I would say 3 seasons in any league consecutive with same team, MUST understand the cap, has never tanked a season to finish low for a higher draft pick. Also wouldnt be apposed to the 6 credit buy in fee.

Thats just my opinion and a starting point

I would loosen up the requirement a little. I consider myself a serious player. I've logged in every day since I signed up, but I've only completed one season in each of three different leagues. I have every intension to keep those three leagues going.

Maybe one of three requirements met:
-Has completed 3 seasons with the same team
-Does not go more than one day without logging in
-Has owned a team and remained active consistently for over a year

Hope an experienced owners league is eventually created!

Here is a suggestion:

Minimum number of seasons played (in all leagues): 5
Plus: Minimum winning percentage (in all leagues): 60%
Plus: At least 4 playoff appearances (in all leagues)
Or: At least 3 division championships (in all leagues)
Or: At least 2 conference championships (in all leagues)
Or: At least 1 league championship (in all leagues)

The key is minimum number of seasons played and all-time winning percentage. I am unsure as to the number of GMs that would be eligible under this criteria, but I don't think the requirements are too onerous. In fact, they might be too lax. I would be interested to hear others' suggestions as well.

It would also be interesting to require GMs who don't succeed in the "big league" to step down and allow other successful GMs to enter the league. Perhaps measured by having a winning percentage of less than "X", e.g. 45%, over a five season span. It would make it much less likely that a GM would tank to get a better draft choice unless he figured that there would be an immediate turnaround.

I like the idea of a league with only experienced GMs very much.

However, I do NOT like the idea of having to buy credits in order to join this league.

(1) I think there are some good owners who have always played for free and would want to continue doing so.

(2) I will not be spending any more money on MFN until some of the major issues have been addressed. It's just not worth paying for yet.

I like the idea of having the experienced league more than the pay-to-play league as well for both the items you mention (yes, I'm not arguing with #2, and I thank you and everyone else for your patience and promise to continue to work tirelessly to make sure this game only improves)

I don't know that I'd qualify with this criteria, haha - actually I'm out with the playoff appearances. Not that I'm a good example of a committed player since I spend more time writing code than I do playing the game.

I think a minimum # of seasons with a minimum winning percentage might be sufficient, and I think it's interesting that you could lose your privilege to stay in the league if you don't maintain some level of success in it.

Keeping owners is always going to be a challenge... I'm relatively new here, I'm in 3 leagues now. It's the best Management Sim I've seen, and I've been in online leagues since the FBPro days... Kudos, fantastic sim!

I think one step might be holding off on a new allocation draft until all the teams have owners. Once you've drafted a team, you have a connection to it. And all the teams will start on an equal footing, not some human drafted and others computer drafted...

A focus on winning percentage and a minimum number of seasons would suffice for eligibility.

Losing the privilege of playing in the league would be sort of like being fired by the team owner for not developing a successful team on the field. And give a successful GM who is waiting in the wings a chance to prove his (or her) ability. How many owners would tolerate a GM who didn't put together a team that won a minimal percentage of games over an extended period of time?

jdavid: Can you calculate the number of GMs who have played for at least 5 seasons and have a winning percentage of at least 60%? Just curious as to whether there are at least 32. If not, can you tweak the numbers to identify at least 32 experienced and successful GMs. Perhaps we can survey the bunch and see if there is interest in playing in such a league. GMs who qualify for the league later can be put on a waiting list to replace GMs who are "fired" (or quit).

I think the easiest way is to implement invitational league instead of trying to get some sort of criteria for vet' league.

Agree with Benguigui here.
Why should the ability to win and be very good at the game count for being an active,diligent,here for the long term, owner?

Some owners enjoy the long time building process as much as the quick fix sign expensive FA`s/trade for now/win now,quit next season owners.Why shouldn`t these be allowed in a long term owners League?

I think someone who`s been around MFN in lots of leagues (Morbid) has a pretty good idea of who``d be a long term/stick around owner for a league to flourish over time.