Free Agency - Out of the Box

[Chris Rex]

Again, the more I see these posts, the more it says to me: Spend a huge amount on a Bonus if you REALLY want the player. You may pay the piper down the road because Bonus money, even in renegs, adds up. If you offer more bonus money, youll get your guy and someone else wont.

This is all truth, even as we speak. Why do we need a rule to try to force EVERYONE to spend like that?

If my approach is to spend a bunch of bonus money, great, ill get the big player and be strapped by the cap in a season or two, but it may also pay off. If I want to lay low and draft well and pick up a few so-so players, I can do that without breaking the bank. I dont see why everyone has to COMMIT to the same approach.

I am TOTALLY COOL with contracts like the Torres one.
It has not translated into a championship ( A VERY IMPORTANT POINT), and if he adds xxx more such contracts, he'll be in cap hell. No skin off my back.

[r00k]

Again, the more I see these posts, the more it says to me: Spend a huge amount on a Bonus if you REALLY want the player. You may pay the piper down the road because Bonus money, even in renegs, adds up. If you offer more bonus money, youll get your guy and someone else wont.

This is all truth, even as we speak. Why do we need a rule to try to force EVERYONE to spend like that?

If my approach is to spend a bunch of bonus money, great, ill get the big player and be strapped by the cap in a season or two, but it may also pay off. If I want to lay low and draft well and pick up a few so-so players, I can do that without breaking the bank. I dont see why everyone has to COMMIT to the same approach.

I am TOTALLY COOL with contracts like the Torres one.
It has not translated into a championship ( A VERY IMPORTANT POINT), and if he adds xxx more such contracts, he'll be in cap hell. No skin off my back.

It is raining cats and dogs here and I am bored half to death ... so I will continue to amuse myself with responses.

Chris ... what you say is true but I need to add this one caveat. With our current system, we are limited to spend only 1/2 of the totally salary in bonus and then you can negotiate the other half away. With this proposal, if you want to offer the same dollars, most of it must be put in cap.

[r00k]

And to let everyone know, I am perfectly ok with the current system. To paraphrase Jester' s thoughts (which I also agree) :

We all have play on the same field and how we manage within the rules is fair game to all.

But to be honest, I have to agree with Boss, in principle, and did vote in favor of the last proposal.

[Jave]

It is raining cats and dogs here and I am bored half to death ... so I will continue to amuse myself with responses.

Chris ... what you say is true but I need to add this one caveat. With our current system, we are limited to spend only 1/2 of the totally salary in bonus and then you can negotiate the other half away. With this proposal, if you want to offer the same dollars, most of it must be put in cap.

I think Rook's posts this offseason are more then he has EVER posted at one time. I would like to continue this discussion for the mere amusement of seeing just how many times Rook will post before he gives up and goes silent again!!

[r00k]

I think Rook's posts this offseason are more then he has EVER posted at one time. I would like to continue this discussion for the mere amusement of seeing just how many times Rook will post before he gives up and goes silent again!!

+1

[Chris Rex]

I think Rook's posts this offseason are more then he has EVER posted at one time. I would like to continue this discussion for the mere amusement of seeing just how many times Rook will post before he gives up and goes silent again!!

lol

[SteveBsFan]

The problem with this plan is more teams would be forced to keep their young drafted talent, mostly for financial flexibility. This even lowers the chance of us seeing talented players on the market. The current bums we see would be signed for lower money, which increases cap space and allows teams to keep the talented players on their roster for their careers.

The only way your plan would work would be if there were guaranteed 3-5 studs on the market every year, and 10+ other really solid players. This would allow teams get to into the massive bidding wars involving tons of bonus money, and pushing the cap space tighter.

Keep in mind, Torres is the example a lot use for this financial situation, but like Jester pointed out, he should never have been a FA to begin with. I believe Ragin didn't franchise him because he was awol, and he went to the market.

[tarcone]

But Cringer, only if you decide to offer that and once you do that once or twice, you will be in the same situation as guys with less money - it will eventually catch up to you (like a credit card). That is the basic rule of the free market. Spend your money and you will have less to spend and be in charge of the free market.

But this is an extreme example of one guy. You can take it further.
Team A has 6o million in bonus $. Team B has $45 million in bouns. Both teams bid on the same 5 players. Team A bids 12.5 million on all 5 for 2 seasons. Team B can only bid 10 million on all 5. Now we make a rule that you can only bid $10 million on a player in his 4th season on Tuesdays that follow a Jewish holiday in February. And then we add one that it can happen on only odd numbered Tuesdays, because I had to work.

NO TO NEW RULES

[tarcone]

Why dont we play BBCF where you can only keep your players 4 or 5 season until they graduate. And everyone loss their studs.

[Jave]

And to let everyone know, I am perfectly ok with the current system. To paraphrase Jester' s thoughts (which I also agree) :

We all have play on the same field and how we manage within the rules is fair game to all.

I vote for that option.

[Kobeck]

I have went from thinking we/IFL should do something to thinking leave it alone and we all play by the same rules.

Neyt to rule changes

[DakotaGeorge]

So there is NO chance to redo the contract to save money down the road? This sounds like DG's idea only much better worded haha.

Sorry. Next time I will get Jeff Foxworthy to translate.


Now on to this newly purposed idea. I think there is alot more factors in this rule that could make it flop then the previously purposed one in the other thread. Jester makes good points. I would still vote for it tho because we need change.

[Jave]

Sorry. Next time I will get Jeff Foxworthy to translate.


Now on to this newly purposed idea. I think there is alot more factors in this rule that could make it flop then the previously purposed one in the other thread. Jester makes good points. I would still vote for it tho because we need change.

I guess it's a good thing nobody gives a flying fuck what you think.....

[Hell Atlantic]

Why dont we play BBCF where you can only keep your players 4 or 5 season until they graduate. And everyone loss their studs.

go play a major league baseball sim with no cap if you don't ever want to worry about losing your players. what is this - slavery?

"i drafted you. therefore i own you.

...FOREVER!"

pussy.

[DakotaGeorge]

go play a major league baseball sim with no cap if you don't ever want to worry about losing your players. what is this - slavery?

"i drafted you. therefore i own you.

...FOREVER!"

pussy.

Baseball has rules to pry some players away from your team. Some rule like if they arent on your active roster they go into another draft. I don't remember the details.


In short this is basically like Pre FA NFL. Everyone will keep all their players. The game's downfalls make this like infant mode. I believe some GMs would be in awe if they actually had to manage their cap here or make real decisions besides the game plan. Again I will vote for any rule that brings change and offers a solution to any of the forementioned problems in other threads.