AA
Not the Droid I Seek
3%
2013 RADL Champion
Posts: 356
|
Post by AA on Jun 3, 2012 15:32:00 GMT -5
I think I fall somewhere between Steve and Nate, shocking as that may be. I don't want owners to be able to sign rookiez to 5 or 6 years, but i do want us to be able to sign rookies on our practice squad to more than 2 years.
I'm sticking with the idea I've already stated and tweaking it based on what Steve said. I say rounds 3-5 you get an option. Sign them for 2 years for $2 and no increase in pay if they are placed on the active roster. Sign those players to a 3 year contract and if you place them on the active roster you gave to pay them the average of the top 15 players at that position. Sign them to a 4 year term and you have to pay them the average of the top 12 players at that position.
Under this system you'd be allowed to assign a player longer terms, but if you did you would have to pay them a high salary as soon as they were assigned to your active roster.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 3, 2012 16:40:48 GMT -5
I think I fall somewhere between Steve and Nate, shocking as that may be. I don't want owners to be able to sign rookiez to 5 or 6 years, but i do want us to be able to sign rookies on our practice squad to more than 2 years. I'm sticking with the idea I've already stated and tweaking it based on what Steve said. I say rounds 3-5 you get an option. Sign them for 2 years for $2 and no increase in pay if they are placed on the active roster. Sign those players to a 3 year contract and if you place them on the active roster you gave to pay them the average of the top 15 players at that position. Sign them to a 4 year term and you have to pay them the average of the top 12 players at that position. Under this system you'd be allowed to assign a player longer terms, but if you did you would have to pay them a high salary as soon as they were assigned to your active roster. I'd have to do the math and see what that salary would be for 2012 as an example before I could get behind that idea. I do think you have the right idea about a compromise in the middle, but until I see the numbers, I'm not sure if that's not too high.
|
|
|
Post by RADL Commissioner on Jun 3, 2012 18:21:10 GMT -5
Top 10 and 15 in scoring or salary? Big difference for example tier 2 franchisees are buy scoring (lower) and tier 3 is by salary at position.
|
|
AA
Not the Droid I Seek
3%
2013 RADL Champion
Posts: 356
|
Post by AA on Jun 3, 2012 20:25:36 GMT -5
Top 10 and 15 in scoring or salary? Big difference for example tier 2 franchisees are buy scoring (lower) and tier 3 is by salary at position. whichever is lower. I was just throwing those numbers out as examples though. It could be a set number like the early picks in the draft, or some other formula. Just a salary that bumps those players up to the same ballpark as others at their position since we're saying we want a chance to keep players who develop into solid contributors.
|
|
Nerf Herders
Storm Trooper
1%
Who's scruffy looking?
Posts: 688
|
Post by Nerf Herders on Jun 4, 2012 0:49:24 GMT -5
I think I fall somewhere between Steve and Nate, shocking as that may be. I don't want owners to be able to sign rookiez to 5 or 6 years, but i do want us to be able to sign rookies on our practice squad to more than 2 years. I'm sticking with the idea I've already stated and tweaking it based on what Steve said. I say rounds 3-5 you get an option. Sign them for 2 years for $2 and no increase in pay if they are placed on the active roster. Sign those players to a 3 year contract and if you place them on the active roster you gave to pay them the average of the top 15 players at that position. Sign them to a 4 year term and you have to pay them the average of the top 12 players at that position. Under this system you'd be allowed to assign a player longer terms, but if you did you would have to pay them a high salary as soon as they were assigned to your active roster. I'd have to do the math and see what that salary would be for 2012 as an example before I could get behind that idea. I do think you have the right idea about a compromise in the middle, but until I see the numbers, I'm not sure if that's not too high. I'm with myself, pugs, and the fella without a planet. 2 years is a joke for any player drafted after round 2, I think the ideas for bumps in salary with these guys should be based on the top players at these positions when we promote them. What exactly that scale is, we need to look at it. I think everyone that cares will agree to pay more then these guys get promoted, or maybe we pay more up front, like $5 a year or something when we draft them.
|
|
|
Post by RADL Commissioner on Jun 4, 2012 3:46:40 GMT -5
don't forget we'll need to increase the TS to about 15-25 spots because all these wanna be uber stars sitting on the TS for 4 years will block new guys from going on there the following years.
|
|
|
Post by RADL Commissioner on Jun 4, 2012 3:47:51 GMT -5
I'm mean we certainly can't cut the next Drew Brees before he's had his 6 years to cook. Right?
|
|
AA
Not the Droid I Seek
3%
2013 RADL Champion
Posts: 356
|
Post by AA on Jun 4, 2012 4:02:03 GMT -5
I assumed that if I draft anyone named Brees that I'm allowed to keep him for at least 10 years on my taxi squad. I like to take a wait and see approach.
