This is all I've got so far. I'm pretty sure I haven't covered everything, though.

My main suggestion is that we actually use the roster limit of 35 on just wrestlers, then have a limit of 10 for managers/non-wrestlers. That might help some of us out, and it might allow for some jobbers.

And the retire clarification is to allow for us to "retire" workers on camera, and maybe bring them back. Kind of like how Foley did around Wrestlemania 2000

So... uh..... there's supposed to be comments and/or debate. At least say whether you agree or not

WHOA! Whoa! Whoa, whoa whoa!





Lois, this is not my Batman cup!


In all seriousness, I think I agree with this.

I'm cool with the suspension/rehab/injury grace spot, but shouldn't it only be for actual incidents in the game? On camera, storyline suspensions should still count towards your 35.

And really, the only reason I liked 35, is cause it was right at where we all drafted, and it allowed for some strategy and kind of made it a bit harder.

Also, we're gonna have some major issues with some people playing way ahead in their game, and some not. For instance, and just hypothetically, lets say Rowe is already playing in June, cause he got excited, and he signed Steve Austin to an open deal, and then did two more shows. Well, 3 REAL days after he signed Austin to an open contract, Swigg signed him to a written. In those 3 days, Rowe may have already done two more weeks of shows, with Steve Austin in them. Meanwhile, Swiggy, who know owns the rights to Austin, uses him in the REAL next week, his May 13th Saturday Night show, and the future.

Come time for June postings, Steve Austin ends up in major angles on two different programs, rendering the purpose of us using different talent completely...well, purposeless.

Sorry for the long scenario, but I was just trying to make it clear. This also interferes in trades. I was recently talking trade with another owner, and we got to a deal, and then he revealed that he is already in mid July in the game. Which means we could do the deal, but I couldn't get my talent until mid-July. Obviously I balked.

Just some food for thought.

Good points, Jamie. I know its been tempting to get carried away and book like crazy, but so far I've limited myself to writing out rough outlines for where I want the shows to go for about a month in advance. As long as we are putting our shows through EWR the same week we post them, things should be okay.

The only time I think I'm going to need to book ahead is this summer when I go camping for two weeks. When the time comes, I might do all the shows at once and ask Plague to post them for me, or make something up like "NEW suffered some bad luck, and Saturday Night is canceled for the next two weeks. In its place will be "Best Of" episodes airing on TBS."

Since I got off topic a bit, let me reply to these individually. Firstly, I say if everyone feels they desperately need to increase roster space, then lets just vote and do it. I don't like separate holdings for different people, just for later conflicting reasons (ex: Melina is a manager, so then can I have her in a match also, etc.).

As for retiring. I know we may want to "retire and bring back" guys. I also know some of us may want to run a retirement angle where they don't come back. I still maintain that we're all adults, and not gonna do something silly like retire Chris Daniels just to be a cock, so I think that if you retire someone in your game, they're retired. The exception I would make is that if you keep them on your roster, you could then be free to run a re-instatement or return angle with them. If you drop them, I say they stay non-worker, unless you petition the committee.

Yeah, I'm totally down the with whole vacation, gotta go ahead and get two shows hashed out, thing. However, the most important thing you said was that we should be putting our shows through EWR the week that we post them. I know for a fact that some people aren't. And Plague's little "this move will be effective at the end of the month" just really opened up a whole new can of complicated worms.

How about if we have plans to potentially retire someone, we have to run it by the rest of the committee? For example, if I had a Foley vs Flair retirement match, I'd have to ask the rest of you if you'd be okay if one of the two of them went into permanent retirement.


Not that I'm going to, but I do look forward to their matches :)

Honestly, I personally think that if they are YOUR talent, you can do what you want with them, including permanently retiring them.

Not to mention, I wouldn't wanna know the winner, cause I'd be interested. Spoilers suck~

Oh, if I was going to bring that idea to the rest of you, I wouldn't specify which one would be retiring, but that there would be a possibility of each of them losing.

I guess that makes sense. Besides, you're right, we're adults and no one is going to go off retiring all the young talent.

Exactly.

Except smKelly. I don't know what he is after seeing that "graphic" he put up.

