Simon Valmount Retires

[Ahma 1,428]

Well, I don't know. He has been hanging around for too long.

Bye bye!

[Higgins 3,618]

Noooooooooooooooo oh bye bye Valmount

[Ahma 1,428]

1 minute ago, Higgins said:

Noooooooooooooooo oh bye bye Valmount

A shitty career has come to an end

[Victor 10,942]

You finally got the hits record!

[Higgins 3,618]

1 minute ago, Ahma said:

A shitty career has come to an end

 

*checks S49 hits leaderboard* 

 

hmmmm

[Ahma 1,428]

My God... 441 hits, that's a record?

 

Looks like it!

Edited July 3, 2016 by Ahma

[Phil 5,119]

5 minutes ago, Ahma said:

My God... 441 hits, that's a record?

 

Looks like it!

 

Most hits in a Single Season! 

[Victor 10,942]

Valmount might make it onto trivia now!

[Banackock 8,049]

12 minutes ago, Victor said:

Valmount might make it onto trivia now!

Question you can use:

 

Who came on in S49 to retire his player because they were "taking up dead space" only to go inactive in the same day?

 

Makes much sense to come online, retire and go inactive for the simple fact that you just didn't want an inactive player in the league. who cares.. why come on for that  

 

 

[Victor 10,942]

3 minutes ago, Banackock said:

Question you can use:

 

Who came on in S49 to retire his player because they were "taking up dead space" only to go inactive in the same day?

 

Makes much sense to come online, retire and go inactive for the simple fact that you just didn't want an inactive player in the league. who cares.. why come on for that  

 

 

Are you saying Seattle had plans for this record-breaker of a player?

[Kendrick 4,741]

Who cares, let him do what he wants. We should be positive when people like him come back, so they stick around.

[Banackock 8,049]

59 minutes ago, Victor said:

Are you saying Seattle had plans for this record-breaker of a player?

Why would you trade for him if not?

 

The Bears organization is very, happy and excited to lose an inactive player to retirement just so that the player can go back into inactivity. We're glad it was important for him to clear his conscience with this move.

[Victor 10,942]

1 minute ago, Banackock said:

Why would you trade for him if not?

To be fair you traded for him in slightly different circumstances to where you are now.

[Banackock 8,049]

Just now, Victor said:

To be fair you traded for him in slightly different circumstances to where you are now.

And both moments he was inactive and the only reason he's retiring is because he doesnt want an inactive player in the league (who cares? lol) and now he's going back into inactivity. Makes LOADS of sense.

 

Regardless of where we are, we used him then - could use him now (seeing as we dont have a 1st and he'd help our younger players produce)  and we could use him 1-2 years in the future when were a stronger team, Toronto is old as fuck and starting over and New York is all in wheel chairs. 

[Victor 10,942]

22 minutes ago, Banackock said:

And both moments he was inactive and the only reason he's retiring is because he doesnt want an inactive player in the league (who cares? lol) and now he's going back into inactivity. Makes LOADS of sense.

 

Regardless of where we are, we used him then - could use him now (seeing as we dont have a 1st and he'd help our younger players produce)  and we could use him 1-2 years in the future when were a stronger team, Toronto is old as fuck and starting over and New York is all in wheel chairs. 

This is Ahma to be fair, the king of unpredictability.

[Banackock 8,049]

Just now, Victor said:

This is Ahma to be fair, the king of unpredictability.

Truth.

[Kendrick 4,741]

23 minutes ago, Banackock said:

And both moments he was inactive and the only reason he's retiring is because he doesnt want an inactive player in the league (who cares? lol) and now he's going back into inactivity. Makes LOADS of sense.

 

Regardless of where we are, we used him then - could use him now (seeing as we dont have a 1st and he'd help our younger players produce)  and we could use him 1-2 years in the future when were a stronger team, Toronto is old as fuck and starting over and New York is all in wheel chairs. 

It's his player! Why are we blaming, when in reality the impression we make now might have a lasting effect on whether he re-joins down the line. This is the problem with retention, stop with the ill will (especially as a GM).

[Banackock 8,049]

Just now, Kendrick said:

It's his player! Why are we blaming, when in reality the impression we make now might have a lasting effect on whether he re-joins down the line. This is the problem with retention, stop with the ill will (especially as a GM).

How would you feel to lose an inactive player to retirement because the player came on to retire just to be inactive again? Makes ZERO sense though. 

 

You'd be annoyed too. 

[Kendrick 4,741]

1 minute ago, Banackock said:

How would you feel to lose an inactive player to retirement because the player came on to retire just to be inactive again? Makes ZERO sense though. 

 

You'd be annoyed too. 

I'd get over it within 5 minutes. I've been on this site for 49 seasons, if that bugs you then a rude awaken is in your future. I've seen this countless times and would rather point to retention than whine about the unfortunate transaction. As a GM it's your responsibly to insight a positive attitude (even in this situation) in hopes that maybe the member comes back and stays active. If he came back he wouldn't be on your team (with a new player possibly) but you have to set a good example.

 

If you disagree (which you are allowed) maybe the GM job isn't the best area to be. Because as a league it's not like 5 recruits are coming in every day, which means retention is half the battle guys like myself have to battle.

[Banackock 8,049]

15 minutes ago, Kendrick said:

I'd get over it within 5 minutes. I've been on this site for 49 seasons, if that bugs you then a rude awaken is in your future. I've seen this countless times and would rather point to retention than whine about the unfortunate transaction. As a GM it's your responsibly to insight a positive attitude (even in this situation) in hopes that maybe the member comes back and stays active. If he came back he wouldn't be on your team (with a new player possibly) but you have to set a good example.

 

If you disagree (which you are allowed) maybe the GM job isn't the best area to be. Because as a league it's not like 5 recruits are coming in every day, which means retention is half the battle guys like myself have to battle.

I do have a positive attitude - it's simply annoying and any GM would be annoyed to lose a 600 tpe player due to someone logging in for 5 minutes and then leaving again. 

 

So case closed. If he comes back, great. Still annoyed. It is the job, sure. Am I good with it? sure? Still annoyed and that's normal.

 

So cheers  

[eaglesfan036 4,603]

@Ahma come back babe me and draper miss you!

[Kendrick 4,741]

I think it will be a short spell

[FacePuncher 1,343]

3 hours ago, Kendrick said:

Who cares, let him do what he wants. We should be positive when people like him come back, so they stick around.

^^^^

 

Sad to see my buddy @Ahma leave, we were finally teammate's and he left me ? Come back bby....

[jRuutu 2,464]

@Ahma  Recreate as a Spanish sniper?  Pablo the playmaker will follow after next year  

[Advantage 2,891]

20 hours ago, Banackock said:

How would you feel to lose an inactive player to retirement because the player came on to retire just to be inactive again? Makes ZERO sense though. 

 

You'd be annoyed too. 

Welcome to GM'ing.  Seen it several times for myself.

 

End of the day, it's their player.  Hopefully he does stick around though.