What should an aging alternative be based on?

[Relborn]

Well that's true, but as I have said already beside the agreement that an ageing system is necessary, no agreement can be found here ...

Too many different opinions here covering this topic and as long as there is no new solution to this problem, I see no way to convince a majority here to agree on one system.

So either you use the crappy solution from the LRB or you houserule it with the version you like best.

[NightDragon]

I agree House Rule is the only option really. Next Season my League will be having a TR max 300. Goodbye aging.

[Snew]

At least the Poll shows us that no agreement could be found (at least not here on the board).

So why bother any further with ageing?

Because the poll also shows that 82% of people believe that some system should be put in place.

I don't think that's a true statement based on this poll. I do think that it is a true statement over-all, though.

That's what the poll was about. There was no "I don't believe we need a system " option. The closest you have up there is the attrition based system and even that said to increase on field injuries.

[SBG]

HI guys !

I voted something else, because I think there should be no ageing !

What's the point of having a highly skilled player if he almost automatically gets a NI or -1MA ? I just hate it ! Let the players play their game and settle their differences on the pitch !

Fred

[Darkson]

If our next season/league follows the same pattern as our last one (new teams / fixed season length) then I will commish "no aging".

[Colin]

Hey Fred (SBG),

Your back! Glad to see you got back to TBB finally.

Maybe our teams might meet each other again in the next round of the MBBL. My vamps are itching for a rematch (or it could be just athelet's foot).