If you missed the other discussion check it out- but this is just a feeler to see where we need to go with this...

_________________


Home of Marvin "Muddy Waters" Raffo

I voted and would like to add that whatever rule we come up with should be applied to FA only, so as not to restrict restructuring and other contract perspectives that have, do, or might come up.

_________________
ROF Division Champions: 2039 - 2043, 2045, 2047, 2054, 2056 - 2060, 2063, 2066-2067, 2070-2072
WFC Conference Champions: 2018, 2041, 2042, 2057-2058, 2060, 2062-2063
CFL Champions: 2018, 2041, 2057-2058, 2060, 2062

[quotef7b7a67="TurfToe"]I voted and would like to add that whatever rule we come up with should be applied to FA only, so as not to restrict restructuring and other contract perspectives that have, do, or might come up.[/quotef7b7a67]

yes yes

_________________

Ring of Fire Division Champions - 2009, 2011-2026, 2028-33
Western Conference Champions - 2011-2013, 2016, 2017, 2019-2022, 2024, 2025, 2028, 2033
CFL Champions - 2011, 2013, 2016, 2017, 2019, 2020, 2022, 2025

[quotedaaed2b="TurfToe"]I voted and would like to add that whatever rule we come up with should be applied to FA only, so as not to restrict restructuring and other contract perspectives that have, do, or might come up.[/quotedaaed2b]

Agreed..

_________________
omaha arrowheads

JJ Smitty's Record
Atlantic Division Champions - 2007, 2008, 2010, 2018, 2020, 2021, 2028, 2035, 2037, 2039, 2044, 2046, 2047
Eastern Conference Champions - 2008, 2039, 2047
CFL Champions - 2008, 2039, 2047

[quotef2573e0="TurfToe"]I voted and would like to add that whatever rule we come up with should be applied to FA only, so as not to restrict restructuring and other contract perspectives that have, do, or might come up.[/quotef2573e0]

I agree with that, should have made that an option as well.

_________________


Home of Marvin "Muddy Waters" Raffo

one year contracts okay, limits on bonuses, and only in free agency stages and not restricted free agents.

_________________

[quote68d5259="Hoosier"]one year contracts okay, limits on bonuses, and only in free agency stages and not restricted free agents.[/quote68d5259]

???

[quoteaab49bf="TurfToe"]I voted and would like to add that whatever rule we come up with should be applied to FA only, so as not to restrict restructuring and other contract perspectives that have, do, or might come up.[/quoteaab49bf]

Agree.

_________________
GM, Atlanta Wolfpack
Formerly of the Anchorage Wolfpack and Huntington Beach Wolfpack and now back as a mediocre GM
CFL Champs - 2026, 2029

I think the best wording would be any rule we come up with [b5e1980f]Only applies to unrestricted free agents[/b5e1980f]

_________________


Home of Marvin "Muddy Waters" Raffo

[quote75917dc="Doug5984"]I think the best wording would be any rule we come up with [b75917dc]Only applies to unrestricted free agents[/b75917dc][/quote75917dc]

Actually, I'd say unrestricted Free Agents in FA-1 ... otherwise (mainly for option 2 here) it gets real tricky in relation to undrafted rookies.

_________________

[quote="Shooter"][quotee52b466="Hoosier"]one year contracts okay, limits on bonuses, and only in free agency stages and not restricted free agents.[/quotee52b466]

???[/quote


I suppose writing it correctly would have made it clearly.

I believe one year contracts are okay, but only on restricted free agents, not the unrestricted or undrafted free agents.

_________________

While I did vote for one of the first 2 options, I also feel we need to limit this to unrestricted free agents and not limit it to any stage. The rule should apply to all FA rounds.

[quote10ec59f="Shooter"]While I did vote for one of the first 2 options, I also feel we need to limit this to unrestricted free agents and not limit it to any stage. The rule should apply to all FA rounds.[/quote10ec59f]

That's fine for rule #1, but for rule #2 - how do you handle all of the undrafted rookies?

_________________

[quoteacfc20a="wademoore"][quoteacfc20a="Shooter"]While I did vote for one of the first 2 options, I also feel we need to limit this to unrestricted free agents and not limit it to any stage. The rule should apply to all FA rounds.[/quoteacfc20a]

That's fine for rule #1, but for rule #2 - how do you handle all of the undrafted rookies?[/quoteacfc20a]

I guess I'm not aware of what benefit could be derived from offering a rookie a 1 year deal. For the most part they are reasonable offers. It behooves you to make longer offers to rookies because you have exclusive negotiating rights to that player. The 1-year contract exploit only seems to be an exploit when trying to draw talent in a competitive bidding process.

