AA
Not the Droid I Seek
3%
2013 RADL Champion
Posts: 356
|
Post by AA on Apr 21, 2012 12:47:13 GMT -5
I don't want to pay any of my players. They're all greedy bastards!
I didn't realize that the TS guys would become RFA's and we would have the chance to retain them. I was under the impression that players had to be in the league 3 years before being considered RFA's, but I may be confusing our rules with the NFL rules. So long as we have the chance to sign our draftees to long-term contracts should they turn out to be good players than I'm fine with the terms the way they are. Although I still think my idea was pure brilliance.
And since when did Jesus start playing football, or was Steve referring to Tebow?
|
|
|
Post by RADL Commissioner on Apr 21, 2012 13:21:51 GMT -5
less than 4 years is RFA. If a TS player has been on for 4 years he can be EXTENDED but that voids his original contract and he'd need promoting.
Same thing for an RFA matching of your zero term TS player. You can keep them but they need to be promoted to normal roster.
they can only be on TS for original contract, but if they're so good we're worried about losing them and talking about long term extensions for the most part you'd want them on your active roster.
|
|
Nerf Herders
Storm Trooper
1%
Who's scruffy looking?
Posts: 688
|
Post by Nerf Herders on Apr 21, 2012 19:16:39 GMT -5
What Pete Said.
"I didn't realize that the TS guys would become RFA's and we would have the chance to retain them. I was under the impression that players had to be in the league 3 years before being considered RFA's, but I may be confusing our rules with the NFL rules. So long as we have the chance to sign our draftees to long-term contracts should they turn out to be good players than I'm fine with the terms the way they are. Although I still think my idea was pure brilliance."
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 29, 2012 17:06:32 GMT -5
Also round 2 players could be franchised as they will have 4 years credited service at the end of their 3rd season. If bid on, "the next jimmy graham" would then make a fair wage. Maybe, just maybe the top half of round 2 should be 4 years so you could extend them without competition. Maybe, just maybe round 5 could be an "assign term" round. But round 3 and 4, imo, should be as is because all these super stars you guys plan on drafting would hold out if payed the piss wages in a second contract.RFA bidding which all these mid-round players would require, is designed to pay them a fair wage. Which guys like Aldon Smith, Cruz, Washington, and all the other RFA's bid on got. A decent raise and their brilliant drafters get to always match the offers. undrafted rookies are all "assign term" guys and TS eligible. I agree though if you get a 5th round stud WR then you should probably be rewarded and allowed to keep them on the cheap. Round 3? Seems like the luck of the draw 70% of the time and I'd imagine that's being generous. Jesus the NFL hit rate can't be more than 50% as the average NFL career is 3 seasons. I understand your point about holding out, but the problem is that a player's first 2 years can basically have no fantasy value. Some players will not be ready until year 3. I feel like the 4th and 5th rounds can be wasted picks because by the time they develop, their contracts are already up and now I have to compete with the rest of the league in 2 years. It's like I'm picking now just to have the right to match the RFA. The NFL tends to sign late round players to 4 year contracts. Yes, the players may or may not hold out, but there is a reason why they try and lock up players at those positions for 4 years. I feel like we should be able to sign a 4th rounder to at least 3 years if not 4. I look at the current 4th rounders available to me in the 2012 draft, and I feel like it's almost pointless to grab a prospect who won't deliver within the first 2 years.
|
|
AA
Not the Droid I Seek
3%
2013 RADL Champion
Posts: 356
|
Post by AA on May 29, 2012 18:25:16 GMT -5
Agreed. I was actually just thinking about just this issue when considering possible draft picks. QB's who aren't slatted to be starters become basically undraftable because they're all not likely to even see the field in their first two years, and WR's typically take three years. I'm not against paying players what they're worth should they turn out to be decent starters. I just wish there was a way to keep them longer to find out.
I still like the idea of being able to sign rookies to 3 or 4 year terms, but that their salaries would go up more significantly if they are activates off the TS squad. So if i assign a qb for 4 years then if i put him on my active roster he'd automatically make a certain salary commiserate with his position.
|
|
Nerf Herders
Storm Trooper
1%
Who's scruffy looking?
Posts: 688
|
Post by Nerf Herders on May 29, 2012 19:44:46 GMT -5
Ditto to what pugs said (they just said it better than I have). And I think Pete n pugs r saying I am right. Minimum rookie contract should b 4 years. I think would all b willing to pay more. Or more years option, $10 a year. Just a thought.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 29, 2012 20:47:50 GMT -5
Ditto to what pugs said (they just said it better than I have). And I think Pete n pugs r saying I am right. Minimum rookie contract should b 4 years. I think would all b willing to pay more. Or more years option, $10 a year. Just a thought. I'm fine with the years the way they are on the mid round players and them becoming a RFA after 2 years. If a player is already performing well you will have the ability to match the best offer and if they aren't and you still have faith in them I would believe you'd still get them fairly cheaply. So if somebody hasn't developed yet I would think the team that drafted them would get them back and be able to assign years at that time.
|
|
Nerf Herders
Storm Trooper
1%
Who's scruffy looking?
