BuzzerBeater Forums

What else would be beneficial for HGL?
We should do all we can to promote HGL to HG managers still not aware of it, and put our efforts into that one common goal. While HG community in Buzzerbeater is certainly bigger than teams presented in LOPO's list of homegrown teams (not all HG teams are included), it's still not too big and for that reason already, we should put all work towards HGL.
For the future and positive development of HGL, it would be very beneficial also to have only one HG-teams based league for first (not Utopian) teams,

I understand you are referencing here the 'other' league. And, as we discussed privately, our opinions differ where this is concerned.

All I will add here is that the HG community is bigger than that we currently know and all HG managers, and indeed all non-HG managers, should have options. Particularly the managers of Utopian HG teams who are excluded from the HGL because...well...just because it seems.

HG is HG. Utopian or otherwise.

Yes, our opinion differs on these things.
Having Utopian teams in HGL is to me against the spirit of HGL, also as Utopian teams are not part of LOPO's original Home-Grown teams-listing (but also for other reasons previously discussed on Homegrown Teams II-thread, that are dreadful to link into this discussion due to not being Supporter; finding something like that later on from a thread is usually an arduous process).

It's a positive thing if and as HG community is bigger than we know, but the key point here is how do we realize the benefit of that to HGL?

From my point of view, benefit for HGL will not be realized by establishing a competing league, that will divide the time&attention of teams and/or reduce participation of teams to HGL. If people who otherwise might have played/participated in HGL will "take the easy way", well, because it's easy, then of course having such league available is a direct and dividing competitor of HGL, that has then effectively reduced the amount of participants in HGL.
How should I see that in a positive light? I don't expect you to give me an answer to this, because I suspect there is no positive one available...

Establishing a separate PL league for only Utopian HG based teams would be completely another story, as it'd be understandable, and from that standpoint it wouldn't directly compete with HGL in terms of participation (as you can't participate in such league with your first team anyway).
To quote you: " all HG managers, and indeed all non-HG managers, should have options. Particularly the managers of Utopian HG teams who are excluded from the HGL".

If you don't stick with offering only Utopian teams this (understandable) opportunity, these "options" offered by you would then quite possibly weaken HGL in the long run, as people in reality are in average very comfort seeking. In some things in life it's a good characteristics (and guarantees the development in many parts of life), but how should I see this being a good thing for HGL in this case?

Like I have said numerous of times, HG community isn't huge and making another league, especially the one that fights against the very important spirit of HGL - being always free to all - I think has a potential to do a major disservice to HGL. I'd like to see HGL in a way being the center point of HG community, that brings all of us together in one.

Other point is that pay-to-participate style of league should never replace HGL as a "premier/go-to"-option, but opinions on this will be differing and eventually that's likely happen in the case of some managers. How is this not a competitor of HGL (as both accept first teams), I´m again asking?

However, it is a fact that I have no means to stop anyone doing anything they want to do in BB, but I can only give my strong recommendation: I don't see that beneficial at all for the future of HGL.

Last edited by Wagner at 5/19/2025 9:26:33 AM

Other point is that pay-to-participate style of league should never replace HGL as a "premier/go-to"-option, but opinions on this will be differing and eventually that's likely happen in the case of some managers. How is this not a competitor of HGL (as both accept first teams), I´m again asking?

This is your opinion, Wagner. Respectfully, not everyone will agree. I do not.

I am concerned with ALL HG teams, and excluding some (Utopian HG teams) because they don't fit into your view of what is HG is something, as you know well, I strongly disagree with. HG is HG.

The 'other' league (and I call it this out of respect for your feelings) is an opportunity for managers to have the freedom of choice, as well as being the 'only' HG option for Utopian teams.

BB is big enough for the both of them.

“From my point of view, benefit for HGL will not be realized by establishing a competing league, that will divide the time&attention of teams and/or reduce participation of teams to HGL. If people who otherwise might have played/participated in HGL will "take the easy way", well, because it's easy, then of course having such league available is a direct and dividing competitor of HGL, that has then effectively reduced the amount of participants in HGL.
How should I see that in a positive light? I don't expect you to give me an answer to this, because I suspect there is no positive one available... “

I suspect some managers may play both, but for me 100% I would prefer to take “the easier way” and if a large amount of managers were to choose to do so I would think that is cause for reflection.
And before anyone kicks off about “pay to play” those of us who do buy subscriptions get no match day benefits from that while everyone else in the game benefits from us helping to bankroll it for them. Games like this don’t exist for free.

