Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Locked thread
JT Jag
Aug 30, 2009

#1 Jaguars Sunk Cost Fallacy-Haver
Enjoy that kid while you can. He's gonna get poached by a Premier League side in two years time for sure.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

JT Jag
Aug 30, 2009

#1 Jaguars Sunk Cost Fallacy-Haver
France and Argentina get groups they'll just stroll through and the US gets the group of death. Fantastic.

Arquebus posted:

As an Australian, it was already going to be unlikely we'd see a draw that didn't leave us doomed from the start... though I'd probably trade a finger to see us beat Spain, or at least to seriously injure Fernando Torres.
You're really overvaluing an injury to Fernando Torres here.

JT Jag
Aug 30, 2009

#1 Jaguars Sunk Cost Fallacy-Haver
I mean all I'm saying is that an injury to Torres, especially during international duty, is worth no more than maybe a sprained ankle on your part. He does it so often that he's devalued it.

JT Jag
Aug 30, 2009

#1 Jaguars Sunk Cost Fallacy-Haver
You were fired because you asked for a lower points total at the end of that meeting. I guess the game took that as a "demand".

Just reload and don't do that. B.

JT Jag
Aug 30, 2009

#1 Jaguars Sunk Cost Fallacy-Haver
Wrexham seems like the best choice here, both in terms of actually being the best choice in the game and in terms of plot.

JT Jag
Aug 30, 2009

#1 Jaguars Sunk Cost Fallacy-Haver
(Assertively) While I agree that the team needs to improve its scouting knowledge, we have our finances to consider. I authorize the hiring of two additional scouts. (B)

JT Jag
Aug 30, 2009

#1 Jaguars Sunk Cost Fallacy-Haver
I hope both Wrexham and Tackleford get promoted, if that's even possible. We get the league lead and they win the playoffs?

I want to milk this rivalry for all it's worth.

JT Jag
Aug 30, 2009

#1 Jaguars Sunk Cost Fallacy-Haver
1. (Firmly) C. In light of the recent promotion, additional spending on coaching is necessary to compete at the next level.
2. (Passionately) B. Our pitch must be better than that of Tackleford's!
3. (Firmly) B. See my answer to #1, but increase "coaching" with "youth".
4. (Idlely) B. Sure, doesn't cost that much.
5. (Firmly) C. Additional spending will be needed at the next level but let's keep it reasonable.

JT Jag
Aug 30, 2009

#1 Jaguars Sunk Cost Fallacy-Haver

Cthulhu Dreams posted:

Oh, the board should control the total budget no doubt, but the allocation of the pie between football operational areas seems like a decision for the manager.
This is fair, actually. As the manager you should do what you choose with your budget.

Until you get a director of football, that is. Then we get control of allocations again.

JT Jag
Aug 30, 2009

#1 Jaguars Sunk Cost Fallacy-Haver
The pitch will be in terrible condition by April 10th.

It will probably change from bad to terrible condition well before that date, but that's the condition it'll be on that day.

JT Jag
Aug 30, 2009

#1 Jaguars Sunk Cost Fallacy-Haver
Yeah, I think the 4-5-1 might not jive with your squad's level of talent. You should look into returning to the 4-4-2 or maybe playing an anchor man. 4-3-3?

JT Jag
Aug 30, 2009

#1 Jaguars Sunk Cost Fallacy-Haver
(Calmly) Ok. 6-nil at home against Tackleford of all teams. That's not good, not good at all. But the injuries are mounting up and they're spending four times we are. I'll give you a pass this time.

(Firmly) But ship up, stay out of the drop zone and don't let that happen again. Or you're shipping out.

Dias posted:

...so, this is the one they bring up every time the rivalry is mentioned, right? Oof.
Tackleford won't get the vast majority of their fans until they break into the Premier League, or maybe the Championship at the earliest. The bandwagoners won't even know about this game.

JT Jag
Aug 30, 2009

#1 Jaguars Sunk Cost Fallacy-Haver

habeasdorkus posted:

They're under a transfer embargo. Not that it matters much, since they have basically 3 teams currently under contract. It could screw them up over the summer, though, and at the very least they're not going to be buying every player on the market.
It'll probably be problematic for them if/when they get promoted. That said, the payroll they currently have will probably still be good for the middle of League 1.

JT Jag
Aug 30, 2009

#1 Jaguars Sunk Cost Fallacy-Haver
(Calmly) I'll offer you a contract of £900 a week for one year. I request you focus on bringing in youth talent--- why else did we invest in the new youth development center? Focusing on scoring from set pieces, however, is not of major significance to me.

JT Jag
Aug 30, 2009

#1 Jaguars Sunk Cost Fallacy-Haver
If I actually win the pitch condition guess contest, I believe I have the right to become team president. Hell, my guess was a joke because I assumed it would have gotten to terrible months ago. Of course, if I had a dragon, I'd use it to periodically burn the Tackleford pitch, maintaining it at a worse condition than Wrexham's. Even when Wrexham's pitch condition is Terrible, I'd keep Tackleford's pitch at the mythical "Dogshite" level.

