2 Topics of discussion

Discussion in 'Thread Archive' started by Keller, Sep 28, 2010.

  1. Keller

    Keller The enemy of my enemy is my friend.

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2010
    Messages:
    13,939
    2 Topics of discussion

    I was thinking about the offseason and how you guys all feel about 2 areas.

    1. Randomly selected "good" CPU FA's (simulated holdouts)

    The idea would be to populate free agency with maybe 2 or 3 marquee free agents. It would get everyone excited about free agency and force teams to maybe make some difficult decisions. I've been apart of a league that did this before and let me tell you... when Vontae Davis was suddenly a free agent people went completely ape shit bidding over him. It was fun to be apart of and isn't that what the whole point of this soirée is?

    2. Randomly selected user "holdouts.

    Let me use an example to illustrate what I'm after. I'll use my guy, Lee Evans. A player who I think would potentially demand a lot of money on the open market in our league, with his speed skills, but a player who plays for much less in Buffalo and is under contract for another 2-3 years.

    Let me preface this by saying, the only players that are eligible for "random" selection are players with "Max $" contract demands.

    As commish, I would select 1 or 2 "holdouts" each season. The players would enter a "negotiating period" with their principal owners. Instead of letting their players hit the open market, teams could opt to simply make that player the highest paid player at their position, and re-work their deal right then and there. That player would become the new highest paid player at their position and return to their teams. The downside is obviously that instead of getting that player on the cheap for a few more seasons they have to pay them then and there. So the owner writes up a new contract with signing bonus and salary and years starting in the year of the upcoming season.

    Or teams could trade the player, forcing the new team and new owner to sign the player to a new contract in the same manner as above.

    Or teams could let the player walk. In reality it would be a holdout and the player would sit out the season a la Vincent Jackson but since we don't want to let players like this sit in FA all year, we'll just say that the team cut the player and he's now a FA, free to be bidded on.

    I personally like the idea (otherwise I wouldn't have brought it up.) I would be in strict control of the players who get nominated and being the fair commish that I am, I wouldn't be out to totally screw over people or the computer for that matter, when nominating hold out candidates.

    What do you guys think? It could be implemented as early as our first offseason or it could wait until our second offseason.
     
  2. DreSmithJr

    DreSmithJr It Be So EMPTY, WITHOUT ME...

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2010
    Messages:
    1,476
    i like the cpu holdouts thing

    but as far as user... i think u shud do it like this

    Each user has to cut 7 people before the draft in order to make space for rookies anyway right?

    combined with our salary cap, those 7 players shud meet certain ratings requirements

    for example lets say u said out of those 7 players 2 had to be 75 or better and 2 had to be 85 or better

    at the end of this year shawn merrimans contract ends for me..

    do u think i can afford to sign him or will based up the cap requirements?

    so he wud be a FA.

    that would be cool i think.
     
  3. Keller

    Keller The enemy of my enemy is my friend.

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2010
    Messages:
    13,939
    The key difference on the user front is users don't always have to cut people because contracts expire and when they do, owners can move those players into free agency.

    I personally like the randomness aspect of the holdout proposal. That means it could happen to any team with a Max $ player (I'm thinking most teams will have at least 1.)

    Just setting the bar and saying, release players over this overall just handcuff's guys into making tough decisions and it doesn't seem like that would be as enjoyable as it randomly happening.

    What does everyone else think?
     
  4. yankeery25

    yankeery25 Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2010
    Messages:
    1,286
    I like the randomisity idea
     
  5. stryder24

    stryder24 Walk On

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2010
    Messages:
    757
    I don't like that Vontae Davis's name was thrown out there :)
     
  6. Geiger52

    Geiger52 Walk On

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2010
    Messages:
    133
    I like the ideas. It'd definitely make things a bit more interesting.
     
  7. Subkontraktor

    Subkontraktor Plays with Knives.

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2010
    Messages:
    694
    As of right now, I'm against this.

    For one reason, it adds more work, that I don't feel is neccesary because of the second reason.

    The second reason is that we already have a pretty strict salary cap. Now, I may be wrong because it's my first season playing like this, but isn't the cap in there to make owners have tough decisions? Especially those owners that do well and have a lot of players progress - making them unsignable?

    Right now I'm right at the cap maximum. I don't know how that will play out, but I'm sure I'm going to have to make some decisions.

    Also.. I need to read more on the offseason - I don't remember it all - don't players already demand more money if they achieve something (lead the league or team). I guess I shouldn't bring this up without looking at it first, but bottom line was that I thought the Cap already made things interesting? Maybe I'm wrong?
     
  8. Keller

    Keller The enemy of my enemy is my friend.

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2010
    Messages:
    13,939
    The salary cap is certainly intricate enough to force people to make some tough decisions. This isn't something thats going to happen on a large scale. As I mentioned, it would only happen to 1 or 2 players per offseason and it would only happen to Max$ players who are currently under contract.

    Players will have their Max$ demands still, sure, but this is sort of an acceleration of the those demands. Normally the owner has the luxury of waiting until the players contract was up before deciding whether or not to pay him the large sum of money he demands. This accelerates that and forces them to make a decision now instead of 3 or 4 seasons down the road.

    Regardless, thats why we have the discussions. Thanks for the input. I'd like to get some more peoples opinions obviously.
     
  9. yankeery25

    yankeery25 Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2010
    Messages:
    1,286
    I had to make a lot of tough decisions in the beginning of this year. I had to dump salary left and right in order to get a team on the field.
     

Share This Page