“From my point of view, benefit for HGL will not be realized by establishing a competing league, that will divide the time&attention of teams and/or reduce participation of teams to HGL. If people who otherwise might have played/participated in HGL will "take the easy way", well, because it's easy, then of course having such league available is a direct and dividing competitor of HGL, that has then effectively reduced the amount of participants in HGL.
How should I see that in a positive light? I don't expect you to give me an answer to this, because I suspect there is no positive one available... “

I suspect some managers may play both, but for me 100% I would prefer to take “the easier way” and if a large amount of managers were to choose to do so I would think that is cause for reflection.

Reflection? How does one's reflection change the nature of the league?
It will always include certain amount of manual work for regular manager and for Commissioner, as long as it's not official part of BB. So all the reflection in the world doesn't change this fact.
But in general I don't think this should be too much work for a regular HGL manager, and therefore be a decisive factor for someone not to participate. I guess for some it's still too much, such as to yourself and maybe to Gccsteel, if I can recall correctly this being one of the reasons why he isn't participating for Season 2. Also you didn't like certain league practices etc., but you've mentioned them already before so no recap is needed here.

Or maybe your "reflection" meant that in your opinion HGL should change the league rules/practices, or something like that, who knows. But in my opinion this again in general has very little, if anything to do with how arduous people would feel HGL to be, so again I don't think "reflecting" would change anything. Some people will always view things differently, some feel something is arduous when another one doesn't see it that way at all.

On the other hand, if you meant by "reflecting" that maybe it shouldn't then exist if users aren't participating in large numbers, I would strongly disagree with that, as the one an only correct standpoint for a league (should at any point only one league exist, such as during this Season 1 of HGL) is "free for all qualified HG participants"-type of league.

So with due respect, suggesting that "reflection" would be then needed feels very tacky to be honest with you... Because in practice, as I as a non-native speaker hears it/how I understand it, it means that "I should then look at the mirror and blame myself if people wouldn't participate to HGL". What makes it tacky to me is also the fact that there are some built in differences between PL and PU leagues, and like mentioned, no amount of reflecting makes those differences (such as certain amount of work included in PU type leagues) disappear.

And before anyone kicks off about “pay to play” those of us who do buy subscriptions get no match day benefits from that while everyone else in the game benefits from us helping to bankroll it for them. Games like this don’t exist for free.

Well, it's good of course that some want to pay to play. However, they do rely partly on advertizing as well, which I guess everyone who plays has noticed... I have no data though on how much of their income is created through advertizing and how much through Supporter orders.

However, I do not wish to pay to play (this game), just like so many others. And from this standpoint I have a strong opinion, that for me all notable leagues are free ones, not pay to play-ones. While some could argue that HGL is now an invitational league, in it's spirit it's rather an open league for all qualified participants. And all notable competition should be free to all.

So again, I'm not going to be happy about it if establishing some other HG based league will cause managers to not to participate to HGL.

Other point is that pay-to-participate style of league should never replace HGL as a "premier/go-to"-option, but opinions on this will be differing and eventually that's likely happen in the case of some managers. How is this not a competitor of HGL (as both accept first teams), I´m again asking?

This is your opinion, Wagner. Respectfully, not everyone will agree. I do not.

Which part of it don't you agree with?

That it should't become "premier/go to-league"?

Or that it's not a competing league for HGL (even though it accommodates same teams)?

Or some other aspect, such as you being fine with pay to play-type of league being the main HG league?

HGL, or originally BBHG, was established with this main goal in mind and in center/heart of all, that it will be forever free and open to all qualifying participants (depending on resources, of course, but at least to guarantee play in matches/playoffs to determine participation rights for next season if we couldn't accept all participants some season due to league size), and no other than Pickup game-type of league can fulfill this extremely important demand/point.

I am concerned with ALL HG teams, and excluding some (Utopian HG teams) because they don't fit into your view of what is HG is something, as you know well, I strongly disagree with. HG is HG.

