Discussion on Cap reduction

[JesterBlaze]

I think some of us assumed this was a discussion on a 25% cap reduction, which Matt has pointed out isn't necessarily the case. Perhaps some discussion on different levels?

[Kobeck]

I like when I first joined this league I mentioned something about this and instantly got hated by the inner circle. But here we are years later talking about this very issue again. I guess it takes someone else bringing it up to get it some real attention.

I remember and you offered a complaint without offering a solution.

[JesterBlaze]

[BOSS]

This would be a great thing for the league and our overall experience playing this game.

[tarcone]

This would be a great thing for the league and our overall experience playing this game.

Why?

[BOSS]

The same reasons Matt listed. He said himself he finds it more enjoyable, more of a challenge. It would provide better talent in the F/A pool. Gives the struggling teams with cap room more of a chance to get better. The cap itself will become one of the most important aspects of the game. Right now, money is no object in this game except for a few teams. It will create parity.

[Matt]

To be clear, this is a discussion to have a cap reduction. the value is not set. we could agree that we do want cap reduction, but for it to be only 5 or 10%........or less. I brought up 10% as an example. the league i'm in has 25% and no franchise tag. It's pretty hard, I'll admit.........but that league sims 6 days a week, so the game years zip by.

[Matt]

If you want to talk realism... in real life players take salary cuts to stay together with their team to keep winning. Does this game take into account stuff like that? When I have a super star WR or QB and he is coming up for a later contract in his career you think he is gonna take a pay cut to keep my team together? Idk. I dont think we can have absolute realism.

that's what that little "cap out offer" button is for.

[BOSS]

To be clear, this is a discussion to have a cap reduction. the value is not set. we could agree that we do want cap reduction, but for it to be only 5 or 10%........or less. I brought up 10% as an example. the league i'm in has 25% and no franchise tag. It's pretty hard, I'll admit.........but that league sims 6 days a week, so the game years zip by.

Yeah, I think 25% is a little extreme myself. We do need some reduction though. Like 10-15% I believe would be a good start. As for myself, I would like to keep the franchise tag though.

[Matt]

Again, the thread is for discussion. the actual cap reduced value would be another poll.
I think i may have scared some people when I started the thread.

the main reason this has never come up is because we've never had the ability to do it before. With Ben's help, he actually adjusts the cap IN GAME so that it looks like lost cap space. There's no manual record keeping required.

[Beeznik]

The same reasons Matt listed. He said himself he finds it more enjoyable, more of a challenge. It would provide better talent in the F/A pool. Gives the struggling teams with cap room more of a chance to get better. The cap itself will become one of the most important aspects of the game. Right now, money is no object in this game except for a few teams. It will create parity.

I think it will take away from the game. For instance, having to let go of a player go after his rookie contract after you drafted and developed him. That would suck for a lot of people, IMO.

Let the struggling teams get better the way everyone else has had to the last 20 league years the IFL has had. Why should they get thrown a bone now?

[SteveBsFan]

Let the struggling teams get better the way everyone else has had to the last 20 league years the IFL has had. Why should they get thrown a bone now?

What you say would hold more weight if it happened more than it did. Take a look at the past 10 or so seasons, especially in the NC. Penn, Tulsa, Lawrence, Newark, and Vancouver have all been in the playoffs together nearly every season except for a fluke Oakland title.

It's been pretty much the same in the AC except the North which is the only division that seems to have parity. The only reason I took over Murf's spot is the same reason they took the Cards spot. They waited out the aging process of players.

(I quoted Beeznik but the next parts are my general reply, so don't think anything below is directed at you specifically, Beez)

I seen people compare it to the NFL, and yea that league probably doesn't have as much parity as it would want, and the FA turnover isn't very high either. However, the owner of the Browns gets a nice fat paycheck even if his team goes 6-10. Shit, he probably makes more than some winning teams because of revenue sharing.

In our league, losing teams get a high pick, but that's about it. Attendance, coaching, team income, scouting, etc are all extremely vague and bare. IFL teams aren't nearly as equipped to compete as NFL teams are. We have to sit around and slowly build a roster that meshes with the exploits of FoF (cohesion, BPR receiver, 3-4 blitzing WLB, etc) and hope the rest of our roster doesn't take a random off-season hit by the FoF engine, or star players just get too old.

When you factor in a league that basically doesn't have a salary cap, that takes away one more thing that makes running a team fun.

----

If anyone says 'just join a league with a tighter cap', save it. It's not a sin to talk about rule changes. If we're not talking about ways to improve the league each and every off-season, we've already given up and may as well close shop.

[JesterBlaze]

Good post, Beans.

I'm going to touch on a sensitive subject to give another angle so please everyone please only read this post if you're skin's thick enough.

The NFL fires coaches and GMs every season for simply not being as good as the league requires. The fact that the same teams make the IFL playoffs may be because of a salary cap somehow... or it could be that those GMs are simply better. I personally don't want a salary cap crunch because it will require me to spend more time than I'd like replacing players with similar players, not because I think it's going to cause me to have less success with W's and L's. I don't mean to sound like an asshole when I say that I personally believe any "crunch" will be felt more by my opponents than me. I won't like the style but I can certainly adjust from a competitive POV.

Salary cap crunch means QB-WR-WR runs things and there's nothing anyone can do about it. Right now the past 3 IFL champions have NOT been in the QB-WR-WR mold.

[Beeznik]

If anyone says 'just join a league with a tighter cap', save it. It's not a sin to talk about rule changes. If we're not talking about ways to improve the league each and every off-season, we've already given up and may as well close shop.

I disagree strongly. Having leagues with different rules/etc is a good thing. This way, they can suit different GMs styles/preferences. No one is telling anyone to leave this league, but join another one that fits what you want if you think it would be better. People obviously feel this rule might be detrimental to the league. Detrimental to those who enjoy drafting players and watching them grow.

If you struggle with drafting, there are threads in FOFC that will show you how to improve your drafts, and it's not very time consuming at all.

[JesterBlaze]

It's not a sin to talk about rule changes. If we're not talking about ways to improve the league each and every off-season, we've already given up and may as well close shop.

Genocide is a sin. The IFL is the ONLY FOF league that I know of with....
1) 1 game/week
2) Fictional teams
3) no salary cap
4) coolest mickeyficken' GMs around!!



I'm not telling anyone to leave who doesn't want to, but please see that it's wrong to try to change the 1 exception into the rule when there's plenty of people left who like the exception and have no other league to turn to.

I've wanted to join a 2nd 1 gm/week league with fictional teams for a long time now but the option isn't there. The IFL is some the only option for some of us. So that's why we suggest other options for the horse lovers: leave the Unicorn alone!