JT Jag
Aug 30, 2009

#1 Jaguars Sunk Cost Fallacy-Haver

rizzen posted:

1. D. We need to be aiming high. The Tackleford scum are in League One, and we are not. Reach for those stars, but don't be breaking the bank while doing so.
2. Your requests are reasonable, make it so.
3. C. The better training our players get, the more and faster they'll improve. This doubly important because of our Youth focus.
4. A. Relay the pitch if possible. If things hold as they did last season, it will become Terrible quality in the New Year. Might as well relay it this summer so we can avoid that.
Second. If we are going to be giving you such a significant increase in funds and staff, you need to make it pay off by getting to League 1 next year.

JT Jag
Aug 30, 2009

#1 Jaguars Sunk Cost Fallacy-Haver

KDavisJr posted:

No. :colbert:

The Red Dragons deserve better than some jersey from some collegiate american football team called the Ducks.
Clearly.

We'll make 'em red and put dragon wings on the shoulders instead.

JT Jag
Aug 30, 2009

#1 Jaguars Sunk Cost Fallacy-Haver
We told you not to do the goals from set pieces goal. But nooo.

JT Jag
Aug 30, 2009

#1 Jaguars Sunk Cost Fallacy-Haver

habeasdorkus posted:

eta: Also also, when I say that Al-Beloushi's been a different player for Kuwait, I ain't joking. Over 15 recent games with his national team he's got an average rating of 7.35, which is very high for any player and ludicrously high for a goalie, he's making on average two spectacular saves a game with that average. He hasn't had a game where his rating was below 7 in literally a year. He's been decent for us, but nowhere near the stud level he's played for Kuwait. And it's not like he's only playing scrub teams, he earned an 8.9(!) against Chile last year. For us he's been perfectly average, a 6.68 rating with only two games above a 7. I'm thinking I should shift his play style so he's not trying as many long balls, that might be one of the key differences.
Kuwait are minnows on the national scene. I assume that good goalkeepers on bad teams tend to have better ratings than they would on a better team, because they are challenged more often and thus display their capabilities much more frequently over the course of a match. As opposed to being a goalkeeper on a good team, your defense is actually up to snuff and so you just make just a few saves a game, not a ton of opportunities to impress.

JT Jag
Aug 30, 2009

#1 Jaguars Sunk Cost Fallacy-Haver

Zeroisanumber posted:

I've found that it helps to imagine that everyone in SAS is Karl Pilkington. A horde of Karl Pilkingtons arguing with each other about sports. Forever.
There is a bit of a FYAD-ish edge to The Ray Parlour in particular. Whether that's a good thing or not is up to you.

JT Jag
Aug 30, 2009

#1 Jaguars Sunk Cost Fallacy-Haver
Am I on the list for people to be executives? I should be because I almost won that pitch condition contest that one time.

JT Jag
Aug 30, 2009

#1 Jaguars Sunk Cost Fallacy-Haver
I hope you bitched about the ref in the postgame so much that you got a touchline ban.

JT Jag
Aug 30, 2009

#1 Jaguars Sunk Cost Fallacy-Haver
1. B. We need to increase the budget a little to keep up with the new league, but our income just isn't sufficient to justify a large increase at this point.
2. Again, B. We need to keep an eye on our finances.
3. I feel like this might end up being a straight B vote. The club needs to start making more from TV money before you can get all of the transfer money for team purposes.
4. B again. Mujkic is brilliant, but don't blow everyhting on it.
5. Four years, 1000 a week, yearly salary increase of 10% and promotion salary increase of 25%.

JT Jag
Aug 30, 2009

#1 Jaguars Sunk Cost Fallacy-Haver

Sky Shadowing posted:

a Top Division Promotion Clause of 75%, but also a Top Division Relegation Clause of 75%.

Get us to the top and stick and you'll be making a pretty penny.
This sounds like a good way to avoid more contract demands the second you get the team promoted to the Premiership.

JT Jag
Aug 30, 2009

#1 Jaguars Sunk Cost Fallacy-Haver
We will finish 12 points ahead of Tackleford. +12. 6 goal differential.

JT Jag fucked around with this message at 05:39 on Feb 24, 2014

JT Jag
Aug 30, 2009

#1 Jaguars Sunk Cost Fallacy-Haver

Sunning posted:

Wow, an embezzlement crisis. This really is the most realistic football management game on the market.
It would be amazing if the board embezzling money and ultimately being forced to resign when caught was simulated in the game.

It's not though.

.... Right?

JT Jag
Aug 30, 2009

#1 Jaguars Sunk Cost Fallacy-Haver
I was in attendance for the game that this happened.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=06LdqVfMBho

Now you might be thinking, "JT Jag, are you saying that the most embarrassing thing you've seen in sports is that the Jaguars defense allowed that to happen to them? Three laterals, and Aaron Brooks of all quarterbacks was responsible for the pass! This wasn't even the Drew Brees Saints!" No! The most embarrassing thing is that the kicker, John Carney, missed the extra point. The Saints lost despite all this.