You are presenting this so, that this would be my view only (that Utopian teams should be excluded from HG type of leagues). As a repeat, this is an original definition used by LOPO when he compiled this list of Home-Grown teams on Homegrown Teams II-thread, and I'm certainly not alone with my critical view on Utopian teams participation to HGL.

The 'other' league (and I call it this out of respect for your feelings) is an opportunity for managers to have the freedom of choice, as well as being the 'only' HG option for Utopian teams.

BB is big enough for the both of them.

Like mentioned, let's say it again - it's understandable for Utopian teams, as they do not have a place where to compete at this moment (between HG competitors).

However, "BB is big enough for both" I think misses the point completely, or then I just misunderstood it. Of course BB is big enough, as there are no limits within BB.

How we should approach this is rather through question, that is active and committed HG community big enough for both (in terms of numbers and committed managers; especially valid question, if at any point this another league causes HGL to lose managers, who could've played in HGL instead)?
(And no, I'm not looking especially at you Deano25 or Gccsteel right now, you at least had a go in HGL and then you didn't decide to proceed to Season 2 - but this would be especially notable/important thing for new-to-HGL managers who could just choose the "easy way" instead of even playing in HGL, and this I find very negative).

If I wouldn't have any doubts that establishing such league would negatively affect HGL, I wouldn't try to persuade you to restrict this league to Utopian teams only (which it doesn't seem you're going to do).

People often times pull out this freedom of choice card, and while it's theoretically nice on many occasions, it is not without problems - as I said earlier (maybe in BBMail to you), that these leagues are not played in vacuum, and everything affects everything, in good and in bad. I really don't see how another league could affect HGL in an positive way. And as far as I'm concerned, there does not need to be "million choices", as there's already HGL. Is it perfect? Absolutely not, nothing ever is. However, I think it should remain at the heart/center of HG community.

Oh well, I have now kind of used my only tools for driving a change - my persuasion attempts, requests and suggestions - and whatever you end up doing, I can only hope it doesn't affect HGL negatively.

Hi Wagner,
What I mean by reflection is, like any product that gets created, if the people interested in that product go on to find something that meets their needs better they may end up choosing that second product. It is then up to the people behind the first product to reflect on why and decide if anything about their product should change. They may decide it doesn't need to because they like it the way it is, which is fine, but at least thinking about it and being open to consider that not everyone will think like them is always a good way to grow and evolve.

Other point is that pay-to-participate style of league should never replace HGL as a "premier/go-to"-option, but opinions on this will be differing and eventually that's likely happen in the case of some managers. How is this not a competitor of HGL (as both accept first teams), I´m again asking?

This is your opinion, Wagner. Respectfully, not everyone will agree. I do not.

Which part of it don't you agree with?

I refer to your opinion that a pay-to-play (P2P) style league should never replace HGL. If the 'other' league is preferred by more managers, then the P2P style will naturally become the 'premier/go-to-option'. Time and peoples' choices will decide that issue. You believe the HGL should not be replaced by a PL, but that is your opinion...this is my point.

I don't necessarily agree nor disagree. Managers will choose that which best suits them, whichever this ends up being.

I think your strong dislike for all things Utopia, Wagner, is preventing you from seeing the bigger picture: whether you like it or not, many managers like the Uptopian option and many managers are choosing a HG Utopian team.

HG is HG!

I treat my 2nd team exactly like my first. I do not want it to go brankrupt (whether it can or not). I simply enjoy running 2 teams as opposed to 1. As of the start of next season, my Westopian Tigers will be 100% HG. Why should they be prevented from playing in the HGL just because a few people dislike Utopia so much?

This is the problem I have. This is why I created the 'other' league.

Other point is that pay-to-participate style of league should never replace HGL as a "premier/go-to"-option, but opinions on this will be differing and eventually that's likely happen in the case of some managers. How is this not a competitor of HGL (as both accept first teams), I´m again asking?

This is your opinion, Wagner. Respectfully, not everyone will agree. I do not.

Which part of it don't you agree with?

I refer to your opinion that a pay-to-play (P2P) style league should never replace HGL. If the 'other' league is preferred by more managers, then the P2P style will naturally become the 'premier/go-to-option'.

Time and peoples' choices will decide that issue. You believe the HGL should not be replaced by a PL, but that is your opinion...this is my point.

