season was exciting as teams had to adapt to a change in personnel that wasn’t calculated several months ago.
One big problem with money is the bank accounts only really show the longevity of a user and how often they pump out media or how many league jobs they have. @infinitempg’s article on wealth distribution alludes to this with the richest users being long term users massively dwarfing what you would consider a standard active user. Money also has no real concept to these people anymore. Even if @IsaStarcrossed made no money from now on, including having $0 contracts, with a season taking roughly 7 weeks, he could pay for training and Tier 6 equipment for over 25 seasons, more than 2 full players or the entire history of the league. When you include inevitable contract money and league job pay for his roles, money will never be a real consideration. This isn’t to discredit the amount of money Isa (or any top end user) has made, he deserves it all for all the work he’s put into the league. It does however mean that negotiating a higher contract (admittedly with himself at this point) would be of no real benefit.
You don’t want to force players to do anything, being happy at your current team and trying to help them win is not a problem, but currently it feels like the default in the league. Below I have 4 suggestions to help combat some of these issues, while attempting to not hurt a player’s experience.
[div align=\\\"center\\\"]All-time top earning players leaderboard (through contracts)[/div]
[div align=\\\"left\\\"]My first suggestion is one that I feel could be implemented anyway even without a focus on changing the landscape of contracts and Free agency. A leaderboard on the wiki of the players who earned the most through their contracts would provide a competition to encourage earning money through contracts. While many people still may not be bothered, it would open up the possibility of top players demanding top contracts for their services to be retained. Possibly a profile banner akin to the Hall of Fame banners currently on the site would allow this to be a prestigious and well known title, for some of the most valued players ever, even if stats dictate they may not make the actual Hall of Fame.
Unfortunately, GM players may have to be exempt from this to avoid abuse of power, but this is a small minority of players. GM’s would also have a lot of the power in controlling this leaderboard, but hopefully they wouldn’t be dicks about it.[/div]
[div align=\\\"center\\\"]Separation of contract and other money[/div]
[div align=\\\"left\\\"]While this may be an unpopular suggestion with the bankers, creating 2 different money pools for each player, with different uses for each would also create an importance to contracts. In the current TPE earning format, if, for example, weekly training could only be bought with contract money, everyone would want their contract to be at least of a value to maximise their weekly trainings. This might mean that teams have to decide between which of their players they can afford to keep, and which players they may offer more depth roles as salary cap limitations dictate these players may earn 10 TPE less per season. These players may decide that a change of team would then allow them to earn more and max weekly trainings again.
I’m sure this would need a recalculation of training costs and salary caps at a much more in-depth level than this article would go to. The goal would be to make contracts and salary caps a factor again, but if all it does is to effectively increase base salaries for active players to 7m without any cap concerns, this would both achieve nothing and even promote teams keeping IA players as they can pay them less. Any overhaul of the money system would need a look at salary caps, as with the number of players in the league now, we do still want everyone to be happy on a team. Another concern would be causing fallings out between players and GM’s if they are being offered less than another user for favouritism even if both players were active. This may always be an issue in any salary cap fix. While this may be seen as more realistic, the goal of this league is ultimately for fun and really we should be encouraging positive relationships with as many members in the league as possible, not dividing people further.[/div]
[div align=\\\"center\\\"]Youth training equipment (or Prestiging)[/div]
[div align=\\\"left\\\"]
This is a change aimed at recreates and their possible inflated bank balances. A lot of recreates already have a large amount of money ready for equipment and training on their new player. I would like to counter this by having an option to trade in some of your bank balance for a TPE bonus when creating a new player. My initial idea would be 80-90% for a +10 TPE training. The numbers can be changed to whatever HO feel appropriate, but taking out a large chunk of a players bank account would encourage these recreates to once again be active in their earning of money. The minimum amount of money in a players bank account to do this would need to be set to stop abusing it at low bank account values, but at least 10m in an account would probably stop this. The high end users would lose a lot more money than lower users, but will also be less effected by a singular prestige. If the cost was 90% a high end player like infinite would lose over $400m, but with $45m left, wouldn’t struggle anyway. Even with $100m, 10m in the bank account after is still most of the way to tier 6 equipment.
It would be completely optional so if you didn’t want to be as active in earning, that wouldn’t be a problem. The TPE earned would be able to push the players that did want to earn to higher skill levels in their early years. I’m not sure what the right level is for them to not be overpowered at a DSFL level, but have some longer term impact is, but it would be a small boost aimed at active players. Thematically, the money earned by your player would be spent on training and coaching for your child/mentee to make them a better player to begin with.
While this gives bias to recreates, this is unavoidable in the league anyway. Trade deadline creation can provide a massive head start anyway which is unlikely to be known or used by new players. Players in league jobs may be unaffected by this if their league pay is high enough, but those people help the league run so personally I would have no problem with that.
Long term you could even look at increasing the TPE earned on a second prestige, as long as the player in question has had a long and healthy career, probably at least 8 seasons so regression has kicked in I would suggest.[/div]
[div align=\\\"center\\\"]Top paid players by positions[/div]
[div align=\\\"left\\\"]This is a minor detail, but a wiki page on the top paid players by position would both allow a small amount of fame for having the top contract and allow for better negotiations of new contracts. The wiki team is hard at work currently updating the wiki, so this may be a page for later down the line but would probably be a fun addition.[/div]
These are my 4 suggestions, all of them have pros and cons, but anything changing the current money system in the league will. It would however add an extra interesting dynamic to the league if contracts were a real factor for more people.
Code:
1587 words*PMoney's take on Money - siddhus - 04-27-2020
Lowkey very good ideas, it would be cool to see this.
*PMoney's take on Money - ADwyer87 - 04-27-2020
seperation of contract and other sounds like it could have some drawbacks I would worry about. But I like a lot about these other ideas!
*PMoney's take on Money - Isidore94 - 04-27-2020
I agree money and salaries and contracts need to be looked at. As of right now they're an inconvenience to get everybody signed, and not an actual issue like they are in the real world. I'm not sure what the solution ought to be for this, but a discussion on this topic can't hurt.
*PMoney's take on Money - Frostbite - 04-27-2020
(04-27-2020, 12:44 PM)ADwyer87 Wrote:seperation of contract and other sounds like it could have some drawbacks I would worry about. But I like a lot about these other ideas!
*PMoney's take on Money - IsaStarcrossed - 04-27-2020
I want to preface this by saying I appreciate you diving in and putting thought into this before giving my own opinions!
(04-27-2020, 10:51 AM)PMoney Wrote:[div align=\\\"center\\\"]All-time top earning players leaderboard (through contracts)[/div]
I actually enjoy this idea and I think it could lead to some movement just to get their name up there. I feel like this appeals more to the kind of players who would ask for bigger contracts in the first place though.
(04-27-2020, 10:51 AM)PMoney Wrote:[div align=\\\"center\\\"]Separation of contract and other money[/div]
This idea has some solid foundations, but the problem is that everything in this league comes down to win percentage at the end of the day. What this would lead to is GMs doing the testing and the math on what positions can be effective at what TPE levels and paying accordingly. A lot of this information is already out there. A system like this would see positions like quarterback and cornerback getting maximum contracts so they can afford their training while positions like defensive tackle, defensive end, and running back would be left at minimums still because they hit near peak efficiency at lower TPE levels.
(04-27-2020, 10:51 AM)PMoney Wrote:[div align=\\\"center\\\"]Youth training equipment (or Prestiging)[/div]
I dislike everything about this idea. It'd need to be a far larger number of TPE for someone like me to even remotely consider this idea. At the end of the day, missing 10-20 TPE is meaningless in the grand scheme of things. Heck, long term missing 100 TPE isn't that big of a deal. Most positions max out meaningful stats before they hit 1000 TPE, max earners can hit that mark as is after their fourth season even without the prestige boost. I just couldn't see myself spending $30k-$40k for such a small boost, much less $300k-$400k.
*PMoney's take on Money - PMoney - 04-27-2020
I'm glad this invoked some discussion, the ideas need some work but it's more about the concepts and .