_________________

Deep South Division Champions
2006, 2009-10, 2019, 2023-24, 2027, 2031-32, 2034-35, 2040, 2044, 2046-47, 2051-53, 2055-56, 2058-62
Eastern Conference Champions
2009, 2031, 2055
CFL Champions
2031, 2055
Hall of Fame
Joshua Mask, Douglas Hartman, Carl Bradford, Leland Wellins, Wally Wooden (#80), Brantley Gilmore (#9), Mo Kirwan, Josh Stanton, Efrain Tate

[quote8134e6a="Raven Hawk"][quote8134e6a="wademoore"][quote8134e6a="Shooter"]While I did vote for one of the first 2 options, I also feel we need to limit this to unrestricted free agents and not limit it to any stage. The rule should apply to all FA rounds.[/quote8134e6a]

That's fine for rule #1, but for rule #2 - how do you handle all of the undrafted rookies?[/quote8134e6a]

I guess I'm not aware of what benefit could be derived from offering a rookie a 1 year deal. For the most part they are reasonable offers. It behooves you to make longer offers to rookies because you have exclusive negotiating rights to that player. The 1-year contract exploit only seems to be an exploit when trying to draw talent in a competitive bidding process.[/quote8134e6a]

key word there is undrafted rookie..

Undrafted rookies all ask for 1 year deals.

_________________

[quotee3dbbaf="wademoore"][quotee3dbbaf="Raven Hawk"][quotee3dbbaf="wademoore"][quotee3dbbaf="Shooter"]While I did vote for one of the first 2 options, I also feel we need to limit this to unrestricted free agents and not limit it to any stage. The rule should apply to all FA rounds.[/quotee3dbbaf]

That's fine for rule #1, but for rule #2 - how do you handle all of the undrafted rookies?[/quotee3dbbaf]

I guess I'm not aware of what benefit could be derived from offering a rookie a 1 year deal. For the most part they are reasonable offers. It behooves you to make longer offers to rookies because you have exclusive negotiating rights to that player. The 1-year contract exploit only seems to be an exploit when trying to draw talent in a competitive bidding process.[/quotee3dbbaf]

key word there is undrafted rookie..

Undrafted rookies all ask for 1 year deals.[/quotee3dbbaf]

Gotcha, I misunderstood. Excellent point, Wade.

_________________

Deep South Division Champions
2006, 2009-10, 2019, 2023-24, 2027, 2031-32, 2034-35, 2040, 2044, 2046-47, 2051-53, 2055-56, 2058-62
Eastern Conference Champions
2009, 2031, 2055
CFL Champions
2031, 2055
Hall of Fame
Joshua Mask, Douglas Hartman, Carl Bradford, Leland Wellins, Wally Wooden (#80), Brantley Gilmore (#9), Mo Kirwan, Josh Stanton, Efrain Tate

Outside of that, I just don't know that there is any real practical purpose outside of FA-1. I don't think there have been insane 1-year deals outside of that set of stages - if a player is good enough to get worked up about an unfair deal, they're gone by the time FA-2 rolls around. It just seems to eliminate potentially unnecessary policing/griping if we limit it to that area.

Let's face it, if someone offers 4x the salary of a 35/35 mentor after the draft, do we really care?

_________________

[quote8f63810="wademoore"]Outside of that, I just don't know that there is any real practical purpose outside of FA-1. I don't think there have been insane 1-year deals outside of that set of stages - if a player is good enough to get worked up about an unfair deal, they're gone by the time FA-2 rolls around. It just seems to eliminate potentially unnecessary policing/griping if we limit it to that area.

Let's face it, if someone offers 4x the salary of a 35/35 mentor after the draft, do we really care?[/quote8f63810]

There were cases last year that the 1-year deal was used to sign players 45/45 guys that were being heavily sought after last year as the drafy was going on. So the answer is yes, some of us do care. I also care about the integrity issue.

[quote016d807="Shooter"][quote016d807="wademoore"]Outside of that, I just don't know that there is any real practical purpose outside of FA-1. I don't think there have been insane 1-year deals outside of that set of stages - if a player is good enough to get worked up about an unfair deal, they're gone by the time FA-2 rolls around. It just seems to eliminate potentially unnecessary policing/griping if we limit it to that area.

