BuzzerBeater Forums

Good Afternoon,


Over the years many teams have hired “Mercenaries” and “Hitmen” for either a specific cup game, or specific league game to get a big win over opposition. Now, in my league this season I have a Leagumate who specifically exposes the economic Monday loophole and deliberately purchases players for his league games that incumbent week and fired them specifically on Sunday night before the economic update to avoid paying salaries.

I propose a solution to this; any player that works for a team after their transfer acquisition commands to be paid, it’s only right since they need to make a livelihood. If player is let go before the economic update, the team that acquired him has to pay either their entire salary or a percentage (like 50%) of that salary for the week if they were to be let go before economic update.

This in turn will aid in the “Rent A Player” approach some teams have towards specific league matches and will help aid the balance of cup and league games going forward.

Who is doing it and is it really efficient ? With the GS hit and the fact that he pays the purchase while not getting money back, it's not great. Even if he does pay less salary.

I checked the B3 teams that currently have 2 wins and 0 losses.
Here are some examples.
/team/188848/transferhistory.aspx
/team/186553/transferhistory.aspx
/team/276261/transferhistory.aspx
/team/178425/transferhistory.aspx
/team/146834/transferhistory.aspx
/team/44271/transferhistory.aspx

Interestingly, replacing or firing a staff member requires paying one week's salary in severance, but that's not the case for players.
It seems like BB did this on purpose.
I wonder if there's a reason behind it?

Did you win anything doing this method?.

I think my league is doing the same things. This and abuse of salary floor are a lot to deal with. Also since you've been here awhile. How did you defeat teams of such nature. If it ok,to ask .

This method works in lower leagues, I guess not in higher leagues where GS is more important.

This method works in lower leagues, I guess not in higher leagues where GS is more important.

I live of that in natinal cup, or , sometimes, I buy for few 1K a over 150K salary and fire him.

This rule is to change like hattrick (when you buy a player you pay his salary).

But..meanwhile the engine has this "oppurtunity", I will use.

Not meant be a smart alick or snide remark. But isn't league 3 mid level, a blend high and lower style players.

I do understand overseas there's no level 4 or 5 division ranks.

As I dwell in the thought of this. When you buy a player you've already paid him per say. So firing one week after that ,is fair. Maybe not on a match perspective. But to the points, I think the end game is, t time to introduce player contracts.

That would a great topic in the forums . players and staff contracts

Interestingly, replacing or firing a staff member requires paying one week's salary in severance, but that's not the case for players.
It seems like BB did this on purpose.
I wonder if there's a reason behind it?

I don't know the reason behind it.

I just thought that new teams might need to fire the players they started with, including star players.
If firing a player requires paying severance, that would be an extra cost for the new team.

Also, for teams that are close to going bankrupt, whether severance is needed might make a difference.
If severance is required, they might need to fire players one week earlier to avoid bankruptcy.

If there's no plan to change the system to make firing players cost severance, it's also possible to suggest this to other managers:
To avoid having listed players treated as disposable by others, you can set the starting bid to be, for example, the same as their salary.