I'll definetely be interested.
I'll definetely be interested.
1990 sounds a little too late, but I do think there would be too many unfamiliar players in starting at 1980. I think 1985 would be a good starting point. A lot of players that have recently retired (some that are still playing) got there start at that time. This way there would be more players that people are familiar with, but it would still be starting 20 years ago.Originally Posted by Generalissimo
i'm in
I know we're not calling teams, but I'm fully prepared to beat some ass if someone thinks they are going to be Seattle.
And 80 or 85 sounds good to me. '85 preferably.
i'm always seattle...no reason to change now! lmaoOriginally Posted by MarinersFan87
I think '85 would be good.
19...19...1985!
"Players can't get better over time." -GiantsFanatic
I'd be up for a 1985 league.
I'll call Detroit Tigers.
Bring it.Originally Posted by CrazyEights
Braves, baby.
"Players can't get better over time." -GiantsFanatic
Easy guys. We still need to start this thing up. Hold up on calling teams for now.
So start the damn thing!!!!!!111!!!oneone!!!!11
"Players can't get better over time." -GiantsFanatic
So 1985 sounds good for everyone? If so, we have two ways of going about this.
1. I can start the league in 1975 or so and sim up to 85 so that the minor leagues have more quality players. or...
2. I can just start it in 85 and fill the minors with fictional players. (There will be some good prospects, but not as many.)
I would prefer #2 because Id like us to start fresh and not have all the players have stats from prior to our league. I wouldnt really care either way though.
Numero Uno.
"Players can't get better over time." -GiantsFanatic