Let's face it, if someone offers 4x the salary of a 35/35 mentor after the draft, do we really care?[/quote016d807]

There were cases last year that the 1-year deal was used to sign players 45/45 guys that were being heavily sought after last year as the drafy was going on. So the answer is yes, some of us do care. I also care about the integrity issue.[/quote016d807]

Again, that was still during FA-1 then if it was during the draft.

I don't think I have ever seen a highly sought-after guy in FA-2. A guy in FA-2, who has gone through all of the main FA, through the draft, etc and garnered no contract offers - you don't think it is logical for him to sign a high-bonus, 1-year deal?

_________________

Wade, I fully understand what you are saying and agree with it.

For those that don't understand, FA-1 means the whole set of stages that occur before, during, and after the draft.

FA-2 is the shorter set of stages where you complain about rookies not signing.

_________________
ROF Division Champions: 2039 - 2043, 2045, 2047, 2054, 2056 - 2060, 2063, 2066-2067, 2070-2072
WFC Conference Champions: 2018, 2041, 2042, 2057-2058, 2060, 2062-2063
CFL Champions: 2018, 2041, 2057-2058, 2060, 2062

[quote734d67e="wademoore"][quote734d67e="Shooter"][quote734d67e="wademoore"]Outside of that, I just don't know that there is any real practical purpose outside of FA-1. I don't think there have been insane 1-year deals outside of that set of stages - if a player is good enough to get worked up about an unfair deal, they're gone by the time FA-2 rolls around. It just seems to eliminate potentially unnecessary policing/griping if we limit it to that area.

Let's face it, if someone offers 4x the salary of a 35/35 mentor after the draft, do we really care?[/quote734d67e]

There were cases last year that the 1-year deal was used to sign players 45/45 guys that were being heavily sought after last year as the drafy was going on. So the answer is yes, some of us do care. I also care about the integrity issue.[/quote734d67e]

Again, that was still during FA-1 then if it was during the draft.

I don't think I have ever seen a highly sought-after guy in FA-2. A guy in FA-2, who has gone through all of the main FA, through the draft, etc and garnered no contract offers - you don't think it is logical for him to sign a high-bonus, 1-year deal?[/quote734d67e]
Only exception might be a guy who got cut due to cap reasons. Pretty rare, though. And I don't think worth worring about. I think FA-2 should be wide open.

_________________

I'm disappointed that there isn't more of a concensus. I've seen the NAFL rule in action, and it really works.

[quotec6d4ad5="timmynausea"]I'm disappointed that there isn't more of a concensus. I've seen the NAFL rule in action, and it really works.[/quotec6d4ad5]
I think this is indictative of how divisive this issue has become. There's been more heated discussion over this than any other issue I've seen.

_________________

[quote8d2b3c6="Cheesehead Craig"][quote8d2b3c6="timmynausea"]I'm disappointed that there isn't more of a concensus. I've seen the NAFL rule in action, and it really works.[/quote8d2b3c6]
I think this is indictative of how divisive this issue has become. There's been more heated discussion over this than any other issue I've seen.[/quote8d2b3c6]

Shouldn't have to look too hard to find more heated discussions. It happens every year around this time and I'm waiting for it to escalate a little more.

_________________
ROF Division Champions: 2039 - 2043, 2045, 2047, 2054, 2056 - 2060, 2063, 2066-2067, 2070-2072
WFC Conference Champions: 2018, 2041, 2042, 2057-2058, 2060, 2062-2063
CFL Champions: 2018, 2041, 2057-2058, 2060, 2062

[quotea3f5533="Cheesehead Craig"][quotea3f5533="timmynausea"]I'm disappointed that there isn't more of a concensus. I've seen the NAFL rule in action, and it really works.[/quotea3f5533]
I think this is indictative of how divisive this issue has become. There's been more heated discussion over this than any other issue I've seen.[/quotea3f5533]

It's not divisive and I'm not over emotional! You're a big doodoo head whose big ugly face stinks of skunk!

Okay, seriously now, the way the A.I. signs contracts is fundamentally broken. I think some rule needs to be put in place, whether it's the NAFL rule or the 1-year rule.

Either one works for me.

_________________
GM, Atlanta Wolfpack
Formerly of the Anchorage Wolfpack and Huntington Beach Wolfpack and now back as a mediocre GM
CFL Champs - 2026, 2029