It Was Inevitable (Renegotiation Issues)

[sovstar]

If you're in another league or browse the FOFC forums you're probably aware that there is a mass movement to police contract renegotiations. The issue at hand is that FOF's renegotiation logic is weak - it's too easy to keep your core team together. This creates a ripple that affects the quality of free agents available in the offseason and the overall fun that can be had in one of the key parts of the game.

The most common rule put in place is one that says that GM's are only allowed to restructure a player's contract in its final year. An exemption is made for holdouts.

I think the renegotiation logic is going to start affecting us more and more as we use FOF 2k7 more and more. In my opinion, it would be best to be proactive about it. I want free agency to be a fun (and important) venture in this league. Let's flesh out any thoughts, concerns, and questions about this issue.

[Cringer]

The most common rule put in place is one that says that GM's are only allowed to restructure a player's contract in its final year. An exemption is made for holdouts.

It happens in the NFL, so there must be some fighting going on over this one.

Whatever happens happens I guess, just let me know what the rule is. Stupid FOF.

[sovstar]

I don't want to single Kozure out, because he didn't break a rule. But this contract is one that makes me very queasy.



Nitschke was rookie of the year last season, is rated ~90, and extended for peanuts. Absolutely makes no sense...

[Kozure]

Yup, a big strategy I use is to renegotiate early. You can get guys for less if you get sign them when they are young.

I have no problem with any rule that you put into place. Would probably be for the best.

Also, you could renegotiate early for less in FOF2004 too.

[Cringer]

That is odd. Can't say I have ever tried to extend a guy going into his second year.

I was going to ask if Given's and Kennedy's contracts were close to what you are talking about? They are nothing like Nitschke there, but I am pretty sure they are guys I have either extended, or just re-worked their contracts years before they were up, with the goal of creating cap room the year I did it.

[Kozure]

I must say, Nitschke looks goooooood.

[hawkster]

We had the same debate in the USFL. Don was the biggest opponent of this, and I imagine he will be here again, and I pretty much agree with his points. I hate artificial rules.

Some points argued over:

1. Trade exceptions - renegotiating a guy after trading for him
2. Cap-Out offers
3. Some way to renegotiate before the last year that still cost the team money (i.e. every year from the current deal had to be exceeded by the new deal, including the current year.)
4. Not having a rule at all
5. Artificially lowering the cap (i.e. every owner MUST have 10 mil in cap room or he's violating the rules) but allowing all renegotions as they stand.

I'm sure we'll see more of the same here, but those were the major sticking points in our debate.

[Kozure]

The artificial salary cap isn't a good idea. I do think a rule should be in place.

[Matt]

As a general rule, I hate outside of game rules.

[sovstar]

1. Trade exceptions - renegotiating a guy after trading for him

If a guy gives someone a bad contract, it makes sense that their trade value is diminished. What you see is what you get.

2. Cap-Out offers

Capping out isn't a bad thing, but it would make any rule weaker. Maybe more important is that it would be a pain to police. I'd probably have to open the game as each team and make sure the exact cap out offer was made.

3. Some way to renegotiate before the last year that still cost the team money (i.e. every year from the current deal had to be exceeded by the new deal, including the current year.)

A deal that is better than the current one doesn't necessarily mean it's better for the player. Drew Rosenhaus doesn't tell himself and his client, "Hey, that is better than what you are making right now." It's more complicated than that.

5. Artificially lowering the cap (i.e. every owner MUST have 10 mil in cap room or he's violating the rules) but allowing all renegotions as they stand.

I think that'd be absolute hell to police. Too much of the game depends on the in-game cap number.

[sovstar]

As a general rule, I hate outside of game rules.

Who doesn't? That's not a legit excuse to avoid them though.

[Matt]

Who doesn't? That's not a legit excuse to avoid them though.

no, you're right. It's my special way of stating the obvious and not adding a solution to a problem

[Suicane]

I for one am a proponent of letting things stand as they are. Everyone can do it so it has no effect in that regard. The thing it does do is lower the amount of quality free agents (Jeff explained this to me....slowly) which doesn't bother me at all. I actually like that it makes rebuilding harder.

[sovstar]

I for one am a proponent of letting things stand as they are. Everyone can do it so it has no effect in that regard. The thing it does do is lower the amount of quality free agents (Jeff explained this to me....slowly) which doesn't bother me at all. I actually like that it makes rebuilding harder.

So to be clear, you have no gripes with Nitschke's extension and you wouldn't have a problem if that was more common?

[sovstar]

Guys have always griped that our free agency classes suck. Guess what? In comparison to what they will look like in a year or two, they will look like gold mines.