Posts: 688
|
Post by Nerf Herders on May 29, 2012 21:38:27 GMT -5
Ditto to what pugs said (they just said it better than I have). And I think Pete n pugs r saying I am right. Minimum rookie contract should b 4 years. I think would all b willing to pay more. Or more years option, $10 a year. Just a thought. I'm fine with the years the way they are on the mid round players and them becoming a RFA after 2 years. If a player is already performing well you will have the ability to match the best offer and if they aren't and you still have faith in them I would believe you'd still get them fairly cheaply. So if somebody hasn't developed yet I would think the team that drafted them would get them back and be able to assign years at that time. But Brock, that defeats the whole purpose of the practice squad. If I can't leave a rookie that takes several years to develope on my TS for more than 2 yrs, because the guys we are drafting in rounds 4 & 5 likely are long term projects, why even have a TS? Here's another thing. Say I drafted Steve Thiers because i belive ge has sleeper potential and in his rookie year he blows out his ACL, thats a year on the TS wasted, I only get him for 2 years. 2nd year maybe he gets some playing time at the end of the year, but not enough to know. Now I have to take Thiers and either promote him and "hope" he produces in his 3rd year, and now I have to use up an active roster spot, on a guy that I should b able to let develop on my practice squad, just like the NFL.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 29, 2012 21:42:51 GMT -5
Ditto to what pugs said (they just said it better than I have). And I think Pete n pugs r saying I am right. Minimum rookie contract should b 4 years. I think would all b willing to pay more. Or more years option, $10 a year. Just a thought. I'm fine with the years the way they are on the mid round players and them becoming a RFA after 2 years. If a player is already performing well you will have the ability to match the best offer and if they aren't and you still have faith in them I would believe you'd still get them fairly cheaply. So if somebody hasn't developed yet I would think the team that drafted them would get them back and be able to assign years at that time. I'm not fine with it. I think we should be able to sign them to 4 years; otherwise, we're just drafting for the right be able to match RFA.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 29, 2012 22:04:40 GMT -5
I'm fine with the years the way they are on the mid round players and them becoming a RFA after 2 years. If a player is already performing well you will have the ability to match the best offer and if they aren't and you still have faith in them I would believe you'd still get them fairly cheaply. So if somebody hasn't developed yet I would think the team that drafted them would get them back and be able to assign years at that time. But Brock, that defeats the whole purpose of the practice squad. If I can't leave a rookie that takes several years to develope on my TS for more than 2 yrs, because the guys we are drafting in rounds 4 & 5 likely are long term projects, why even have a TS? Here's another thing. Say I drafted Steve Thiers because i belive ge has sleeper potential and in his rookie year he blows out his ACL, thats a year on the TS wasted, I only get him for 2 years. 2nd year maybe he gets some playing time at the end of the year, but not enough to know. Now I have to take Thiers and either promote him and "hope" he produces in his 3rd year, and now I have to use up an active roster spot, on a guy that I should b able to let develop on my practice squad, just like the NFL. I guess I don't think we should be able to sit on "sleeper potential" forever at no expense. I feel eventually you gotta crap or get off the pot. On your scenario with Thiers, his blown ACL and some playing time what could he possibly cost if he went to auction? I guess to me I'll probably know by the end of year 2 if I want anything to do with a player moving forward. Out of 33 current taxi squad players, there are 5 that I would want on a taxi squad or my roster leading me to believe that my taxi squad will have a lot of turnover. I wouldn't be against teams having their own discretion on draft pick contract years at 2 to 4 for rounds 3 to 5 or 6 but I don't see the point in a mandatory 4 years on all picks.
|
|
Nerf Herders
Storm Trooper
1%
Who's scruffy looking?
Posts: 688
|
Post by Nerf Herders on May 29, 2012 22:50:23 GMT -5
I'm fine with the years the way they are on the mid round players and them becoming a RFA after 2 years. If a player is already performing well you will have the ability to match the best offer and if they aren't and you still have faith in them I would believe you'd still get them fairly cheaply. So if somebody hasn't developed yet I would think the team that drafted them would get them back and be able to assign years at that time. I'm not fine with it. I think we should be able to sign them to 4 years; otherwise, we're just drafting for the right be able to match RFA. I'm with the Pugs, 2 years is to short for later round guys. Otherwise what's the point of a TS if they have to develop in less than 2 years.
|
|
|
Post by RADL Commissioner on May 30, 2012 1:03:33 GMT -5
I don't think signing guys to $2 contracts for 4-6 is any challenge at all.
I think it can be tweaked a bit to end the crying. But if you guys want longer terms the base pay is going to skyrocket. It has to.
All you geniuses that have apparently drafted 4 of the next super studs aren't keeping them for the rest of their career for $8. It just isn't how this is going to work.
Except if you do it in round 6 and as I said earlier round 5 would make sense to MAYBE add an "assign term" option.
However, and I'd like others to join in, rounds 3 and 4 seem to be the main points of contention. It would make sense to me to give owners the option to assign players a short term low money deal or a longer term bigger money deal.
Regardless, if more people think an adjustment is needed I am sure we can come to a suitable format.
|
|
Nerf Herders
Storm Trooper
1%
Who's scruffy looking?
Posts: 688
|
Post by Nerf Herders on May 30, 2012 1:10:38 GMT -5
I'm a super evil genius by the way.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 30, 2012 18:34:00 GMT -5
Obviously, O.S.V. Yoda feels the same way about the 4th and 5th round picks as he's decided to boycott these picks all together.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 30, 2012 18:57:29 GMT -5
Obviously, O.S.V. Yoda feels the same way about the 4th and 5th round picks as he's decided to boycott these picks all together. That's one way to draw your line in the sand.
|
|