2018 Rule Proposals

Moderator: TrueDawg

User avatar
ssmith313105
Role Player
Role Player
Posts: 369
Joined: Mon Aug 03, 2015 3:53 pm

Re: 2018 Rule Proposals

Postby ssmith313105 » Wed Jun 13, 2018 5:13 pm

TrueDawg wrote: Wed Jun 13, 2018 4:59 pm
TrueDawg wrote: Mon Jun 04, 2018 10:10 am Jim proposed:

We should expand the off season roster to 21.
Nobody's commented on this... thoughts?

I'd be okay with it. The current roster limit is 19 during the season and offseason, so this would give us 2 extra spots in the offseason.
I like it, gives everyone a chance to see how preseason works out before making final roster decisions.

User avatar
jimscafs25
Starter
Starter
Posts: 714
Joined: Mon Aug 03, 2015 2:54 pm

Re: 2018 Rule Proposals

Postby jimscafs25 » Wed Jun 13, 2018 5:16 pm

TrueDawg wrote: Wed Jun 13, 2018 4:55 pm
jimscafs25 wrote: Tue Jun 12, 2018 5:08 pm I don't think we touched on playoff seeding/format.

I think the easiest solution is just dropping the conferences. The 4 division winners qualify, then the 2 highest scoring teams of the remaining non qualifiers. 2 teams with the best record get byes.
I could go for this, so the 6 best teams get in. I always hated that about the NFL... a 7-9 NFC team could host a playoff game while a 10-6 AFC team doesn't even get in.

But I think the bigger issue was with seeding for NON-championship teams, which we've discussed in separate posts in this thread.
Id even go as far as letting the #1 seed choose his opponent in the semis, but im willing to be bet that doesn't fly here.
You mean in the 2nd round (since they get a bye in the 1st round)?

This could be fun... though it would make it harder for me to setup the playoff brackets. Cuz right now I just set the seeding up front an the whole thing plays itself out.
Yeah, 2nd round.

OnABloodbuzz
Pro Bowler
Pro Bowler
Posts: 1231
Joined: Thu Nov 06, 2014 2:32 pm

Re: 2018 Rule Proposals

Postby OnABloodbuzz » Wed Jun 13, 2018 8:03 pm

Bidding with years sounds ok, submit salary, years and contract type with each bid.

Yes to expanded off season roster to 21.

Decrease QB yardage for sure, then review next year.

Kickers and defenses can go.

Comp picks in the too hard basket.

I like straight W-L for all placings, scoring for tiebreakers.

No trading players acquired in free agency until week 1.

Dre
Pro Bowler
Pro Bowler
Posts: 1410
Joined: Tue Aug 04, 2015 3:52 am

Re: 2018 Rule Proposals

Postby Dre » Wed Jun 13, 2018 11:29 pm

I support the expanded offseason roster

I'm not a fan of including years for bids

User avatar
monkeybones
Ring of Fame
Ring of Fame
Posts: 3396
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2014 2:16 pm

Re: 2018 Rule Proposals

Postby monkeybones » Thu Jun 14, 2018 8:11 am

TrueDawg wrote: Wed Jun 13, 2018 3:41 pm
Xulu Bak wrote: Wed Jun 13, 2018 7:37 am That makes sense, although, based on the ridiculous level of tanking that occurred last year two thoughts...

1) Eliminate the draft entirely, dumping rookies into the FA pool

OR

2) Draft Lottery

Yes, either would be a pretty drastic deviation from the real thing (we've modeled as best we can for a lot of rule changes over the years); however, real teams have substantial financial interests that keep them from starting to tank 2-3 weeks into the season.
The tanking is why I've suggested in the past that we use POTENTIAL points (from the Power Ranking report)... we could use that for non-playoff seeding. That way you can't have good players and just not start them to get into the bracket for the #1 pick, then start playing them in an attempt to win the #1 pick. It's probably a truer measure of who has a worse roster/team and puts those teams in the bracket for the #1 pick.

I personally hate the idea of a lottery.
Potential points sounds like the best solution

User avatar
monkeybones
Ring of Fame
Ring of Fame
Posts: 3396
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2014 2:16 pm

Re: 2018 Rule Proposals

Postby monkeybones » Thu Jun 14, 2018 8:13 am

Dre wrote: Wed Jun 13, 2018 11:29 pm I support the expanded offseason roster

I'm not a fan of including years for bids
I agree about the years.