Nate, $5 more a year for a longer term is nothing. It would have to be more than that. I'm thinking more like $50-$100. After all, the top picks in the draft make over $100 and if we're thinking these guys are going to be so good that we need to have longer terms than $100 isn't too much to ask for.
|
|
Nerf Herders
Storm Trooper
1%
Who's scruffy looking?
Posts: 688
|
Post by Nerf Herders on Jun 4, 2012 8:38:35 GMT -5
What ever works man, I'm not a numbers guy, I just pay the going rate or pay someone else to work it out for me.
No Steve I don't think we add more TS spots, if I want to blow all my picks on 6 year developmental players that take up all my TS spots, then an owner should have to make room for them as well.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 4, 2012 8:56:11 GMT -5
I assumed that if I draft anyone named Brees that I'm allowed to keep him for at least 10 years on my taxi squad. I like to take a wait and see approach. Nate, $5 more a year for a longer term is nothing. It would have to be more than that. I'm thinking more like $50-$100. After all, the top picks in the draft make over $100 and if we're thinking these guys are going to be so good that we need to have longer terms than $100 isn't too much to ask for. So you'd rather pay them $50-$100 for a longer term if you place them on your active roster, than match a contract offer after 2 years on a RFA.
|
|
Nerf Herders
Storm Trooper
1%
Who's scruffy looking?
Posts: 688
|
Post by Nerf Herders on Jun 4, 2012 11:28:09 GMT -5
I assumed that if I draft anyone named Brees that I'm allowed to keep him for at least 10 years on my taxi squad. I like to take a wait and see approach. Nate, $5 more a year for a longer term is nothing. It would have to be more than that. I'm thinking more like $50-$100. After all, the top picks in the draft make over $100 and if we're thinking these guys are going to be so good that we need to have longer terms than $100 isn't too much to ask for. So you'd rather pay them $50-$100 for a longer term if you place them on your active roster, than match a contract offer after 2 years on a RFA. I think the point is that the whole point of having a TS is so that guys have time to develop. Right now as it stands unless ur drafting a 1st rounder, teams are forced to put guys on active rosters b4 they develop because they're standardized rookie contracts aren't long enough. So yeah, myself and others are willing to pay more if we have guys on our TS that will actualy b given time to develop.
|
|
|
Post by RADL Commissioner on Jun 4, 2012 16:54:44 GMT -5
What if...if
Round 5 was "assign term"
and if you match or qualify an RFA who is currently on your TS you may keep them on your TS for the length of the new contract BUT they can still be claimed during that particular window, but would have to go to the claiming teams active roster. Advantage drafting team.
Nobody has admitted the majority of 3rd and 4th round picks will not pan out. If that is true their undeserved salary is off your books quickly, maybe you want to keep waiting to MAKE SURE, but they won't pan out. Just the facts.
However, when they seem to be turning the corner and their two years is up, another team bids on this RFA. They offer a fair wage above the $5 or so they currently make. All I ever wanted, players to make a fair market scale.
As the miner of these valued gems you deserve the advantage in an equal monetary situation, I'd agree.
A RFA with an expired contract on your TS is making $7. He is offered a fair wage by another team, you may still match it but now you can keep them on your TS for this new contract.
They might still be claimed during the season after week 5 but you have time to figure it out.
|
|
AA
Not the Droid I Seek
3%
2013 RADL Champion
Posts: 356
|
Post by AA on Jun 4, 2012 17:30:20 GMT -5
Makes sense to me
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 4, 2012 17:31:14 GMT -5
Just so we have some numbers to go off of here is the top 15 by scoring and salary at QB,RB,WR based on last years stats and this years salaries though I dont think it would fluctuate to drastically
QB- $154 salary $126 stats RB- $215 salary $184 stats WR-$184 salary $134 stats
|
|
Nerf Herders
Storm Trooper
1%
Who's scruffy looking?
Posts: 688
|
Post by Nerf Herders on Jun 4, 2012 18:09:37 GMT -5
Not going to quote Steve's who thing but, yes, I think we are aware "most" late round guys don't pan out, but right now we don't even get to see who does.
"A RFA with an expired contract on your TS is making $7. He is offered a fair wage by another team, you may still match it but now you can keep them on your TS for this new contract. they can still be claimed during that particular window, but would have to go to the claiming teams active roster. Advantage drafting team.
This I love, this works great I think. I'd think Alderan and Pugs will like this as well.
Lastly making round 5 assingable would be ideal. Thanks for all the input and feedback.
|
|