After several days of discussion, By a vote of 4 to 1, the competition committee has decided to evict kemosabe from NCAA world because he broke the 200 loss rule. Below you will find 4 of the decisions, although I have kept them anonymous. As the commissioner, I will not keep mine anonymous.
Throughout our discussions, we tried to come up with some type of "sanction" we could put in place to justify voting for kemo to stay. Unfortunately we weren't able to make it work. Either the sanction was too weak or it was too strong (lasted multiple seasons) and in that case no one can guarantee real life won't get in the way to take them away from HBD. If that happened, then the sanctions would just hurt the follow up owner.
After a lot of discussion and thought, I voted to evict kemo. I The only reason it was such a hard decision was because I've grown to enjoy the friendship we share through this baseball game. I truly think he is a good guy and I hate to lose him. I hope that after his one year absence from NCAA, he applies for the wait list again.
I believe that NCAA is a top flight world and think our set of rules are great. I've seen owners with 10 plus seasons in worlds get evicted due to loss requirements and believe that if we are going to play in that category then we have to abide by the rules we all have agreed to play by.
I informed kemo (and several others) at the beginning of the season of the loss target he had to avoid to miss the 200 losses. I also sent updates throughout the season. I believe that kemo made a calculated decision that he wasn't going to compete for a division championship and/or pennant and decided to "roll the dice" and leave as much player payroll open as possible so he could transfer that to prospects. Unfortunately that move backfired and he ended up with 207 losses over the two seasons. It is my opinion that it is easy enough to avoid 200 losses over 2 seasons in HBD except in very extreme cases. As I've mentioned several times, I legitimately hoped we'd never have to come to this point.
Below are the other 4 votes with their reasoning. As I mentioned, we spent several days discussing this through trade chats and sitemails so please don't think any of us came to this decision lightly.
Please let me know if you have any questions.
Vote for Removal:
After doing the requisite research into kemosabe's 2 full seasons here i vote for option 1, to evict him. my reasoning behind this is as follows: he took over a pretty well run franchise that was pretty consistent as far as winning went, and they also had quite a few very good ML players.
He basically started selling off all his players that were good with the intention(in my opinion) of getting a high draft pick and eliminating all the salary to spend as much as possible on IFAs. now i dont have a problem with the strategy of rebuilding this way, but we do have a 200 loss requirement and he was aware of that. he gambled that his team would avoid the 200 losses and lost.
I dont feel like he did enough to actually try to win while he was rebuilding though and that is the reason i am voting the way i did. if he had the same payroll and all of his top prospects at the ML level, i would have felt like he was trying to win and would have definately voted for him to stay with the sanctions, but he was trying to get by on the cheap with waiver guys and FAs nobody else wanted....
Vote for Probation with sanctions.
Probation with sanctions. I'd like to see him given a chance to fix this. And if he doesn't get to 70 wins then we;re in the same spot. And if he does get to 70, then we've fixed the issue.
Vote for Removal
Reasoning: The transfer of $40M to prospect is the main reason. Even if kemo had spent $10M of that on a FA, his prospect budget still would have been $34M but instead choose to roll the dice when he knew that he had to hit a certain number of wins this season. Probation with sanctions only hurts the new owner if things aren't met, which is also hurtful to the world. Kemo's a friendly owner and has enough experience, but choosing to go with a $28.5M payroll instead of getting a player in FA that could have helped avoid this is my reasoning for removal.
Vote for Removal
I vote to evict...to me it comes down to the lack of player payroll...i would have no problem with him spending 40M in prospect if he were able to remain competitive, but to be on pace to blow by 100 losses and to be continuing to transfer out of player payroll to me was inexcusable...plus i think that in order for the rules to mean anything they have to be enforced and should be waived in only the most exceptional circumstances