I like it, gives everyone a chance to see how preseason works out before making final roster decisions.
2018 Rule Proposals
Moderator: TrueDawg
- ssmith313105
- Role Player
- Posts: 369
- Joined: Mon Aug 03, 2015 3:53 pm
Re: 2018 Rule Proposals
- jimscafs25
- Starter
- Posts: 714
- Joined: Mon Aug 03, 2015 2:54 pm
Re: 2018 Rule Proposals
Yeah, 2nd round.TrueDawg wrote: ↑Wed Jun 13, 2018 4:55 pmI 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.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.
But I think the bigger issue was with seeding for NON-championship teams, which we've discussed in separate posts in this thread.
You mean in the 2nd round (since they get a bye in the 1st round)?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.
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.
-
- Pro Bowler
- Posts: 1231
- Joined: Thu Nov 06, 2014 2:32 pm
Re: 2018 Rule Proposals
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.
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.
Re: 2018 Rule Proposals
I support the expanded offseason roster
I'm not a fan of including years for bids
I'm not a fan of including years for bids
- monkeybones
- Ring of Fame
- Posts: 3396
- Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2014 2:16 pm
Re: 2018 Rule Proposals
Potential points sounds like the best solutionTrueDawg wrote: ↑Wed Jun 13, 2018 3:41 pmThe 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.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.
I personally hate the idea of a lottery.
- monkeybones
- Ring of Fame
- Posts: 3396
- Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2014 2:16 pm
- jimscafs25
- Starter
- Posts: 714
- Joined: Mon Aug 03, 2015 2:54 pm
Re: 2018 Rule Proposals
Nfl teams have 90 roster spots in the offseason. Gives teams enough time to evaluate their teams and deal with injuries before season starts.monkeybones wrote: ↑Thu Jun 14, 2018 8:13 amI agree about the years.
I'm not sure why we need to expand off season rosters.
- SuperHawks
- Starter
- Posts: 511
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2015 9:28 pm
Re: 2018 Rule Proposals
Yes to all of this.TrueDawg wrote: ↑Wed Jun 13, 2018 4:03 pmAgreed. 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.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.
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%.
- monkeybones
- Ring of Fame
- Posts: 3396
- Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2014 2:16 pm
Re: 2018 Rule Proposals
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.jimscafs25 wrote: ↑Thu Jun 14, 2018 9:04 amNfl teams have 90 roster spots in the offseason. Gives teams enough time to evaluate their teams and deal with injuries before season starts.monkeybones wrote: ↑Thu Jun 14, 2018 8:13 amI agree about the years.
I'm not sure why we need to expand off season rosters.
- monkeybones
- Ring of Fame
- Posts: 3396
- Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2014 2:16 pm
Re: 2018 Rule Proposals
I'm all for increasing the catch and release penalty.TrueDawg wrote: ↑Wed Jun 13, 2018 4:03 pmAgreed. 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.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.
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%.
- jimscafs25
- Starter
- Posts: 714
- Joined: Mon Aug 03, 2015 2:54 pm
Re: 2018 Rule Proposals
What's stopping someone from doing that now?monkeybones wrote: ↑Thu Jun 14, 2018 11:10 amI 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.jimscafs25 wrote: ↑Thu Jun 14, 2018 9:04 amNfl teams have 90 roster spots in the offseason. Gives teams enough time to evaluate their teams and deal with injuries before season starts.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.
-
- Captain
- Posts: 770
- Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2015 7:46 am
- Location: Michigan
Re: 2018 Rule Proposals
Definitely not a fan of lottery, using the power ranking report makes the most sense imo.TrueDawg wrote: ↑Wed Jun 13, 2018 3:41 pmThe 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.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.
I personally hate the idea of a lottery.
-
- Captain
- Posts: 770
- Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2015 7:46 am
- Location: Michigan
Re: 2018 Rule Proposals
Im on board with this also, the current NFL is favoring offenses, so passing yards aren’t that difficult to accumulate.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.
-
- Captain
- Posts: 770
- Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2015 7:46 am
- Location: Michigan
Re: 2018 Rule Proposals
I think turnovers should stay -2
-
- Captain
- Posts: 770
- Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2015 7:46 am
- Location: Michigan
Re: 2018 Rule Proposals
I won so many matchups because of thisTrueDawg wrote: ↑Fri Jun 08, 2018 8:45 pmDefense 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.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
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Semrush [Bot] and 49 guests