2017 Rule Change Suggestions
Moderators: TrueDawg, monkeybones, Dionosys
- monkeybones
- Ring of Fame
- Posts: 3396
- Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2014 2:16 pm
2017 Rule Change Suggestions
I'd like to see a stiffer (100%) penalty for winning a player and then cutting him during the same off season.
I understand bidding up players is part of the game but I'm not in favor of roster churning. Teams with tons of cap space are able to bid up players, win them and then cut them in the same off season when they win another player they want more. This doesn't always happen immediately (it could be 3-4 days later) and other teams are forced to move on and bid on other players. This means the offending owner has the opportunity to re-sign the player he just cut at a discounted price because other teams have already allocated their remaining cap space to other players.
I'm not saying this is what's happening in our league. I just see it as a potential problem we should at least look at. I also think there should be more risk for owners trying to price enforce. There is nothing wrong with this tactic but the risk of only being assessed a 20% cap penalty doesn't seem like it's enough.
I understand bidding up players is part of the game but I'm not in favor of roster churning. Teams with tons of cap space are able to bid up players, win them and then cut them in the same off season when they win another player they want more. This doesn't always happen immediately (it could be 3-4 days later) and other teams are forced to move on and bid on other players. This means the offending owner has the opportunity to re-sign the player he just cut at a discounted price because other teams have already allocated their remaining cap space to other players.
I'm not saying this is what's happening in our league. I just see it as a potential problem we should at least look at. I also think there should be more risk for owners trying to price enforce. There is nothing wrong with this tactic but the risk of only being assessed a 20% cap penalty doesn't seem like it's enough.
-
- All Pro
- Posts: 1921
- Joined: Sun Aug 02, 2015 7:18 pm
Re: 2017 Rule Change Suggestions
Are you guys co-commishing?
I thought it was just Dio these days. I could be out of the loop. (Not asking because of your suggestion but the fact this thread is an announcement so presumably you're still modding on some level?)
BTW, I agree with the proposal, even though I might be a low-level offender of it this year, at the very least prevent said owner from re-bidding. That's what we did in KFFL. Plus maybe extra penalty, that'd be fair too I guess.
I thought it was just Dio these days. I could be out of the loop. (Not asking because of your suggestion but the fact this thread is an announcement so presumably you're still modding on some level?)
BTW, I agree with the proposal, even though I might be a low-level offender of it this year, at the very least prevent said owner from re-bidding. That's what we did in KFFL. Plus maybe extra penalty, that'd be fair too I guess.
- monkeybones
- Ring of Fame
- Posts: 3396
- Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2014 2:16 pm
Re: 2017 Rule Change Suggestions
He is the commish but I still have moderator ability on the forum. I asked him if it was fine to start the thread and make it an announcement since this is what we've done in the past.Multiple Scorgasms wrote:Are you guys co-commishing?
I thought it was just Dio these days. I could be out of the loop. (Not asking because of your suggestion but the fact this thread is an announcement so presumably you're still modding on some level?)
BTW, I agree with the proposal, even though I might be a low-level offender of it this year, at the very least prevent said owner from re-bidding. That's what we did in KFFL. Plus maybe extra penalty, that'd be fair too I guess.
The plan is for me to be able to help when needed but to be hands off as much as possible. So far, I haven't been needed which is fine with me.
Re: 2017 Rule Change Suggestions
I talked with Dionosys about something similar. No team should be able to bid on players if it takes them to either/or:
* 25 total players, which is 4 over the roster max
* 120% of the salary cap, which is $25,000 over the max
How to monitor? Each bid placed must be accompanied with those totals as part of their bid.
At one point during this years UFA a team was bidding on TWENTY TWO players at the same time, that's ridiculous.
* 25 total players, which is 4 over the roster max
* 120% of the salary cap, which is $25,000 over the max
How to monitor? Each bid placed must be accompanied with those totals as part of their bid.
At one point during this years UFA a team was bidding on TWENTY TWO players at the same time, that's ridiculous.
-
- All Pro
- Posts: 1921
- Joined: Sun Aug 02, 2015 7:18 pm
Re: 2017 Rule Change Suggestions
We've discussed that before and it was widely shut down, as it should be. I assume I was the 22 bidder, but guess what? I've won a total of 4 players - Dalton, Stewart, Green and Watson. So I guess I got crushed on 18 of 22. That's exactly why there's no problem bidding on many, you have to give yourself chances on everyone. Soon as I won a couple guys I quickly stopped bidding on most others. Now I'm actively bidding on like 4 dudes to round out my roster, funnily enough I have 4 roster spaces.