That is your opinion, which I disagree to the strongest degree. I think by following and participating to discussions you must have had a very clear understanding from the very start (when HGL was being created, that one of the key points in HG scene/community should be that it remains always free for everyone and not ever become pay to play league), that all this work for HGL is done because no other option can create free for all league, which is the only fair and equal way to determine real champion, not an "invitational pay to play-league"!

So frankly I think it's surprisingly tasteless (even unpolite) to possibly ruin the whole basic idea of Home-Grown main league being free for all.

I mean people can play pay to play PL's as much as they want, and I have no means to restrict anyone from doing anything in BB, but I hope what people do doesn't affect HGL negatively.


Again, this is the only fair and equal way to decide any kind of notable champion, an open and free league.
Personally, as I've said before, I wouldn't dare to call myself a HG champ winning such league.
Not to take anything away from the competitional level, which could even become higher (in salaries) than in HGL, but it's just totally wrong to try to make that "go-to HG option" and move "main HG-style league" behind paywall.

Like I said, that is exactly what I wanted to avoid like a plague from the very beginning, and trying to "steal" this position as a main HG league by saying "let people decide" is kind of irritating approach to be honest with you.

Not restricting this another league to Utopian teams (which I wouldn't have felt is in a clash with HGL as we have different "clients" and probably that already should've made you happy enough as you seem to be so eager on getting Utopian HG teams to play each other?) is one thing, but in an indirect way possibly attempting to make that other league "premier/go-to option" and therefore move "main Home-Grown"-style league behind paywall season by season is already completely another story, which makes me disappointed.

I don't necessarily agree nor disagree. Managers will choose that which best suits them, whichever this ends up being.

Of course they'll decide what they do or don't, but as you're usually considerate, I don't get it how you don't want to see the undeniably critically important value in always keeping HG style league free for non-Supporters??

[...]many managers like the Uptopian option and many managers are choosing a HG Utopian team.

HG is HG!

[...]. As of the start of next season, my Westopian Tigers will be 100% HG. Why should they be prevented from playing in the HGL just because a few people dislike Utopia so much?

This is the problem I have. This is why I created the 'other' league.

This I have discussed in lengthy manner already.
That doesn't sound credible though. If it would've been the sole problem and reason for league creation, you would've likely restricted that to Utopian teams only (as was firmly requested).

I think you are being too close-minded on this Wagner to continue this conversation.

Your opinion is noted. As is mine.

You believe the HGL should never be challenged by an alternative; that a 'free' HG league is the ONLY league of value; and that Utopian (supported) teams have no place in BB or in the HGL.

I believe the HGL is a great HG initiative which offers those who like the format and 'free' PickUp game method a way to compete; that a Private (supporter) League offers others an equally opportune way of playing (which happens to be easier to run); and I strongly believe that Utopian HG teams should also be able to play in any HG competition without being excluded.


People like choices, whether you like it or not. Especially if you do not like it...as this can help us 'reflect' like Deano was trying to suggest, on why people like certain things over others. If something is in opposition to what we think, it doesn't make that thing wrong, it just means others choose differently...and we should respect that.


After the inaugural Home Grown Kings Private League is completed, I will reflect on its place in the HG universe. Those HG teams that compete in it will also reflect on its value to them. Perhaps it will dissolve or perhaps it will flourish. Regardless, it won't be dictated by the opinion of one manager.

I respect your views on the importance of the HGL. I only ask that you respect my view that happens to view that Private Leagues and Utopian teams are important too.

Interesting debate. I think HGL was a great idea. And it is also interesting because it is played twice a week. The private league is played only once a week. If I am not mistaken.
If I were a supporter, I would continue to play in HGL and I would definitely play HGK if they accepted me. The more matches, the better. I would not consider HGK as something bad for HGL, but as an opportunity to play more matches. But that is just my personal biased opinion.

hi everyone, firstable sorry for my english
I think there are more serious things than BB and that it is not good to take the head (i don't know if this french speaking can be translated word for word) for a game, there is a way for all the gaming experiences you want,
everyone is free,
long live HGL and long live HGK ... i have a dream : maybe one day we can have a pick up game between the two winners

Last edited by WiMaOl at 5/21/2025 1:18:15 PM