I'm not sure why we need to expand off season rosters.

User avatar
jimscafs25
Starter
Starter
Posts: 714
Joined: Mon Aug 03, 2015 2:54 pm

Re: 2018 Rule Proposals

Postby jimscafs25 » Thu Jun 14, 2018 9:04 am

monkeybones wrote: Thu Jun 14, 2018 8:13 am
Dre wrote: Wed Jun 13, 2018 11:29 pm I support the expanded offseason roster

I'm not a fan of including years for bids
I agree about the years.

I'm not sure why we need to expand off season rosters.
Nfl teams have 90 roster spots in the offseason. Gives teams enough time to evaluate their teams and deal with injuries before season starts.

User avatar
SuperHawks
Starter
Starter
Posts: 511
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2015 9:28 pm

Re: 2018 Rule Proposals

Postby SuperHawks » Thu Jun 14, 2018 10:56 am

TrueDawg wrote: Wed Jun 13, 2018 4:03 pm
monkeybones wrote: Wed Jun 13, 2018 11:36 am I think the easiest solution is to assume all players won at auction have 1 year of guaranteed money for the duration of the offseason. It doesn't matter if they are cut or traded, the cap hit is still applied.
Agreed. Prior to this rule, we had owners during FA who would bid wildly and indiscriminately (over their cap and roster limit) to jack up the price of players they weren't really even interested in. And while I think some of this is a healthy part of a "free market" (owners SHOULD be paying fair market value for players), I think it was getting out of hand and owners were getting away with it by simply giving the player a straight contract and then cutting him.

The catch & release rule was introduced to curb this and at least give owners some pause when bidding... cuz if you win a player, you're stuck with him or you're paying a cap hit. However, this rule can be circumvented by trading the player, even if you have to give up a future 3rd or something to do it. The simplest thing to do is assume all players won during FA have one year of guaranteed money and assess the cap hit for trades as well.

And while we're on the topic, I think the catch & release penalty needs to be increased to at least 30%.
Yes to all of this.

User avatar
monkeybones
Ring of Fame
Ring of Fame
Posts: 3396
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2014 2:16 pm

Re: 2018 Rule Proposals

Postby monkeybones » Thu Jun 14, 2018 11:10 am

jimscafs25 wrote: Thu Jun 14, 2018 9:04 am
monkeybones wrote: Thu Jun 14, 2018 8:13 am
Dre wrote: Wed Jun 13, 2018 11:29 pm I support the expanded offseason roster

I'm not a fan of including years for bids
I agree about the years.

I'm not sure why we need to expand off season rosters.
Nfl teams have 90 roster spots in the offseason. Gives teams enough time to evaluate their teams and deal with injuries before season starts.
I see it as an opportunity to hoard players, cut them right before the deadline then resign the player for a cheaper rate because the total available dollars is reduced.

User avatar
monkeybones
Ring of Fame
Ring of Fame
Posts: 3396
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2014 2:16 pm

Re: 2018 Rule Proposals

Postby monkeybones » Thu Jun 14, 2018 11:11 am

TrueDawg wrote: Wed Jun 13, 2018 4:03 pm
monkeybones wrote: Wed Jun 13, 2018 11:36 am I think the easiest solution is to assume all players won at auction have 1 year of guaranteed money for the duration of the offseason. It doesn't matter if they are cut or traded, the cap hit is still applied.
Agreed. Prior to this rule, we had owners during FA who would bid wildly and indiscriminately (over their cap and roster limit) to jack up the price of players they weren't really even interested in. And while I think some of this is a healthy part of a "free market" (owners SHOULD be paying fair market value for players), I think it was getting out of hand and owners were getting away with it by simply giving the player a straight contract and then cutting him.

The catch & release rule was introduced to curb this and at least give owners some pause when bidding... cuz if you win a player, you're stuck with him or you're paying a cap hit. However, this rule can be circumvented by trading the player, even if you have to give up a future 3rd or something to do it. The simplest thing to do is assume all players won during FA have one year of guaranteed money and assess the cap hit for trades as well.

And while we're on the topic, I think the catch & release penalty needs to be increased to at least 30%.
I'm all for increasing the catch and release penalty.