Absolutely no way that level of complicated bidding will work. These things always work out.
Absolutely no way that level of complicated bidding will work. These things always work out.
Re: 2017 Rule Change Suggestions
Ha, OK sensitive. Good luck on the 9 guys you're still bidding on. You keep trying to sell it however you want. And hey, you've got more Championships than me so who am I to say anything right. I put it out there, let the majority rule. I can live with that. I'm not gonna argue with you like a few years ago, I know it's time wasted.
-
- All Pro
- Posts: 1921
- Joined: Sun Aug 02, 2015 7:18 pm
Re: 2017 Rule Change Suggestions
...and I'm sensitive? LOL
Just saying your bitterness over not getting every stud for $300 won't pass a vote. That's all. But good luck.
Just saying your bitterness over not getting every stud for $300 won't pass a vote. That's all. But good luck.
Re: 2017 Rule Change Suggestions
And there's my point exactly. You're the only STUD round these parts partner. I won't reply to this again. No Quarter's got my phone number. If you're ever in OH look me up. Good luck!
-
- All Pro
- Posts: 1921
- Joined: Sun Aug 02, 2015 7:18 pm
Re: 2017 Rule Change Suggestions
Settle down brah. What's gonna happen, you gonna welcome me with a Cleveland Steamer?
-
- All Pro
- Posts: 1921
- Joined: Sun Aug 02, 2015 7:18 pm
Re: 2017 Rule Change Suggestions
Man, I'm looking at the DS rules and despite changes they're still pretty harsh numbers IMO. Let's say you promote a 2nd round TE in the 2nd year, his salary is 3k. That's a 10x raise. Is it worth it for the saving of a roster spot? IDK. I guess I can see the argument, but the DS still seems like a negative proposition when IMO it should probably be used by every owner in the league every year -- stashing a couple secure lotto tickets.
Re: 2017 Rule Change Suggestions
We need to change when contract years are assigned. NFL teams don't have the luxury of waiting til 3 days before the season starts. Why do we?
Owners should have 24 hours from acquiring a player to assign years. Not only would it make things more realistic, it would eliminate some issues (like placing a guy on IR who doesn't have contract years yet).
Owners should have 24 hours from acquiring a player to assign years. Not only would it make things more realistic, it would eliminate some issues (like placing a guy on IR who doesn't have contract years yet).
Re: 2017 Rule Change Suggestions
I'm against this...we all have the same roster limit and salary cap. We're all adults and should be able to manage them any way we see fit. Basically, I'm in favor of freedom and fewer rules.SSHoundz wrote:I talked with Dionosys about something similar. No team should be able to bid on players if it takes them to either/or:
* 25 total players, which is 4 over the roster max
* 120% of the salary cap, which is $25,000 over the max
How to monitor? Each bid placed must be accompanied with those totals as part of their bid.
At one point during this years UFA a team was bidding on TWENTY TWO players at the same time, that's ridiculous.
I am, however, in favor of MonkeyBones proposal to increase the "catch & release" penalty for signing and cutting a player in the same offseason.
As far as bidding on 22 players at once...that's just making sure teams pay players market value. Sometimes it bites you in the a$$...
- monkeybones
- Ring of Fame
- Posts: 3396
- Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2014 2:16 pm
Re: 2017 Rule Change Suggestions
I like this idea. 24 hours to post contract years or the player gets a 1 year deal.TrueDawg wrote:We need to change when contract years are assigned. NFL teams don't have the luxury of waiting til 3 days before the season starts. Why do we?
Owners should have 24 hours from acquiring a player to assign years. Not only would it make things more realistic, it would eliminate some issues (like placing a guy on IR who doesn't have contract years yet).
Re: 2017 Rule Change Suggestions
monkeybones wrote:I like this idea. 24 hours to post contract years or the player gets a 1 year deal.TrueDawg wrote:We need to change when contract years are assigned. NFL teams don't have the luxury of waiting til 3 days before the season starts. Why do we?
Owners should have 24 hours from acquiring a player to assign years. Not only would it make things more realistic, it would eliminate some issues (like placing a guy on IR who doesn't have contract years yet).
I think we could make something like this work.
Re: 2017 Rule Change Suggestions
I'd hardly consider this a luxury. My team has been set for damn near a month and a half, but apparently, I didn't check in during the right window, so Rawls, Dorsett, and Rivers, all obvious 6-year contracts, end up as one. I could have assigned my contract years over a month ago, but that opportunity wasn't provided.TrueDawg wrote:We need to change when contract years are assigned. NFL teams don't have the luxury of waiting til 3 days before the season starts. Why do we?
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 24 guests