Now all can reply

Share
avatar
Ra-fa_br

Posts : 660
Join date : 2013-11-04
Location : Boston
20150503

Now all can reply

Post by Ra-fa_br

Rule 1:
Going forward, No more offering contracts 6 or 7 years unless the player is looking for a contract with those length. Proof of picture is needed for a contract with these terms. The reason being, we don't even get to 7 years so we never have to deal with the crazy 2 last years. (Penalty for breaking this rule would be to release the player. The player would then sit in FA until the offseason FA bidding.)


Rule 2:
I'd like to try this now. We can only resign guys for the first 3 weeks of the season. After that the player choose to test the market. We still we be allowed to franchise tag a guy. The reason being, to deepen the FA pool and it would also pressure teams into possibly over paying for guys. (Penalty for breaking this rule would be to release the player. The player would then sit in FA until the offseason FA bidding.)


_________________
New England Patriots 
Twitch: classico_inc
Text: 617-823-2596
NFC South Banners 2
Share this post on: Excite BookmarksDiggRedditDel.icio.usGoogleLiveSlashdotNetscapeTechnoratiStumbleUponNewsvineFurlYahooSmarking

Post on 5/3/2015, 10:16 am by j_bell12

With the trade limitations rule #2 is just plain stupid. What about roster violation rules? Who's checking that? Never gets upheld. I've picked up quite a bit of the slack here. I'm not taking hours out of my day to check rosters, no one else does. Heck! Daddy Leagues is always weeks behind. If your gonna make new rules, uphold the other ones first. Again, #1 rule.... Website activity. All but 10 or so owners flunk there. When are we going to start upholding that rule? This league didn't have half the problems when that was functioning right. All I'm saying, if ya wanna make new rules, uphold the old ones first.
avatar

Post on 5/3/2015, 12:47 pm by Ra-fa_br

Relentless with critism... Fabulous

Post on 5/3/2015, 1:46 pm by j_bell12

I'm not critsizing... Just remembering what's worked until recently. If it's criticism then it's constructive! Do you honestly believe I want bad things rafa? I suck yet almost never miss a game, I help with the site, which isn't being used. That's the first place they see to sign up.... Or is supposed to be. Then they are directed to groupme which maybe half the league uses. And many times the first thing they see is arguing! I apologize that you take offense. Didn't mean for you to take it that way. But I did mean to factually make a proven point bud. I'm trying to help. Not start bs. I'm not the only one here that feels this way either. I'm just the one saying it.

Post on 5/3/2015, 4:29 pm by Helldawg66

rule 2 isn't possible to enforce as some 1yr player deals like the free agents during the season and certain expiring deals do not show up until the offseason re-sign stage. I've kept several players like backup runningbacks, kick returners, and linebackers after signing them in season or preseason to 1 yr deals...they'd go back into bidding or disappear depending on overalls if rule 2 is a thing. that's kinda bullshit.


for rule 1, i get it but i don't think we really need to change how it is. madden doesn't let you restructure deals. for tight against the cap teams, a way to reasonably restructure could be give an older guy extra years. this could get too messy because a young player likely doesnt take a 7 yr deal at age 21, but in real life some young 24-25 yr old might even if thats not what they want. or an older guy would restructure to help the cap situation...i don't think rule 1 is necessary but i understand it.
avatar

Post on 5/3/2015, 4:36 pm by Ra-fa_br

Jay I know you mean well. I post on the forum and you complain we're not using the site-_-


Getting off topic, It would be great to get some more opinions about this
avatar

Post on 5/3/2015, 4:39 pm by deathbyeagle

Id have to agree with JBell, its a rule that is unneeded and yea kinda dumb. You have too many situations that can come up.

1- What if you have a older player for example Ill say CB Sherman. You want to wait till offseason to resign him since you dont know it he will decline or not. If I resign him, then he drops to 75 spd now I have to take 10-20-30 mill cap hit possibly. Last season was a perfect example. I never even offerd him a contract till offseason, so tech he never wanted to test FA.

2- What if someone drops a player and you pick them up and want to keep them? You dont get the option to resign them to an extention till the offseason. So you have to bid on him in FA? Ya dumb

3- Lets say I trade for a player with 1 year left on his contract and its after week 3, now I can't extend him in the offseason? So I wasted a trade, pick, player etc to get a guy for 3/4 of a season?

I can name off so many examples of how this rule is just flat out not going to work. We have enough rules as is, if it is not broke, dont fix it. We need to be reducing the rules, not add bigger and rules that make zero sense. You want to add higher FAs to the pool? Why? So people can bid crazy amounts and ruin there team? We dont have the long time owners here to do that, you will have half the teams is so much cap trouble by 3rd season ur going to have to restart the lg. There are other problems that need to be fixed, this is not one of them.

Sorry, its just a bad idea. I get your view, but thats my view on it.
avatar

Post on 5/3/2015, 5:38 pm by Ra-fa_br

Unanimously #2 is nixed.
avatar

Post on 5/3/2015, 6:08 pm by Flybad

I don't think contract lengths should be monitored. We have an overwhelming amount of rules now that would take a new owner a substantial amount of time to become reasonably familiar with. If we restrict contract length then it needs to be monitored and enforced which is a great deal of work. An increase of high dollar free agents will put teams in dangerous financial situations, owners will bail when their overspending catches up with them, commishes will need to fix the $, and that team will B difficult to attract a new owner to take it over.

Post on 5/3/2015, 7:18 pm by titanbrian

You guys need to realize that rule #1 already exists, it's probably 150 words long, and you get so many 7, 6, 5, 4, 3 year deals on your roster, and you can't back load a contract past the amount of years remaining, bla, bla.

Rule 1 would now be easy to remember, easy to enforce, and streamline our out of control rules! No more 6 and 7 year deals, I've NEVER seen a player ask for more, and we're putting in a clause that IF they do, then snap a pic and commish will probably give it to you.

Right now several teams sign a 70 ovr. player to 7 years for cheap, then can build him into a stud and never have to pay him again, nothing is realistic about doing this, and the new rule would help prevent it.

It's shorter, easier, and better, let's do it.

Post  by Sponsored content


    Current date/time is 10/18/2017, 7:54 pm