User avatar
jimscafs25
Starter
Starter
Posts: 714
Joined: Mon Aug 03, 2015 2:54 pm

Re: 2018 Rule Proposals

Postby jimscafs25 » Thu Jun 14, 2018 12:14 pm

monkeybones wrote: Thu Jun 14, 2018 11:10 am
jimscafs25 wrote: Thu Jun 14, 2018 9:04 am
monkeybones wrote: Thu Jun 14, 2018 8:13 am

I agree about the years.

I'm not sure why we need to expand off season rosters.
Nfl teams have 90 roster spots in the offseason. Gives teams enough time to evaluate their teams and deal with injuries before season starts.
I see it as an opportunity to hoard players, cut them right before the deadline then resign the player for a cheaper rate because the total available dollars is reduced.
What's stopping someone from doing that now?

sprtsfrk208
Captain
Captain
Posts: 770
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2015 7:46 am
Location: Michigan

Re: 2018 Rule Proposals

Postby sprtsfrk208 » Thu Jun 14, 2018 4:05 pm

TrueDawg wrote: Wed Jun 13, 2018 3:41 pm
Xulu Bak wrote: Wed Jun 13, 2018 7:37 am That makes sense, although, based on the ridiculous level of tanking that occurred last year two thoughts...

1) Eliminate the draft entirely, dumping rookies into the FA pool

OR

2) Draft Lottery

Yes, either would be a pretty drastic deviation from the real thing (we've modeled as best we can for a lot of rule changes over the years); however, real teams have substantial financial interests that keep them from starting to tank 2-3 weeks into the season.
The tanking is why I've suggested in the past that we use POTENTIAL points (from the Power Ranking report)... we could use that for non-playoff seeding. That way you can't have good players and just not start them to get into the bracket for the #1 pick, then start playing them in an attempt to win the #1 pick. It's probably a truer measure of who has a worse roster/team and puts those teams in the bracket for the #1 pick.

I personally hate the idea of a lottery.
Definitely not a fan of lottery, using the power ranking report makes the most sense imo.

sprtsfrk208
Captain
Captain
Posts: 770
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2015 7:46 am
Location: Michigan

Re: 2018 Rule Proposals

Postby sprtsfrk208 » Thu Jun 14, 2018 4:09 pm

TrueDawg wrote: Wed Jun 13, 2018 4:35 pm Looks like we have a consensus among those who have commented that we're cool with lowering QB yardage scoring from 1/20 to 1/25.

I think we could do more but I'll take it... we can see what impact it has in 2018 and go from there and maybe do something else next offseason. I know the NFL is a QB-driven league but I'm tired of seeing dudes like Jacoby Brissett and Andy Dalton outscore DeAndre Hopkins and Antonio Brown.
Im on board with this also, the current NFL is favoring offenses, so passing yards aren’t that difficult to accumulate.

sprtsfrk208
Captain
Captain
Posts: 770
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2015 7:46 am
Location: Michigan

Re: 2018 Rule Proposals

Postby sprtsfrk208 » Thu Jun 14, 2018 4:16 pm

ssmith313105 wrote: Sun Jun 10, 2018 8:39 am
Xulu Bak wrote: Sat Jun 09, 2018 3:21 am I'm in favor of 1/25+ passing yards. Adamantly opposed to -3 INTs though. -2 turnovers is consistent and far too many INTs aren't really the QBs fault.
Agreed, -3 seems excessive.
I think turnovers should stay -2

sprtsfrk208
Captain
Captain
Posts: 770
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2015 7:46 am
Location: Michigan

Re: 2018 Rule Proposals

Postby sprtsfrk208 » Thu Jun 14, 2018 4:17 pm

TrueDawg wrote: Fri Jun 08, 2018 8:45 pm
Tonystavoli wrote: Thu Jun 07, 2018 11:10 am I would be ok with that qb change with -3 and 1pt per 25 yards

I’m not in any leagues without kickers and defenses, we say we want to be super realistic yet want to get rid of them. I will vote no, but if I get outvoted I’m not going to cry about the change
Defense scoring is fluky. If I lose, I want it to be because my players sucked.... not cuz some defense happened to be playing Nathan Peterman that day.
I won so many matchups because of this 😜


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests