Should the AGM Spot be Removed?

Not sure you can take anything from this poll. I have no idea what I actually voted for.. I thought "No" was to get rid of AGM.

 

Would have been nice if the Poll could have been redone also. Keep or Remove. I voted No because I was thinking No I don't want to keep. Or people could take it as Yes Remove it. A better worded poll might reflect the answers better.

 

I voted for No as well thinking it was remove.

 

So we can all agree that AgentSooka should be removed then? Deal!

 

Obviously Sook could've worded the actual poll better, but seriously, to those of you who couldn't figure it out on your own, please, for the sake of us all, never breed.... Ever.

 

How do you ask a question saying Keep or Remove, and then ask to say Yes or No? And then say that No is to keep and Remove is Yes? Call me .

 

The title of the thread "should the agm spot be removed" and the poll was clearly the answer to that question. Glad to see the University of Alabama is teaching you well, maybe if you went to Auburn you would have figured it out.

Roll tide.

 

Go buffaloes.

 

Poll is worded horribly and can't be taken as fact. I don't even know which one I voted for anymore.

As far a raising cap if we take away AGM.. What's the point? All you are doing is adding more money to spend more money, which is the exact same thing as inflation. We can have a cap of 10 mil then elite players salary are going to go down drastically, it's all relative and percentage based which doesn't change whether you add or subtract. Now I understand if we made the cap that low the difference in salaries wouldn't be a lot between elite and average, but I'm just trying to make a point. Good owners will realize that with an extra player they need to fill because the AGM was removed, that they need to understand that the value of EVERY SINGLE player should go down. Let the few who don't understand economics bid up a couple players to the amount they are used to seeing and watch the rest of the team crumble because it's even harder now with an extra player. Sure it sucks for those couple guys but not everyone can win.

 

Voting in a poll is something done pretty quickly without haste or thinking about if you read the question right. Sure, I read the title initially, but then the question was posed as "keep or remove". "Keep" being the former option, I quickly made the assumption that this was alternative in which we were selecting "yes" or "no" for. Therefore "no" would be for "remove".

You can say that people should have referred back to the title, but all that matters is there are clearly a ton of people (myself included) who answered inaccurately. All that really matters at the end of the day, so I very much doubt this be considered a 50/50 split.

Regardless, it seems the league has it's mind made up for the time being on the subject. While I'd like to see the AGM spot removed to improve the overall competitive level and remove some disparity in the league, I think we have a talented enough ownership pool as is (and GMs, I'm sure) where as the AGM won't cause too much of a stir in the competitive level, at least for the time being.

Still, I'm hoping the league take a close look at implementing this before the upcoming season rather than wait a season or two.

 

My own personal view on it from being management in other leagues before is that you have a GM & AGM. As for Captains & even Alt captains, they can be hand picked from the roster that you draft / bid on & those would be players who are willing to take down stats & deal with any issues should the GM or AGM happen to not be available for whatever reason. Captains would not have any say in terms of trades or disciplinary actions. They would be there simply to gather lines together for the game & grab stats. They would also be the go to person for any in game issues should there happen to be any.

 

basically enough of the important owners that need to be coddled and catered to want to be able to keep their elite players. Gg. Looking forward to imbalance yet again

 

If it's removed then "less skilled" owners are being coddled.
If it stays how it is "high skilled" owners are being coddled.

Your argument goes both ways.

 

Easiest way to combat that is to gather up everyone who wants to be an Owner, GM & AGM & put them in their own respective pools. Select the best possible players to fill those rolls & then randomly assign those players based on position. This way hopefully you wouldn't have say 3 Goalies that are all management on the same team. Try to balance it out based on position & randomly assigned to a team as management.

 

the argument goes both ways, yes, but you're not coddling the owners who would benefit from it being removed you're just creating more balance.


lets be real.....not every owner has the opportunity to lock up an elite player. and before anyone makes the claim about 3 players not making that big of a difference on a team, please check yourself first.

even guys like ozzy think its pointless to have an agm considering how automated everything on the site is.

i say leave the AGM position open to owners who would like to utilize it then cap it like a franchise tag....example


IF YOUR AGM IS A FORWARD: take the average of the top 10 forwards and that is your AGM's cap hit.

Same for goalie and defense. that is truly the only justifiable way to create balance with a bogus position....cuz i guarantee the agm will do nothing more than put points on the board....stop glorifying it. Call it a Franchise Tag..




and to reiterate my point about it not coddling lesser skilled players to DUB:

i don't think its fair to the owners who have ABSOLUTELY no chance of having an elite player in management....we're already creating disproportionately skilled teams.

look at the AGM's or even some of the elite gm's....the only difference they'll make is that they are a top tier player. If i owned a team, i would have absolutely no chance of enlisting the talent level at gm or agm as you. do i think i should be coddled? no. im saying that for the first season, lets at least try to give every owner a chance to build a talented team instead of allowing good owners to have dominant management squads. i just think for the good of the league we should try our best to keep competitive balance.

 

I think the problem we are having is that there is literally no purpose to an AGM with these tools. Its unjustifiable. The only thing its doing is keeping owners banking on dominating based on the "status quo" of having a an AGM from quitting. Or those that were planning on being AGMs on their friend's teams. It is not like teams have announced AGMs. It is my opinion that "elite players are not what make a league enjoyable, it is competitiveness and parity. It is why vhlers did not come here before (in my opinion), as a few ultra-talented owners/players could dominate the league and no one enjoys curb stomping a lesser opponent. We have the opportunity to put fresh rules in place, how could we remove an agm once teams arr construcyed with one. That is more infair to owners than eliminating the position as part of a fresh start. What happens next season if we decide to change the rules? It would either put teams over the cap or we will have to increase the cap to make room for an AGM or another salary.

 

Hence the reason i suggested to Tris (which idk if it was ever read, not a diss at you tris) that we have a competition committee to ensure balance in certain areas. like having grades for as many top players as possible so that a top tier guy with an unrecognized gamertag won't go for the minimum to an owner who knows the guy personally....trust me, i've seen that shit too many times and especially when i was a gm for Tiny in the VHL....we won a championship with alternate accounts for the most part...

 

half the people didn't understand the poll itself.

 

----

+1

 

That is a good point that was brought up. If we change this after the season there is a chance the league would have to raise the cap in order for some (probably most) teams to be able to fit at the very least a 1 mil player to have a full roster. I know people are naturally afraid of change but we really should take a look at doing this now while there is a "clean slate" for adjustments to the league where the effect would be minimal. After next season there will have to be a couple things that need to change including the cap if this were to happen, and i'm just worried people are going to say it requires too much change lets just keep it how it is because if its not broke don't fix it. I have tremendous respect for active and lan, and I understand your side of the argument seeing as some people already have agm's lined up and other reasons, but we really should look at this more. Also, I still would like someone to tell me why they think agm's or even captains are necessary. The job is not hard to do with two people, what is the reason that you need to have someone in a management role that they can't do as a player? And for those of you saying don't fix what isn't broke, look around in the real world and ask any business making money like apple if they don't bother making new products because their old ones still work.

And to the people against taking away the spot I just don't understand why. The real reason for having an agm is to help out the owner when there was a lot of work to be done. Now that there is not a lot of work to be done it is not needed. Just because vhl took it away before and people complained doesn't mean it should go back. The league needs to look at how much work there is for an owner, and decide if he needs 1 official person to help or 2. It's really that simple. Whether the answer to that is 1 or 2, nothing else should matter except what the league thinks is needed.