2015 RULES: Suggested Topics

[Goodell]

While I plan on looking into some options with practice squad, I disagree that bidding isn't involved with NFL practice squad players. Bidding and an open market is involved in any player with teams interested in signing them to an active roster contract. Any practice squad player on any NFL team can be signed by any other NFL team at any time. Often teams get into issues fighting over practice squad guys. Look to the Seattle-49er rivalry for many front office fights over waivers and practice squad players. http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/10116 ... e-seahawks

If another NFL team wants a guy on someone else's practice squad, their current home team has to decide if they want to step up and pay more (out bid) the competition to keep them.

A couple seasons ago, the Packers were having WR injuries and tried to sign Tavarres King off Denver's practice squad. Broncos didn't want to lose him, so instead had to up their offer on him giving him an NFL contract and spot on the active roster to keep him.

Last year the Saints were moving Todd Davis off and on the practice squad frequently as their roster needs changed. Broncos had a LB injury and claimed Davis when Saints trying to stash him on practice squad again. NFL investigated if the Saints played roster games trying to keep Davis in meetings and away from his phone away from the Broncos trying to alert him they've claimed him and to travel to their practice for that week.

Lots of NFL teams play lots of games with practice squad. I wish it didn't get so personal sometimes here for our sim teams that get annoyed by that and I try to advise them that practice squad players are NOT under active roster contract by any team and can be signed by any team so they're virtually free agents (with a little advantage of matching to their practice team if they want to create a roster space for them and cut someone else instead).

If you REALLY want a practice squad guy and other teams playing games with them, just SIGN HIM I say. If you don't want to sign him, then stop worrying about it. He's still a free agent that anyone can sign at any time no matter who's practice squad he's on.

Although it's something worth considering with all the problems sometimes to just drop it, I do probably want to keep p-squad mostly because it's important part of maintaining the realistic elements of the leagues. I do think there might be some tweaks we could look at ahead though to limit some of those issues, whether it's some time associated with p-squad moves or those being less public signing attempts. thanks

[robroach]

But shouldn't teams be able to "call up their own guy" without subjecting him to the bidding process?

[Goodell]

But shouldn't teams be able to "call up their own guy" without subjecting him to the bidding process?

It's not quite minor league baseball, though, where they're called up to the parent team. In the NFL any team can sign anyone else's practice squad players at any time. There's no exclusivity there. No real advantages to the guy's practice squad team either (we have more privileges than NFL toward practice squad ties to team). There are no advantages in NFL to a team keeping it's practice squad players other than familiarity. Because that familiarity and practicing with the team has real meaning in reality, we gave it some importance here in a way we could to reflect that bit of reality (by giving teams an option to match offers which is very much like that DEN-GB example above where DEN didn't want to lose a guy off psquad so they matched his offers otherwise and were able to keep him).

It's not like that in baseball call ups (different sports, different rules). In baseball the Yankees can't buy other team's minor league players just by sending them an offer. But you can in the NFL sign guys off anyone's practice squad. When NFL teams want to sign a guy off another team's practice squad, they offer them a contract offer just like they would if they were a free agent, and that happens throughout the season. Anyone without an active roster contract has to get a contact, and here that's by offering a bid.

They have no active roster NFL contract while on practice squad. They have to sign them to a contract to join their active roster. Sometimes that's without incident (like our teams placing a minimum contract on their guy and signing him the next day without problem) other times multiple teams interested in the player like the examples above from NFL.

If after-peak bids are less publicized overall in general here, it would probably make it easier for practice players to be offered active roster contracts by their teams without as much attention to it as in the past unless another sim team was very interested in them for their own reasons at the same time.

[Knighty Knight]

So my issue is not with losing a ps player to another team who offers that player a contract (never experienced a problem during season with how ps operates). It's during the off season, specifically cut downs, where teams (who are also over 53 or 75) claim my player, only to cut that player immediately to their practice squad. Not sure that happens in real life so I believe we need parameters set up to stop it from occurring here instead of the "offer him a contract" rhetoric because neither team is offering that player a contract.

