Originally posted by rush_27
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
2038 Off-season
Collapse
X
-
-
Yeah, especially at this point, teams have a pretty clear picture of their cap this year. A 1-year deal they can afford under the cap is basically getting the player for free. And the late round pick, if it pans out, it's a sweet 4-year deal for the team. :)
Leave a comment:
-
Guest repliedI thought this may come up! It's pretty simple, (for me anyway). I have the cap space, he immediately enters my depth chart as number 2 receiver and I didn't have to give up any draft picks.
Besides all this, I am new to MP leagues and am having to get used to the aggressive nature of Free Agency. He was available and improved my roster and $5m for this year didn't really hurt me.
If he gets 800+ yards this season, I will be happy.
Leave a comment:
-
Steve Worsham goes to Portland for a $5.220.000 contract with $3.000.000 guaranteed.... I still wondering why you didnīt trade for him for a low round pick and saved some cap room, and you could cut him without penalty if he fell like a monster in TC... Well things that I will never understandGood luck with him. Unfortunatly we will not play this year to kick his bottom
Leave a comment:
-
He wouldn't be able to gain weight anyway. Only players around average can gain/drop weight.
I thought it was short QBs / interceptions, and something about WR/DB height. Usually, skill makes a greater difference, though.
Leave a comment:
-
Guest repliedNot really. It's mostly important for moving positions as the player gains/loses ratings.
There's some evidence that short QBs will have more batted balls and taller WRs are better, but there's NO overwhelming evidence and any effect it has appears to be minimal.
I would imagine the same is true of other positions though I don't think anyone has bothered with OL and size.
Leave a comment:
-
I was wondering say you draft an offensive guard or center and he is way below average for weight..do you have to make him gain weight to reach his potential or play better?
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by irabowman View PostOne thing I am glad we don't have to deal with is bonus for X# TD's X# Games started X# Tackles etc etc. Now that would drive me insane lol. and I'd be broke very soon with my math skills.
EDIT: And yes, no more new rules. 1 year contract, into a franchise tag, resign. I'm ok with that. I'm also ok with allowing the player back into FA.
Leave a comment:
-
One thing I am glad we don't have to deal with is bonus for X# TD's X# Games started X# Tackles etc etc. Now that would drive me insane lol. and I'd be broke very soon with my math skills.
Leave a comment:
-
Let's go with as few rules as possible.
In both FOF & the NFL, teams prefer to lock up a player for years if they can. This shouldn't be easy to do cheaply; FA competition stops that from happening.
In both FOF & the NFL, teams also prefer as brief a real commitment as possible in their contracts. The numbers agents throw around are always exaggerated, because in reality, only the first ___ year/s are guaranteed. If the guy isn't up to snuff, the team can usually cut ties very soon without being on the hook for lots of bonus in the final years.
This isn't possible in FOF, where contracts are simpler, but you can instead just use shorter deals to achieve the same thing. There's nothing very realistic about a 4-year contract with $5M of signing bonus in each year. In the NFL the guarantees would dissipate very quickly, and no GM would be going through all these mid-career average to solid players and guaranteeing significant money for 3 or 4 years down the line.
It's not perfect, and one suggestion I would make is maybe remove the franchise tag (something other leagues do adopt). People like the franchise tag, though. Personally, I don't use the tag here if I sign the player to a 1-year deal in FA. The whole idea of that is to let the player back into FA again. And more quality in the FA pool is a good thing.
Leave a comment:
-
Guest repliedOriginally posted by irabowman View Posthis is just a idea to throw out also, what would happen if the rule was no 1 year offers allowed till FA RD 4 or 5?
Leave a comment:
-
Guest repliedOriginally posted by sawblade300 View PostYou don't see this in the real NFL.
Leave a comment:
-
OK I am not the sharpest player, I understand though what some of you guys are saying about a 1 year contract and I also like what Rob had to say. Apparently there is never a perfect way to settle it for everyone.
This is just a idea to throw out also, what would happen if the rule was no 1 year offers allowed till FA RD 4 or 5? This would allow for the better player be locked up for longer time than 1yr. Then again would the same argument come up that a 2 year deal is unfair?
I sure am glad I am not the commish lmao.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by sawblade300 View PostI know the reasoning behind it. I've done it myself. Ya know...if you can't beat 'em, blah blah blah.
I just think it takes the strategy out of creating a deal for a player. "Here. I have a ton of money. I'll throw it all at this guy and do it again next year." You don't see this in the real NFL. If I'm trying to build my team and see a guy in year 5, fresh off his rookie contract, and I think he can fit into my team's future. I'm going to offer him a 3/4 year deal. I want him for the future. I make a pretty good offer. Then in comes quick draw and offers a one year deal and there goes my future. Only to bid on him again the following year. It's just my opinion, but I think it's bogus.
I'm not saying to make any rules, even though I'd like to see one. I'm just expressing my feelings about the one hit wonders. Trust me. I'm not losing sleep over it.
On the other hand, you don't see many trades in the NFL of a 5th round pick for two tight ends. At some point you just have to accept that this isn't the NFL. This is how things work in the OSFL.
Leave a comment:
Leave a comment: