[OldFatGuy]

I see Charlie touched upon this, but I just wanted to throw this thought in as well. There's probably a very good reason why budgets aren't optional, and that's because without them, the ability to completely break finances comes up.

Now please, don't get me wrong, I'm on YOUR side on this. I happen to agree with the cnocept of folks playing anyway they want. (It's your game, play it your way).

But without budgets, what does happen to that team that has 235 million dollars of payroll and only 110 million dollars of revenue?? Do you let that team get away with it? do you make the game force them to trade away players? Do you institute an in game bankrupt feature, where teams fold?

Again, I agree with your premise, wholeheartedly. I want folks to be able to play however they want to. I just wanted to make the point that there is very likely a very good reason why they aren't optional because it opens up the possibility of some very, very bad and questionable consequences.

By the way, I also wanted to add, isn't there an option to toggle off team owner control of budgets? Where it lets you instead use all revenue?? I guess that's not good enough, but to me that's a reasonable compromise as at least it allows you to use the entirety of a teams revenue. Because if you're allowed to spend more than revenue, what's the penalty?? I guess I'm a little more confused on this than I thought. Sorry. ADDED IN EDIT: Ahh, I think I understand now. Probably even when you disable owner control of budgets the team's budget still isn't a realistic amount based on revenues?? In other words, it's too conservative on future year revenues and thus ties your hands too much on signing extensions and long term contracts???