http://www.thecfl.us/forum/

Free agency stage 2
http://www.thecfl.us/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1682		 Page 2 of 2
Author:  Doug5984 [ Fri Aug 19, 2005 10:22 am ]
Post subject: 
[quote8658e1d="Joe"]I have thought that maybe we should consider adopting a rule similar to the one the enfl has:

[quote8658e1d]4. Contracts.

(i) When making any contract offer, you may not double or exceed double a player's salary from one year to the next, except from the first year of the contract to the second. You must release the player if you violate this rule. Note: bonus money is not included as part of the salary

(ii)Free Agent Bonus Requirement. Every free agent contract offer with a total value exceeding 10% of the current salary cap must include at least 20% in bonus money. Additionally, any two-year free agent contract offer that more than doubles the salary from the first to the second year must include at least 20% in bonus money [/quote8658e1d]

Under these rules the contract in question would still be legal, but they are good guidelines regardless.[/quote8658e1d]

My only problem with the eNFL rule is- since there is a rule in place people will do as much as they can without breaking the rule. We rarely have problems in our league, its a great group of owners who dont try to exploit the game. I like the catch all rule of sportsmanship. However, if the league wanted to impliment a rule I wouldnt be against it. I would be against the bonus rule, that is just too much work to do. :D
Author:  Joe [ Fri Aug 19, 2005 10:25 am ]
Post subject: 
yes sometimes that is too much, and I have been busted on more than one occasion :D
Author:  Grid Iron [ Fri Aug 19, 2005 11:30 am ]
Post subject: 
I think it's too complicated to enforce, given the minimal impact such contracts have on a season.

I say let the AI decide what is a good contract for the player, and let the team deal with the cap hell.:twisted:

For extreme situations, say a team signing 15 stars to 2-year deals which would put them $150 million over the cap the following year, the commish could always invoke the sportsmanship rule.

Note to Tommy Kuhn: don't even think we're actually going to pay you that $12 million salary next year!:)
Author:  MrBug708 [ Fri Aug 19, 2005 11:42 am ]
Post subject: 
I still think it is unbelievable that anyone thinks that I did this contract with something shady in mind. There is no sense in signing him for what he originally asked for. Do you know the cap hit over the longterm contract that I would suffer? Not to mention the fact that if he can't come back THIS year, I'd have him on my books next year as a wasted spot.

It's a gamble, pure and simple. If he wanted less bonus money and more first year salary, I would have done that gladly, but I didnt want to risk not being able to sign him. I believe all I did was remove all of the years he was asking and just left only the 2.

It was his demands, I only made the contract for 2 years instead of the 5 he wanted.
Author:  dberner30 [ Fri Aug 19, 2005 3:31 pm ]
Post subject: 
im all for Hon getting boned. That is who lost. He has a guy on the books for 17MIL next year. If he cuts him it still costs him 8MIL. The big bonus is what makes this deal fair. The player got a shitload of guaranteed money. That is way better than a 5 yr deal with less or the same guaranteed money cuz he gets paid next year if HON cuts him. Another fat signing bonus. :D
Author:  MrBug708 [ Fri Aug 19, 2005 3:56 pm ]
Post subject: 
Indeed. There wasnt anyone in FA who I was going throw a lot of money at and like I said, I had 17 million in cap space this year.
Author:  Grid Iron [ Fri Aug 19, 2005 8:28 pm ]
Post subject: 
[quotead268d2="dberner30"]im all for Hon getting boned.:D[/quotead268d2]

I second that! :lol:

I think the offer was totally fine, MrBug.

In fact, contracts like that are only a problem if an owner wants to just load for one year, win it all, then quit the league with his team in cap hell.

But we have such a great bunch of owners, and such a long waiting list, I doubt that will happen.
Author:  fantastic flying froggies [ Sat Aug 20, 2005 12:24 am ]
Post subject: 
FWIW, I actually thought about doing what Bug did.

Except I didn't have the cap space to work with that he did...
Author:  TurfToe [ Sat Aug 20, 2005 4:10 pm ]
Post subject: 
[quoteb4b62c5="TurfToe"][quoteb4b62c5="wademoore"]Ummmm..

Anyone else think that contract for Beech is WAY shady?[/quoteb4b62c5]

Shady?

How about just plain wrong?![/quoteb4b62c5]

Just to clarify on my comment, I was talking about how much an injured player was requesting...I guess I wasn't paying enough attention to what was being discussed.

I'm all for allowing an owner to do anything within the means of our constitution and whatever the game allows. Unless, of course, it is to put a team in serious cap jeopardy and then quit but I believe that is fixed by never letting that owner back in the league ever again.

GM's can make you scratch your head all the time with certain moves, the results will indicate whether it was right or wrong.

I think the value of risk/reward is in the eye of the beholder.

I may have to make offers like this to get any FA's to sign...
Author:  daedalus [ Sat Aug 20, 2005 10:38 pm ]
Post subject: 
I don't know how it can possibly be regulated but I'm okay with it in this case because of the size of the bonus and the fact that it's a 2-year deal.
Author:  daedalus [ Sun Aug 21, 2005 1:30 am ]
Post subject: 
[quote772687c="Joe"]wow, Urrita went for dirt cheap. Good pickup for Long Beach.[/quote772687c]I . . . I . . . uhhh, well. Huh. That one confused me for a bit. I wasn't quite expecting him to actually signed that one.

Hooray, I do s'pose. :)
Author:  daedalus [ Sun Aug 21, 2005 1:31 am ]
Post subject: 
[quoteef68783="Doug5984"]My only problem with the eNFL rule is- since there is a rule in place people will do as much as they can without breaking the rule. We rarely have problems in our league, its a great group of owners who dont try to exploit the game. I like the catch all rule of sportsmanship. However, if the league wanted to impliment a rule I wouldnt be against it. I would be against the bonus rule, that is just too much work to do. :D[/quoteef68783]What Doug said. :)
Page 2 of 2 All times are UTC-07:00
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited
https://www.phpbb.com/