FanGM

Problem i have with the not being able to trade guys right away is that we have no way of retracting bids like they do in real life. If we add were we can retract a bid if we sign somebody then i have no issues here with not being able to trade a FA signed for more than 1 year for at least 1 year.

Is this vote for a year?


The poll says it's just for like 3 months or until the season starts.

Jared A wrote:Is this vote for a year?


The poll says it's just for like 3 months or until the season starts.

It's mostly to get a general idea of if most think it's a good thing or not. It's mostly split almost 50/50, so not something that we'd probably do now. If we get to know more details of league rules once a new agreement is made, and if there are some limitations in trading a signed player in reality, it's probably something we'd look more closely at as we try to mirror the NFL environment -- especially if it was a fairly short time period as that probably would be a compromise that could work where there was some limit for half that wanted it but not too much for those who didn't. But just getting the general feel for that amongst GMs, and no change there for now given the results, but could be revisited once we know more about the new NFL agreements.

I don't think you should be able to immediately trade free agent signees. I am not sure what the NFL rules state, but I couldn't see a player in real life signing with a team only to be immediately traded to another city. This would help to keep our league realistic.

As for restrictions on free agency, I don't see any reason for it. Our system is not broke, it actually works well, which is a credit to the commish. As long as we have a salary cap, the process should police itself to some extent.

Larry
Minnesota Vikings AFFL

I'd agree that some restriction on traded a newly signed player would make sense, but I can understand the argument against it that says we have to offer contingency contracts to free agents, and you may end up signed more than 1 player for a certain position.

My idea is probably more of a down the road idea since it would entail some work for Troy, but perhaps it would make sense to change the free agency bidding slightly. Maybe we could queue our free agent bids. For example, if I have 5 bids to work with, and I really need to sign a DE, I could use my first bid on the top rated free agent DE. I could then queue up a second offer to another DE that would only go into effect if I lost out on the first DE. Both offers would only count for 1 bid (the trick would have to be that the contingency bid could only apply to another player at the same position).

Anyway, I am sure this idea would need a lot of tweaking and vetting, and it would require some extra code, so I don't expect this to take off immediately. However, it might be something to think about and discuss for the future.

Actually, I thought about this some more, and I agree with Ben C. To me, the inability to retract a bid is something to plan for, not an excuse to trade a player you end up not needing. I understand that you may not get the free agent you want, so you have to offer contingency bids, but I think that is part of the strategy here. If you are going to offer contracts to multiple players at the same position, you need to be ready to sign both of those players. I don't think you should be able to immediately trade one of them if you get both, so at least a 3 month waiting period would make sense to me.

Yes, we don't have free agent visits like real NFL teams, but we also have the luxury of knowing that the highest bidder will get the player. We don't have to worry about players geographical preferences, state income taxes, or the state of our individual teams training facilities. As far as missing out on a star player, that is part of dealing with the market. I know I am taking an example from another sport, but look at the Yankees last season. They went all in on Cliff Lee. By the time he chose to sign elsewhere, several other free agents who the Yankees might have been interested in had already signed elsewhere. That should be part of the strategy of free agency. If you want to make a play for the top OT on the market, you might have to also go after the 5th or 6th best OT so that you can keep them both on your roster if you catch your big fish. If you try to save some money by signing the third best OT, maybe you can afford to chase the 4th best OT as well as a contingency plan.

I love how alot of people hear say it is more like the real NFL when it helps there arguement but when it is something they think should be changed it doesnt matter if it is realistic or not. Case in point the situations we are talking about are not realistic in the slightest.

Strategist wrote:I love how alot of people hear say it is more like the real NFL when it helps there arguement but when it is something they think should be changed it doesnt matter if it is realistic or not. Case in point the situations we are talking about are not realistic in the slightest.

The aim isn't to mimic the rules of the NFL entirely but to create an environment that is as realistic as possible. In real life a player will not be traded immediately after signing because the player would through a fit if they agree to a contract only to be cast aside so quickly. Here, we cannot simulate a player's wishes so we must create rules that lead to realistic results.

Strategist wrote:I love how alot of people hear say it is more like the real NFL when it helps there arguement but when it is something they think should be changed it doesnt matter if it is realistic or not. Case in point the situations we are talking about are not realistic in the slightest.

I for one am almost always against making it like the NFL. I would much rather it be fun and affective. I'd also like the advantages a real NFL team has to be compensated in some sorts by differing rules here. But... I know what you mean.

Jared A wrote:

Strategist wrote:I love how alot of people hear say it is more like the real NFL when it helps there arguement but when it is something they think should be changed it doesnt matter if it is realistic or not. Case in point the situations we are talking about are not realistic in the slightest.

I for one am almost always against making it like the NFL. I would much rather it be fun and affective. I'd also like the advantages a real NFL team has to be compensated in some sorts by differing rules here. But... I know what you mean.

this let's trade some players. Eventually it's gonna happen so why wait? Let's just make this fun