BuzzerBeater Forums

Based on Buzzer-manager stats, there is currently 41 countries are without native users, which mean in every election obviously there will be 0 voter. (Tie also included)

we can't debate or will be a very long debate ('suggestion' or 'denial') why the country still should exist or should remove, i will not touch those part.

What i want to suggest is how the winner of No Voter for every election winner is decide.

based on rule "In the case of a tie, the candidate who has been playing BuzzerBeater for longer is declared to be the winner"

which is biased and can't describe the quality of the manager,.

We can't say that newer manager less good than older manager, experience can't measure by how long we are here?

what i suggest is, the winner is decide by best user team ranking, which at certain aspect is describe how he manage team with his 'limited' resources , to gain those ranking. the Wolrd ranking.

So imho it is fair enough if a manager that could gain highest ranking win, or why do you think older manager should got those priviliges ?

Last edited by Rå–Kütí at 8/25/2026 3:20:45 AM

what i suggest is, the winner is decide by best user team ranking, which at certain aspect is describe how he manage team with his 'limited' resources , to gain those ranking. the Wolrd ranking.

What if a top manager who has been in charge for 4-6 seasons is now in rebuild and his world rank has dropped considerably?

BuzzerManager does not show this data right for some of the countries that are unified under the "Nations of" leagues. Currently there are only 2 countries without a single player, which are Pakistan and Barbados. This of course means that when a country only has one user, they will decide the election, if they cast their vote at all.

I don't think the WR would be the best parameter to use as the tiebreaker in elections, because it's just not stable enough. Even though during the election period there are only limited games, depending on their outcome, one candidate might be in the front at the beginning of the election and another one at the end, when only considering world rankings. And I do think that there is a general tendency that the legacy managers are more able to show tactical finesse and choose the right players for the NTs, rather than the newer player, even when that might not be the case always. The boundary there is getting blurry after some years of BB experience.

When you look at the NT managers right now, e.g., top 20, there are about as many managers playing in lower divisions as there are managers from the top divisions of their respective countries. And this is even more shifted to lower divisions for U21, because most of the managers are training the youngsters themselves. In such cases, good managers inherently cannot compete for the top world rankings.

And of course, the you can push up your world ranking if you have a good bank spared, and of course we don't want to make the election results depending on the finances.

All in all, sure, the sign up date is not the optimal way to decide election tiebreakers, especially in the countries with no active users, but I think it's currently the easiest parameter that is somewhat accurate of determining it. Perhaps in the future, there'll be some more complex algorithms behind it all, but for now.

i can see if buzzer-manager shown incorrect data.. but if we browse through several election, especially as small country mostly there is no voter there (winner is decide by who is older in this game).

about WR, obviously it is not achievable in short term, last season i was rank 900-something, by demotion and after 5 lost in 2nd division (due not to have enough players) now i am drop at 2000-somehting.

my points, there is an effort by the manager to push him self if he want go for election and tried to win it at non voters country and not rely on , who is old enough.

i.e. if i want to cast election at Lubnan, and somehow i see a candidate that already played since season 3, there is no need to compete, i will lost eventually (when 1-2 active user there didn't vote).

World ranking parameter is not complex enough to implemented somehow.

But have you tried to put together a good election speech. If the managers from your country are behind your ideas and philosophy, they might still go with you, instead of the more experienced player. Still, I do agree that there probably is some bias in the election votes towards the more experienced managers, even when you have a good speech... I have experienced this myself. Still, the election are democratic and if the managers want someone more experienced at the helm, then it's their decision and you should try to win them over with a clever election speech.

But have you tried to put together a good election speech. If the managers from your country are behind your ideas and philosophy, they might still go with you, instead of the more experienced player. Still, I do agree that there probably is some bias in the election votes towards the more experienced managers, even when you have a good speech... I have experienced this myself. Still, the election are democratic and if the managers want someone more experienced at the helm, then it's their decision and you should try to win them over with a clever election speech.

But this doesn’t address point/purpose of OPs post pertaining to those 41 useless countries as places where one can build up experience like an internship or entry level job.

OP is wrong to assume that there are 41 countries without a single player. This was explained earlier. There are only 2 of them.