JT Jag
Aug 30, 2009

#1 Jaguars Sunk Cost Fallacy-Haver

habeasdorkus posted:

Unlikely. We might have another season like we did when we first got to League Two, but we've got a lot of talent on this team.
Yeah, a consolidation year would definitely be called for if we had back to back promotions.

JT Jag
Aug 30, 2009

#1 Jaguars Sunk Cost Fallacy-Haver
Bailey is basically Wrexham's Paul Scholes.

JT Jag
Aug 30, 2009

#1 Jaguars Sunk Cost Fallacy-Haver
Yeah, here I was thinking my 12-point difference guess was bold and maybe a bit much, but it isn't even close. Up on Tackleford by 29 points, yikes.

JT Jag
Aug 30, 2009

#1 Jaguars Sunk Cost Fallacy-Haver
1. B. Increase the wage structure gradually to be more competitive with the rest of the Championship, but be careful not to drive us into debt.
2. B. 5.5M and above is a lot of cash at our level. You could buy a lot of new youth players with that sort of dosh. I'd take that.
3. B. Don't blow everything up for Mujkic. I want to keep him but if you give him too much money it'll risk ruining our finances.
4. B. Our scouting and youth development is the club's strongest point. Any measure to strengthen it is warrented.

JT Jag
Aug 30, 2009

#1 Jaguars Sunk Cost Fallacy-Haver

whowhatwhere posted:

I eagerly await his war of words with alt-universe Mourinho.

Actually, that's a request: who is alt-Mourinho and how's he doing?
How many coaches has Chelsea gone through in the game so far?

JT Jag
Aug 30, 2009

#1 Jaguars Sunk Cost Fallacy-Haver
Was going to say nine, but that was taken, so I'm going to pick 11 players.

JT Jag
Aug 30, 2009

#1 Jaguars Sunk Cost Fallacy-Haver

Zeroisanumber posted:

Yeah, seriously. The last time I remember an NFL game failing to sell out was sometime in the early-90's.
I don't know what the numbers are for this most recent year, but in 2012 15 games failed to reach the threshold necessary to avoid a local television blackout. That number probably dropped a bit in 2013 because the blackout requirements were reduced, but I know for a fact that some games were still blacked out, and even a playoff game barely reached the number of tickets it needed to sell to avoid a blackout this year.

NFL games fail to completely sell out all the time, if your definition of "sell out" is "fill the stadium to capacity". And some teams struggle to even fill 70% of the stadium reliably. The San Diego Chargers and Tampa Bay Buccaneers have been particularly bad offenders recently.

JT Jag
Aug 30, 2009

#1 Jaguars Sunk Cost Fallacy-Haver

Zaodai posted:

More directly, if an NFL game doesn't sell out, it gets taken off TV in its home market. It still airs everywhere else it was scheduled to.

[EDIT] Well, if I was going to be beaten to the punch it might as well be by a guy with a Jaguars logo. Who would know blackout rules better?
Jaguars fans always take joy in pointing out when other teams are blacked out, because we haven't for years now despite ESPN types implying otherwise. (insert retort about tarps here)

We also always look out for rumors about other teams being moved, because of the ruthless rumor-mongering about the Jaguars moving to Los Angeles, which has died down in favor of ruthless rumor-mongering about the Jaguars moving to London.

JT Jag
Aug 30, 2009

#1 Jaguars Sunk Cost Fallacy-Haver

Tithin Melias posted:

Ugh, that's not a good run, I mean at least you're out of the relegation zone, but I wasn't expecting your team to struggle this much.

How is your job security? your beginning update made it seem like you were starting to lose your "untouchable" status.
Anyone who expected much more than consolidation this year was being a bit too optimistic. Best case scenario, we get our feet under us, go on a bit of a run, and finish on the low end of mid-table. 14th, maybe. I'd be ok if we ended up right where we are now though.

JT Jag
Aug 30, 2009

#1 Jaguars Sunk Cost Fallacy-Haver

Tithin Melias posted:

I knew going into this that this would be a consolidation year, I just didn't expect to be being smashed right out the gate.

still doing better than tackleford
Getting the poo poo kicked out of you out of the gate is how most consolidation years go. First contact in a higher league is always the roughest: you just aren't accustomed to the new level of play yet. It's how the team handles things as the season wears on when we'll know its true quality.

JT Jag
Aug 30, 2009

#1 Jaguars Sunk Cost Fallacy-Haver

Mad Wack posted:

My favorite political ad is a mailing:

Is it wrong that my first reaction to reading this is "it's damage per second you assholes"

JT Jag
Aug 30, 2009

#1 Jaguars Sunk Cost Fallacy-Haver

habeasdorkus posted:

(As an aside to the audience) Actually, I'm starting to dream big, back to back to back promotions. But it's unwise to promise what I might not be able to deliver.
Yeah, Kevin Spacey really is great.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

JT Jag
Aug 30, 2009

#1 Jaguars Sunk Cost Fallacy-Haver
When did we pick Mujkic up? League 1? You never get premier-league ready players there.

  • Locked thread