I don't think its a bad thing, and no I don't work for EA. I am explaining to you way they don't do it.
Its all about the replay value. If they let you run a team forever, you'll never need to buy a new game unless you want new features.
Personally, I wouldn't play past 20 years. Doesn't mean I think its a bad thing, but I like a little realism in my games. The longest running GM, David Poile, stayed with the Predators for 21 years and then 15 with Washington. No one has ever served for more then 20ish years as a GM with a team. Ergo, I never play more then 20 years.
So, yes I don't get to see my last couple years of prospects grow, but I set the next GM up as best as I can, which is what IRL GMs do.
I understand what you are saying, but nonetheless, marketing managers don't see it as you do. They need to set limitations, or at least feel the need to to ensure what they want.
I get you are trying to explain you point as far as your wants, but remember, that EA is in the business of making money, and this helps ensure that people that would never buy a new game, have to buy one
I'm not trying to argue with you, just pointing out the logic behind their refusal. I understand you don't like that, which is why every year you and @heavydutyrammer beg for these things. I'm not saying stop, just merely answering your questions becuasr EA won't answer them for you. The last thing they want to do is go on record why they won't meet your needs. Its the same reason they won't make an official statement as to why the removed editing players. It would be a PR nightmare if they told gamers they don't trust them.
EA PLS just patch in multi team control. For the love of god.