(04-27-2020, 05:44 PM)ADwyer87 Wrote:seperation of contract and other sounds like it could have some drawbacks I would worry about. But I like a lot about these other ideas!@ADwyer87
It's probably my least favourite of the 3 main ideas because of the massive headache it would cause everyone involved and complexity for new players of having another currency. But if you wanted real consequences to contracts then this could potentially do it.
(04-27-2020, 06:12 PM)IsaStarcrossed Wrote:This idea has some solid foundations, but the problem is that everything in this league comes down to win percentage at the end of the day. What this would lead to is GMs doing the testing and the math on what positions can be effective at what TPE levels and paying accordingly. A lot of this information is already out there. A system like this would see positions like quarterback and cornerback getting maximum contracts so they can afford their training while positions like defensive tackle, defensive end, and running back would be left at minimums still because they hit near peak efficiency at lower TPE levels.@IsaStarcrossed
Admittedly there are solvable solutions in a league like this, but I think your point would just set a market value. Maybe some GM's need certain positions in this FA and are willing to pay slightly more than their current team would at market value because of the way their roster and salary cap is set up in any given season. I think there are other problems with the idea though.
(04-27-2020, 06:12 PM)IsaStarcrossed Wrote:I dislike everything about this idea. It'd need to be a far larger number of TPE for someone like me to even remotely consider this idea. At the end of the day, missing 10-20 TPE is meaningless in the grand scheme of things. Heck, long term missing 100 TPE isn't that big of a deal. Most positions max out meaningful stats before they hit 1000 TPE, max earners can hit that mark as is after their fourth season even without the prestige boost. I just couldn't see myself spending $30k-$40k for such a small boost, much less $300k-$400k.
Numbers definitely need tweaking by someone smarter/more experience than me. The way I saw it is that for someone like yourself, you're earning money faster than you can spend it. While there are discussions of adding in extra high level purchases, if this was the only thing you could spend your money on, it wouldn't have any effect on you at all if you kept earning forever. You wouldn't be anywhere near running out of money still. Realistically, later down the line it would mean you had less of a cushion to be IA on if you quit all jobs, but I think there are some numbers where it's a reasonable trade off for TPE that you can't get anywhere else, and would have more impact as you did it multiple times.
A suggestion of a higher number but only kicking in after your rookie season to not be overpowered in the DSFL was made on a similar topic which I think would work better.
*PMoney's take on Money - Memento Mori - 04-27-2020
Potentially unbalanced solution that just popped into my head. Feel free to tear it apart.
I tried to think of something that would cost a lot of money, that people would want to buy, but also that wouldn't be game-breaking. The only idea I can think of that I actually like is the ability to prolong a player's career.
Currently, as a recent article pointed out, max earners retire after (at most) 13 seasons due to the way regression is calculated, and less-than-max earners also retire after (at most) 13 seasons.
Let's say you're infinite. You've done lots for the league so have a huge bank account, etc. With Wolfie or a future player, perhaps infinite thinks something like 'if only I could have 1-2 more seasons with this player, I think they could win a championship or put together a surefire Hall of Fame case'.
Adding 1-2 seasons before regression would mess with the all-time TPE rankings and perhaps be broken, but maybe you can flatten the curve with regards to regression?
Just throwing some numbers out there to come up with ballpark figures. You have a 1200 TPE player prior to regression, and you earn 150 TPE per season to make things easy to calculate.
After year 7, you regress 20% to 960 TPE. Gain 150, regress 25% to 833 after year 8. You're at 692 after year 9, 505 TPE after year 10, 325 TPE after year 11, 190 TPE after year 12, retire after year 13.
If you could have a player above 500 or so TPE for longer, you could chase career stats/make a stronger Hall of Fame case/not get screwed over if the team you're on is in a rebuild when you hit your peak.
Personally, if I was approaching the end of Booker's career and he was almost worthy of HoF consideration, or Booker hadn't won a championship and was running out of time to do so, I'd pay an exorbitant amount of money to prolong his career a bit. And it wouldn't really have an unfair or negative effect on anyone except retired players or HoF truthers who are offended by people having more time to accumulate stats and accolades.