I figured the retirement thing would be like the suspension thing if it's just on camera. It doesn't really count.

And the reason I thought specifying between workers and non wrestlers/workers was a good idea is so we don't have to drop a wrestler to hire someone like Bill Alphonso.

But essentially we're creating a salary cap without worrying about numbers. And BIll Alphonso would have to get paid out of that same salary cap just like Rene Dupree or Matt Sydal would.

We've still got a cap, it's just that we're giving a bit of elbow room. If I wanted to hire someone to be an authority figure, just to do an appearance every so often, I dont' think it's fair to give up in ring talent for that

Well, we just happen to differ here, because I do think its fair, and the way it should be.

It seems like we've had enough early problems keeping track of one number (35) and adding another one to it would just seem to make thing more complicated.

This is why more people need to post in this thread.

This is true. I have one manager, who also doubles as the Commissioner - and I still hardly use him...and it's Bobby Heenan! I've always used Bobby Heenan when I've had him. Now that I have him as acting Commissioner, I don't use him as a manager. He's pretty much just taking up a stop on the roster, but I don't want to get rid of him either.

There's an easy way to deal with this guys...........don't use the authority figure. We as "smart fans" bitch about how much we hate the authority figure anyway............run your company without it. Plus, I would assume that you could use your on air talent as the authority figure too.............which would be fine if you have Jim Ross or someone like that.

True. But I sometimes use an authority figure as a way to give a face to the booking. Or to give a feeling that there is an authority, and it's not just the workers going crazy.

Fair enough, I just figured I'd throw that out as a suggestion. I won't be hiring one, so I could careless if you guys use a roster space or not for them.

It's also for managers/valets as well. I know that won't effect you much either, but it's not something we're set on

I just can't think of anyone that would use 10 managers (no Valets were even drafted). I mean, having a manager might be a bonus to your show, therefore you should have to use valuable roster space to have that bonus. Same for the authority figure, if you wish to do it.

They're all talent. Regardless of what they do, in or out of the ring. The only people exluded from this are staff, as per the rules.

Well for fairness reasons there could be a draft of managers/authority figure deals. You could say that everyone could pick a total of 5 and you could mix and match anyway you wanted.

That's all hypothetical, but that's up to you guys, I honestly don't care.

I could agree on 5 spots for managers/valets.

It just seems a bit odd to get rid of someone who could be the next big thing to replace them with Joel Gertner

But that is a personnel decision that has to be made in the real world.

Besides, how do we differentiate between "workers" and "managers". If I sign Torrie Wilson, and intend to use her as a manager, am I then not allowed to use her in the ring for a specialty match?

They're all the same, and should be treated the same. Like I said, if we want 5 more spots on the rosters, lets just vote and get it over with.

And I think my company is also losing image because "my small roster makes the promotion look unprofessional." I hate things like that in the game.

While Sophie will continue to tell that your small roster sucks, it actually doesn't affect your growth or your imagine/public perception.

I read on another forum that did a test on that very situation, and they had no problem growing and gaining image with a roster that was 1/2 the recomended size.

Ok, so I'd like to discuss potentially expanding the roster size to 45 workers.

For my fed it would help me stay truer to the lucha libre style of 90% of the matches being six and eight man tags. It would be nice to have some breathing room in the combos I make up. I'm ok currently as the main title tournament will minimize the workers that appear on tv but it's going to become an issue for me probably about a month down the road.

So I figured starting to talk about it now would be a good idea.

I would definitely not be opposed to upping it by 5. And I'd probably go for 10 because Mad Dog stated his case quite well.

Would we have a re-draft? Or just a wild free agency claim? I'm not sure there would be a whole hell of a lot of demand for most of the turds out there anyway.

The only in demand guy I might go for is Ultimo Dragon.

The free agent free for all works. I wouldn't need to add too many. But it's good just in case I want to hire a tag team or something similar.

You think we could just do 5 right now Mad Dog?

I kind of want to keep managing a roster to be a little bit of a challenge, but I understand your need for more.

Yeah, I could work with 5 for a couple of months.

Sweet. Should we put it to a vote or just go ahead and let er fly?

I say put it to a vote.

Posted