Parity or Dynasties, which do you prefer?

David Watts · 01-30-2012, 08:49 AM

I prefer dynasties. Love to try and take down the giant.

OutS|der · 01-30-2012, 10:10 AM

i prefer dynasties if i'm the dynasty but parity if my team sucks

David Watts · 01-30-2012, 10:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OutS|der

i prefer dynasties if i'm the dynasty but parity if my team sucks

My teams always suck

cephasjames · 01-30-2012, 10:28 AM

I only sim, so I have no personal interest in it. But I like to see dynasties. IMO, OOTP doesn't do simmed dynasties very well, so when they do happen they're special.

Cooleyvol · 01-30-2012, 10:40 AM

Every league needs its form of a dynasty. I think it gives the rest of the league something to shoot for.

David Watts · 01-30-2012, 10:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cephasjames

I only sim, so I have no personal interest in it. But I like to see dynasties. IMO, OOTP doesn't do simmed dynasties very well, so when they do happen they're special.

The Athletics and Red Sox have dominated the AL in my replay so far. From 1910-1920 the Senators were the only other team to win the AL and they only did it once. With 10 games remaining in 1921, the Sox are set to win it again.

scott1964 · 01-30-2012, 12:39 PM

In my dynasty, teams have had streaks and faded away, then com back. Depending on which point in time. Examples: The start of my league from 1871 until the expansion in 1882, the American League won the most championships with 8. My team at the time was Philadelphia Athletics, they won 3 (1872-1874). Baltimore Orioles won three also (1875, 1877, 1881). Then we expanded and Louisville was then team to beat, Louisville (Eclipse and Colonels) won 6 (1882, 1884-1887, 1890) until the start of the 1900 season. After 1900 it has been Washington Senators and St Louis Browns (Louisville

). In the National League there have been a couple of dominate teams. 1871 to 1881, it was Chicago White Stockings (lost in 1874 and 1875 won in 1876) and Cincinnati (won in 1871 and 1880, lost in 1873 and 1881). Then Boston was the team in the NL in the early part with 6 appearances (lost in all 6, 1882, 1884-1886, 1889, 1898). After 1900 it was Brooklyn (won in 1905-1906, 1908, lost in 1907, 1909).

Chicagofan76 · 01-30-2012, 12:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by David Watts

I prefer dynasties. Love to try and take down the giant.

I usually have the dynasty, so I prefer them. I do want to see how long the best team in the NL Glenbard Cougars can stay together for. in my original setup they have 14 HOFers 2003-2025 none 2026-2038 So far they are 1-2 in WS play but I expect them o have 10+ by 2020. My Capitals are 2-1 in WS but I will retire most of my stars after 2008. My ABF Chicago Fire have played in 10 of 11 WS and have 6 wins.

DreamTeams · 01-30-2012, 12:42 PM

Dynesties are more fun, but I also like to see a little parity from time to time, then order restored with the dynesty rearing it's head again.

David Watts · 01-30-2012, 12:52 PM

I'm kinda of getting the best of both worlds in my replay. The AL has been ruled by 2 teams, while the NL has yet to really form a dynasty. Brooklyn, New York and St Louis have been strong, but each year seems to bring a new winner.

Matson67 · 01-30-2012, 01:26 PM

I enjoy parity. Of course I like winning too, but with my team seeming have the Bret Saberhagen thing going on, it's nice to see teams like the Cubs win.. lol

1985 Jays make the World Series and lose.. 1986 Jays don't get their 10th win till June.. 1987 Jays lose World Series.. 1988 Jays can't hit the broad sode of a barn yet still end up over 500 but 10 games out of first.. Let's see what 1989 brings.. lol

boshk · 01-31-2012, 10:34 AM

parity for the league, dynasty for my team.

Thundercrack · 01-31-2012, 05:14 PM

Definitely dynasty, need that storyline. And I wish I could be like David Watts.

David Watts · 01-31-2012, 05:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thundercrack

Definitely dynasty, need that storyline. And I wish I could be like David Watts.

Good Job!

Orcin · 01-31-2012, 05:57 PM

I am going to go with dynasty. I don't think it would be much fun to read a Parity Report forum.

David Watts · 01-31-2012, 06:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Orcin

I am going to go with dynasty. I don't think it would be much fun to read a Parity Report forum.

Well that's 2 times today you have made me laugh. My teams suck so bad that I was banned from the dynasty forum years ago.

Matson67 · 01-31-2012, 06:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Orcin

I am going to go with dynasty. I don't think it would be much fun to read a Parity Report forum.

I dunno. Might have been fun to hear about my team going 10-40 for the first 50 games the year after making the playoffs with no changes to the team.. lol

sharklaser · 01-31-2012, 08:08 PM

This should have been a poll.

sharklaser · 01-31-2012, 08:09 PM

Dola, dynasties by a long margin. OOTP doesn't really do it well enough. I love it when teams just dominate year-in, year-out.

tejdog1 · 02-01-2012, 05:57 PM

Dynasty.

I kind of had one from 2019 thru 2030, but only 5 pennants and 4 WS in that time to show for it.

2019: 88-74 (lost NLDS) wild card
2020: 97-65 (lost NLCS) won division
2021: 101-61 (won WS) won division

2022: 102-60 (won WS) won division
2023: 114-54 (lost NLDS) won division
2024: 100-68 (lost WS) wild card
2025: 95-73

2026: 107-61 (won WS) won division
2027: 107-61 (won WS) won division
2028: 110-58 (lost NLDS) won division
2029: 107-61 (lost NLCS) won division

2030: 94-64

01-30-2012, 08:49 AM	#1
David Watts Hall Of Famer Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Looking for a place called Leehofooks Posts: 10,217 Infractions: 0/1 (1)	Parity or Dynasties, which do you prefer? I prefer dynasties. Love to try and take down the giant.

