That is not a question but I'll respond.   He does but he looks at things very small picture.   One of the worst ideas ever came from him.   Real time FA bidding.  Basically you could bid over and over again until you were high bid.  Not on cycles but every 10 seconds.   Somehow or another, he felt this took away any advantage that people with a lot of computer access had.  I still don't understand that.  And he's more stubborn than me.

Your question makes little sense.  Melian does not have good ratings.  I give him a nice career in the minors or, if someone thinks he can pitch, make a trade.

Posted by MikeT23 on 6/4/2015 7:04:00 AM (view original):
5 is very optimistic.    That must be quite the tanker world where a guy with 12 control gets over 700 innings of 2 WHIP/6 ERA. 

And a contract of almost $6m.  

Which leads to my question:  when I try to think of anti-tanking rules other than an MWR, the only one I've thought about for more than 10 seconds is a rule that says, "no ML pitcher may have a split lower than 35, or control lower than 25."  I don't think I like that rule-- it's a pain in the *** to enforce and I suppose someday they could create a pitcher with 24 control and everything else 95 or better-- but have you ever considered anything like that, or any other non-MWR anti-tanking rules?

Edit for clarification-- these would be in addition to an MWR.

As the inventor of "Failed C in RF" it's hard for me to impose too many "BL-eligible" rating restrictions.   For the most part, I just want owners trying to win games.  If there's something obvious, I might catch it.   And, on more than one occassion, I've asked the owner "WTF are you doing?  Stop that ****."   I guess the bottom line is I hope the MWR handles any BS but, if it doesn't, I have no qualms about saying something.   In my worlds, an unkind word sometimes works.   Sometimes it takes a public shaming.   And, sometimes, nothing works.   Tankers gonna tank.   You just have to hope they don't join a good world then do the BS that is so evident in less than stellar worlds.   I'm looking at you, shobob. 

Watch the NFL Network tonight - "Top 10 Coaches of the 1980's" Somehow, Tom Flores was left off the list. Can you explain that?

10-Glanville
9-Wyche
8-Landry
7-Schottenheimer
6-Reeves
5-Shula
4-Ditka
3-Parcells
2-Gibbs
1-Walsh

Only the Top 4 on this list won a Super Bowl as head coach in the 1980's, the rest did not. How does Flores get left off if he was 2-0 in the Big Game?

How are Cliff Branch, Jim Plunkett, and Tom Flores NOT in the HOF?

Does EasyE not realize that it's Roger Goodell's network and something involving Al 'Sue 'em Again' Davis?

If you have a protected first round pick (top 15) and you sign a type A free agent, then later in free agency someone signs your type B guy do you lose your sandwhich pick or your second round pick? What happens if it happens in reverse order?

I never liked Flores.   Not sure why but I didn't so I'm the wrong person to ask.

Branch-He was a deep threat with less than stellar hands.  I think he had a chance but, now, there are so many WR with more catches/yards because the game has changed.  
Plunkett-meh.   I'm not a "Everybody gets in the HOF" kind of guy.  I wouldn't even consider him.
Flores-already covered.

He may not but I'm not sure Goodell has the same dislike for Davis that Rozelle did.


2nd round pick.   You never lose the comp pick.

Still with 2/10 SB rings for that decade, to leave Flores completely out of the top 10 is laughable. Even if you dislike him you have to admit that much right?

I mena Wyche and Glanville but no Flores? really?

I'm not "HE WON A SUPER BOWL AS A COACH SO HE MUST BE GREAT" kind of guy.   Barry Switzer won a Super Bowl.  I suppose, if someone were to tell my what he did that made him special, I might change my mind.  Although, to be fair, Glanville and Wyche aren't even in the same stratosphere as the other 8. 

Taking Melian out of the equation, if you have a player with good stats, what would go into your decision making process if he continually put up bad ratings? Would you pull him? Send him down (although I am not sure what that would do in this game)? Trade him? When would you make a decision?

For players with good ratings, I tend to keep using them.  I might change their settings/usage, bench them against specific pitchers, etc, etc.  For players with suspect ratings, it's a pretty short leash.   The little fake players don't have emotions so a suspect rating guy isn't fighting with his girlfriend, his dog didn't die and his childhood friend didn't get sent to prison.   He was suspect and he's performing that way so I move on pretty quickly.  For instance, my formula says Hardball Dynasty – Fantasy Baseball Sim Games - Player Profile: Pedro Juarez just isn't going to be a good BL player.   But, he's 80 overall so I decided to give him a shot playing 3B vs LHP.    40 games in, he's on the bench.   He has 77 PA VL and has produced this: 

.246

.325

.319

.644

That's not nearly good enough to warrant significant playing time.   That said, Hardball Dynasty – Fantasy Baseball Sim Games - Player Profile: Kevin Ryu has a track record and my formula says he should play all the time.   He started about the same as Juarez.   Not much better yet.   But he's playing full-time.

Is winning the Super Bowl as a player, assistant coach, and head coach enough? How about being 1 of 20 to play the entire history of the AFL. First latino QB and Coach?

The guy gets no respect. Only Super Bowl winning team of first 20 without a HOF skill position player too.

Branch's numbers compare to Lynn Swann, do they not?

Yeah that is one of the nuances I guess I will pick up with experience.

Not enough for me.  AFL and Latino doesn't matter to me.

Swann made big plays in the Super Bowl.    Hall of FAME.

That is not a question.