Another potential BRB for your consideration.

Brian - this was Stewart's idea, so feel free to go wild with the critique ? 

Playing hardness is already a very risky tactic, and this BRB would give additional benefits to those who are already risk-avoidant. I think this BRB might mean the end of teams using hardness, which does serve a useful tactical purpose.

(I am amazed with how balanced this game actually is.)

Still trying to fugure out what portion of this game is broken...

I don't think any aspect of the game is broken.  The brief was to see whether there were any ideas out there that could improve, what is already a mighty fine game, by giving Coaches some more tactical options or breathing new life into aspects of the game that aren't currently heavily utilised.  
 

As it happens, I don't think this BRB is the best one we came up with because playing zero hardness is already an attractive proposition (roughly half of managers never use any hardness) which doesn't need to be more heavily incentivised.  

Nothing is broken for BRBs except in my opinion they are a little stale.  We all go through the motions of finding all 6 each season, check the box, and move on.

In my opinion, we could use some variety IF AND ONLY IF we identify other BRBs that might be useful/beneficial/balanced and so on with the existing ones in terms of impact.

For example, Youth Director was not part of our original setup but was added "around" season 9.  And I think it was a good addition to the game.

In the end I'm hoping we'll find 1-2 useful BRBs to add to the game.  But if we decide the actual number is 0 in the end then no changes will be made.

There's been some time spent identifying potential BRBs and their potential design/usage in the game so we're posting about 1 a week to see if any get traction.  Some may get no momentum and that's fine.  

So if you think a BRB is potentially useful say so.  If you think it may not be useful, say so.  

That's mainly what we're looking for here.  

Like Al says most managers pick up the standard 6 brb´s and that´s that. A few of us felt it would be more interesting to have a bit more choice and hopefully some hard choices in selecting 6 brb´s from the standard 6 and maybe a bunch of new ones.

It´s not set in stone either that we stick with six, but I think our overall view was keep a limit and let people decide which brb´s may be of more use to them. Personally I think this would be tactically more interesting than just letting people buy the maximum that were available.

Hopefully, some of the ideas we came up with will strike some interest for some of you.

Right. BRBs are necessarily broken. But like Al says, they're stale. It's incredibly easy for every team to have their staple of 6 BRBs every season, without having to go spending 200k for new ones. The system essentially gives us a roadmap to replenish out BRBs every year. And with 6 slots, and only 6 BRBs (technically 5, but we can use 2 YCs), you end up with every team having every BRB.

The main idea here is to add new flavor to the game, add new diversity and provide coaches with options - provide a means for each team to have different identities, so that we're not all carbon copies of each other. 

**Edit** - BRB's aren't necessarily broken.