coaching

[JimBob2232]

This really takes away alot from the interactive game-play. My manager took away these options last year, so short of making roster moves and salary decisions, there isnt much to do each sim. I'd really much rather this "feature" go away...but it sounds like it is an OOTP decision not an MBWBA decision.

[c-mitch]

My guy took control of depth charts, lineups, rotation, etc. Pretty much all the on field stuff. So when he wanted to start a guy that I didn't want to play I had to send him to AAA. And I am paying Rigsby 12 mil to be a pinch hitter since he wouldn't start him after he took control. That is why I was wondering if there was any solution short of firing him after he just won me the Landis. Biggest concern is him playing the starters everyday in Spring Training and not getting to try kids out.

Ok, that's not cool. A GM should have depth chart input at the very least.

No depth chart control here, either. Only promotion/demotion and DL.

[recte44]

You can still force start by position

[indiansfan]

You can still force start by position

I can do this if I put a guy on my AAA roster, go to strategy, force start and move him back to ML roster. However if he can't be moved to AAA I have no way to do this as my manager won't let me do anything on the strategy page. The AAA work around should work for most young guys in Spring Training. Is there another work around way to force start that I am missing that I can use on the ML guys?

[avery]

This really takes away alot from the interactive game-play. My manager took away these options last year, so short of making roster moves and salary decisions, there isnt much to do each sim. I'd really much rather this "feature" go away...but it sounds like it is an OOTP decision not an MBWBA decision.

Of course if you were to have somethig that took up a lot of your time, like a newborn or something....

My Manager, for now at least, is still letting me set depth charts and line ups. I want to keep it that way. This no-setting of either one of them is not why I play online. I know Cliche (ATC) was saying the same thing last season about this time. Like Brett (VAN) I I think the AI sux and I want to set things.

[agrudez]

Coaches have always added 0 value and now they are starting to add tangible negative value to the experience. At what point can we finally be rid of this horrid portion of the game design? If the concern is monetary, just drop the national media contract by 10M and call it a day.

[bschr682]

You can still force start by position

I for one cannot. If I could at least do that I think id be ok as I could then at least force my ideal starting defensive lineup out there.

I don't like this but I could deal with it as long as everyone is in the same boat. Like I said the teams that are retaining some control over lineups/pitching staff are going to get way too much of an advantage over the teams that cannot. And I don't really think we want to have to sign brand new coaches every single season just to retain some control. That's too gamey.

So basically I feel it comes down to this. Are we as a league going to be strictly GM's? or are we going to be allowed to manage too (as in have no coaching staff so we retain full control).

I'm actually ok with whatever direction we want to go in (mostly because my gut tells me that my manager Lothar is one of the best in the game ), I just want us all to be in the same situation.

[avery]

It is either keep the system, or hopefully dump it, like agrudez says.

If we keep it, I do not know if we can all be in the same boat because it seems managers change at random or semi-random when they take over control, and recte says we cannot edit this.

My interest in being a GM would go WAY down if I couldn't set my rotation, line up, depth charts. I mean, we know pitchers wear out if they pitch too much year after year. I wanna decide my staff. And my lineup. I got a good defense being worked up, and who knows what an AI would do. Yeah I get the idea of being a GM, but it has always been a GM/Manager, even when we had managers that didn't do that much.

[agrudez]

To me, it is as simple as this - I want to play a baseball sim. I don't want to hire a manager to play a baseball sim for me.

[crobillard]

Are other leagues using OOTP16 having this discussion? I would hate to drop the coaching system as there is a ton of history behind it.

[bschr682]

It is either keep the system, or hopefully dump it, like agrudez says.

If we keep it, I do not know if we can all be in the same boat because it seems managers change at random or semi-random when they take over control, and recte says we cannot edit this.

My interest in being a GM would go WAY down if I couldn't set my rotation, line up, depth charts. I mean, we know pitchers wear out if they pitch too much year after year. I wanna decide my staff. And my lineup. I got a good defense being worked up, and who knows what an AI would do. Yeah I get the idea of being a GM, but it has always been a GM/Manager, even when we had managers that didn't do that much.

Im not sure my interest goes WAY down. It just totally changes the kind of game we are playing here. We just need to decide if we are all strictly GM's or if we are GM+manager. Right now we seem to be stuck in between.

[agrudez]

Are other leagues using OOTP16 having this discussion? I would hate to drop the coaching system as there is a ton of history behind it.

I've been in at least a dozen other leagues and not one has ever used the coaching system. A quick scan through the recruiting portion of the OOTP forums gives a solid 80-20 split for not using and using.

[c-mitch]

I think a large part of the attraction of OOTP was the ability to do BOTH the GM and Manager portions of the game, at least in online leagues.

[indiansfan]

Are other leagues using OOTP16 having this discussion? I would hate to drop the coaching system as there is a ton of history behind it.

I like it because of the history. Personally just looking for some workarounds. As far as teams getting an advantage, it sounds like several of the teams that had the manager take over control did very well last season. So I don't know that there is a competitive disadvantage, more an issue of preference.

[felipe]

I don't mind it...I like it for the history...and I generally have better results when I let the manager manage the group of talent I assemble for him

But

If noone else likes it, can we keep coaches on for minors and off for majors? Is that even doable?

Or

And I wouldn't mind if we turned it off, getting a chance to name a bunch of my former players to run my minor leagues and such, even if they don't actually do anything 'in-game'

[aaronweiner]

Speaking personally, my guy kept running Miguel Garcia out there even though he couldn't play defense and didn't hit. I benched him for five days, and he popped right back into the lineup.

I'm not a fan, and I said so at the time, but I'm willing to do whatever the league wants.

[Blue]

So far, my manager has not taken any control away from me. I'd still rather coaches are off.

[bschr682]

I play a lot of single player OOTP. There is an option to be the GM and the manager. Still have a coaching staff but like previous versions they only have the power you give them. Is this something that just doesn't work with online leagues?

[avery]

It is either keep the system, or hopefully dump it, like agrudez says.

If we keep it, I do not know if we can all be in the same boat because it seems managers change at random or semi-random when they take over control, and recte says we cannot edit this.

My interest in being a GM would go WAY down if I couldn't set my rotation, line up, depth charts. I mean, we know pitchers wear out if they pitch too much year after year. I wanna decide my staff. And my lineup. I got a good defense being worked up, and who knows what an AI would do. Yeah I get the idea of being a GM, but it has always been a GM/Manager, even when we had managers that didn't do that much.

Im not sure my interest goes WAY down. It just totally changes the kind of game we are playing here. We just need to decide if we are all strictly GM's or if we are GM+manager. Right now we seem to be stuck in between.

I wouldn't buy OOTP if online play was limited to a GM-only simulation. It greatly reduces the value and interest to me.

[avery]

People talk about history when this subject comes up. But I don't know what all history there is to coaching. I guess it is when you make a former player a coach. And this is a real cool thing. BUT if we let the AI managers set the lineups, is it going to pay attention to history? I mean would an AI manager let Puckett get a real run at the alltime hit record? Who knows? But a reallife GM/manager can try that. There are other milestones for players that are active. Does an AI manager consider any of that? Which history is more important?

The whole thing about trying out young players, playing players at a certain position to train them there, all kinds of things an AI manager is not going to do. That's only one reason the value goes WAY down to me.