Splitting my post in 2 to ruffle fewer feathers.
We're currently in a weird situation, Manager-wise: Users of the caliber of
drampa's grandpa have declared that the fact that there are only 8 spots for managers calls causes a tough competition for a spot. As I'm writing, there are already 9 sign-ups, and it is only day 1. The absence of co-managers means that more people who would like to actively participate without necessarily playing (like myself), are left without an option and will have to sign-up as players.
Furthermore, that fixed price is creating 2 categories of potential managers (sorry if I got your categories wrong, this is based on my own perception of things):
- People who want to manage, and have a yearning for it, but would not pay 16k for themselves as players (Examples: Mark K, Chloe);
- People who are pushed to manage strictly because they want to exploit the loophole that is still allowed and save ~5k on themselves, but would otherwise not necessarily have sought the managing positions (Examples: xavgb, Andyboy);
- Jrdn (all of the above). The way I see it, Jordan is the only manager (meaning person who originally intended to participate as a manager this edition or has done in the past) that would actually be pushed to buy himself as a player, with such a price. For most of the others, 16k is too much to seriously consider.
So, we have a rule benefitting potentially one person, and potentially causing 8 people with amazing social skills but lower competitive presence to not participate at all, or to a less involved extent (your
TheCoastsOfToast 's, your
berry 's, your
willdbeast 's).
What are our alternatives, in my eyes?
- Declaring that managers will not play, and re-instating co-managers (the 2019 formula) : This negatively impacts those managers who planned on signing up and intend on buying themselves (in my eyes, this would be Jordan and Stresh, if he was planning on managing all along), but stops players, who had no intentions of managing, in doing so just to exploit the loophole. It allows people who were planning on co-managing to do so, and with someone they appreciate (not just someone who drafts them as an assistant).
- Augmenting the price to ~20k and re-introducing co-managers: This does not fully avoid the loophole, but reduces the interest that managers have in finding a top-player with whom to co-manage at all costs, because top players will be less of a steal. It also reduces the current pressure on top-players to manage when they don't really feel like it, because their profit margin would be significantly lower. It also allows Jordan and Stresh to buy themselves, if they so please, for an adequate price. And again, this price changes practically nothing for most other managers as, the way I see it, they would not buy themselves for 16k, either.
- Maintaining the status quo: Whilst maybe not ideal, it might be that no-one gets excluded because of the rule, and all of your typical co-managers are bought at low prices during the draft, from managers that are aware of their worth and their competitive shortcomings. If this is the chosen option, I strongly feel that it should be compulsory for a manager to name a co-manager during or after the draft, so as not to paralyse the League in case of an unforeseen problem.
- Other options: I am far from omniscient, I have not considered all options and I'm sure more may exist. Take me sparking the discussion as an opportunity to suggest more intelligent and practical options.
I apologize to those I have tagged. If I have been disrespectful to anyone, that was not my intent. I love this community, and I'm sure that whatever is decided, we'll really enjoy our OMPL!