01-30-2012, 10:28 AM	#4
cephasjames Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jun 2004 Posts: 8,736	I only sim, so I have no personal interest in it. But I like to see dynasties. IMO, OOTP doesn't do simmed dynasties very well, so when they do happen they're special. __________________ 5000+ Generic Logos Free for the Taking FREE: Uniforms and logos for 500+ teams spanning 1871-present Great Lakes League: 10 Conferences, 100 Teams Pre-OOTP 23 Custom Cap & Jersey Template v3.0 by Deft and NoPepper (with layers from other various artists) that I use: Caps, Jerseys

01-30-2012, 12:39 PM	#7
scott1964 Hall Of Famer Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Denver Posts: 5,626	In my dynasty, teams have had streaks and faded away, then com back. Depending on which point in time. Examples: The start of my league from 1871 until the expansion in 1882, the American League won the most championships with 8. My team at the time was Philadelphia Athletics, they won 3 (1872-1874). Baltimore Orioles won three also (1875, 1877, 1881). Then we expanded and Louisville was then team to beat, Louisville (Eclipse and Colonels) won 6 (1882, 1884-1887, 1890) until the start of the 1900 season. After 1900 it has been Washington Senators and St Louis Browns (Louisville ). In the National League there have been a couple of dominate teams. 1871 to 1881, it was Chicago White Stockings (lost in 1874 and 1875 won in 1876) and Cincinnati (won in 1871 and 1880, lost in 1873 and 1881). Then Boston was the team in the NL in the early part with 6 appearances (lost in all 6, 1882, 1884-1886, 1889, 1898). After 1900 it was Brooklyn (won in 1905-1906, 1908, lost in 1907, 1909). __________________ This just feels more like waiting in line at the Department of Motor Vehicles. PETA.....People Eating Tasty Animals.

01-30-2012, 12:42 PM	#9
DreamTeams Hall Of Famer Join Date: Dec 2001 Posts: 2,522	Dynesties are more fun, but I also like to see a little parity from time to time, then order restored with the dynesty rearing it's head again. __________________

02-01-2012, 05:57 PM	#20
tejdog1 All Star Starter Join Date: Nov 2010 Location: Danbury, CT Posts: 1,654	Dynasty. I kind of had one from 2019 thru 2030, but only 5 pennants and 4 WS in that time to show for it. 2019: 88-74 (lost NLDS) wild card 2020: 97-65 (lost NLCS) won division 2021: 101-61 (won WS) won division 2022: 102-60 (won WS) won division 2023: 114-54 (lost NLDS) won division 2024: 100-68 (lost WS) wild card 2025: 95-73 2026: 107-61 (won WS) won division 2027: 107-61 (won WS) won division 2028: 110-58 (lost NLDS) won division 2029: 107-61 (lost NLCS) won division 2030: 94-64 __________________ It's amazing How you make your face just like a wall How you take your heart and turn it off How I turn my head and lose it all And it's unnerving How just one move puts me by myself There you go just trusting someone else Now I know I put us both through hell ~Matchbox 20, "Leave" Everyone knows it's spelled "TRAID", not trade

01-30-2012, 10:10 AM	#2
OutS\|der Hall Of Famer Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: In A Van Down By The River Posts: 2,778 Infractions: 0/1 (1)	i prefer dynasties if i'm the dynasty but parity if my team sucks

01-30-2012, 10:40 AM	#5
Cooleyvol Hall Of Famer Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Union City, TN Posts: 6,383	Every league needs its form of a dynasty. I think it gives the rest of the league something to shoot for.

01-30-2012, 12:52 PM	#10
David Watts Hall Of Famer Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Looking for a place called Leehofooks Posts: 10,217 Infractions: 0/1 (1)	I'm kinda of getting the best of both worlds in my replay. The AL has been ruled by 2 teams, while the NL has yet to really form a dynasty. Brooklyn, New York and St Louis have been strong, but each year seems to bring a new winner.

01-30-2012, 01:26 PM	#11
Matson67 Minors (Rookie Ball) Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: Peterborough ON Posts: 35	I enjoy parity. Of course I like winning too, but with my team seeming have the Bret Saberhagen thing going on, it's nice to see teams like the Cubs win.. lol 1985 Jays make the World Series and lose.. 1986 Jays don't get their 10th win till June.. 1987 Jays lose World Series.. 1988 Jays can't hit the broad sode of a barn yet still end up over 500 but 10 games out of first.. Let's see what 1989 brings.. lol

01-31-2012, 10:34 AM	#12
boshk All Star Reserve Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 532	parity for the league, dynasty for my team.

01-31-2012, 05:14 PM	#13
Thundercrack All Star Reserve Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 891	Definitely dynasty, need that storyline. And I wish I could be like David Watts.

01-31-2012, 05:57 PM	#15
Orcin Hall Of Famer Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Indiana Posts: 9,890	I am going to go with dynasty. I don't think it would be much fun to read a Parity Report forum.

01-31-2012, 08:08 PM	#18
sharklaser Minors (Rookie Ball) Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: underwater Posts: 32	This should have been a poll.

01-31-2012, 08:09 PM	#19
sharklaser Minors (Rookie Ball) Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: underwater Posts: 32	Dola, dynasties by a long margin. OOTP doesn't really do it well enough. I love it when teams just dominate year-in, year-out.