SittingDuck
Posts: 1166
Joined: 9/1/2002 Status: offline
|
But I would say, if you could engineer it so our finance levels could drop if we kept bombing in the public's eye... Whew - I would love that! Basically, we just stand to lose initially. Then if we improve, we can gain a bit back, but never more than the default starting financial level. And that is what I'd love to see in PSBB '08. I don't need to orchestrate bobble-head nights and set the price of hot dogs or any of that silliness. But having some type of financial repercussions for having a stinker team would be great. For example, the O's attendance, after a near decade of mismanagement by the front office and PGA, has taken a massive dive - the largest percentage-wise in MLB. We are encouraging people to stay away from the ballpark as much as possible, in the hopes that it will force PGA's hand. Whether or not it does, who knows. But the point being, that type of attendance drop (around 26K now when OPACY would be near full attendance in the 90's) eventually hurts things, a lot. So that is one way to make that approval rating really matter. And I think it should. People shouldn't be able to sandbag their season to get a high draft pick without repercussions. And I am not sure how you figure out how FAs choose which team they prefer, but a team that bombs continuously should definitely have some type of modifer to the FA's desire to play there. Again, witness the O's now. Players now openly say they won't play there. What a reversal! But if it did become designed that approval ratings mattered again, then whatever is going on that makes them flop around like that would have to be addressed. No big whoop, I am sure. And you'd definitely want to make some basic XML parameters available to ward off the crying. Man, I hope this lead balloon will somehow fly...
< Message edited by SittingDuck -- 8/4/2006 9:47:09 PM >
|