This is the sequence that frustrated me, especially in September when teams cutting down are claiming players to cut the same day or next:

- Placed on Waivers by Miami on 2014-08-31
- Claimed by STL on 2014-09-02
- Placed on Waivers by St. Louis on 2014-09-03

- Placed on Waivers by Miami on 2014-09-02
- Claimed by STL on 2014-09-04
- Placed on Waivers by St. Louis on 2014-09-04

[Ben C.]

So my issue is not with losing a ps player to another team who offers that player a contract (never experienced a problem during season with how ps operates). It's during the off season, specifically cut downs, where teams (who are also over 53 or 75) claim my player, only to cut that player immediately to their practice squad. Not sure that happens in real life so I believe we need parameters set up to stop it from occurring here instead of the "offer him a contract" rhetoric because neither team is offering that player a contract.

This is the sequence that frustrated me, especially in September when teams cutting down are claiming players to cut the same day or next:

- Placed on Waivers by Miami on 2014-08-31
- Claimed by STL on 2014-09-02
- Placed on Waivers by St. Louis on 2014-09-03

- Placed on Waivers by Miami on 2014-09-02
- Claimed by STL on 2014-09-04
- Placed on Waivers by St. Louis on 2014-09-04

First, the practice squad isn't available in the off-season. It's only opened up at the time of final cuts.

Second, just because a team puts a player on waivers after putting a claim in doesn't mean they intentionally tried to prevent the player from being on your PS. For example, at roster cut-down time say I put out 10 waiver claims with the hope that I'm able to get 3 of them to fill 3 spots on my roster. It's possible that I'll end up getting 5 players from the waivers for only 3 spots. I would then need to waive 2 of the players I've grabbed.

The bottom line is that when you drop a player to your PS you take the risk that another team will claim him. If you don't want to lose the player, then don't cut him.

[Knighty Knight]

Let me clarify then, replace off-season with before the season begins.

I know teams are intentionally trying to prevent players from landing on my practice squad. Your case in point is an issue that the league needs to address. I guess my problem isn't so much with the ps but the waiver system, how it works here and how it works in the NFL. I know we can't emulate everything but we sure do try in a lot of ways.

Personally, I don't put waiver claims out on players while trying to cut down my own roster unless it is a player I want to add to my 53 man roster. NFL GM's aren't putting out 10 waiver claims hoping to fill roster spots at cut downs. If that happened in real life we would all question the GMs capabilities of building a competitive roster. Players are available for a reason at that point.

I would like to see teams be held responsible for the waiver claims they do issue. If awarded the player claimed then they should be responsible to pay at least one game check if they waive the player immediately as part of their roster cuts. That would hopefully bring our click to add, click to cut GM's more in line with the real GM experience.

I understand that if I cut a player to the practice squad, I run the risk of another team claiming him. I don't need more people telling me "if you don't want to lose the player, then don't cut him". What I would like to see is what happens in the NFL in that players claimed by team are kept on the roster not cut in useless transactions. Yes I was annoyed by the uselessness of those moves, but I care more about bringing our rules within the realities of the game as much as possible than simply losing two players who couldn't make my team.

[Nathan S.]

Speaking of LTCs, I'd like to see us discuss increasing the number allowed to 2 per year. I've been pleased with how the contracts have worked out as they seem pretty fair.

Wasn't much on this but I would agree.

[Ulrich82]

I agree with Knighty Knight here. I usually give teams the benefit of the doubt and assume they don't realize what they are doing, but it could be more malicious.

I constantly have issues where when I cut a player to the PS, he is claimed by another team and instantly cut to their PS. My own policy when making a waiver claim is to do a roster search and see if he is listed as W (waivers) or WP (waivers cut to practice squad). If the player is WP, I won't claim him unless I have genuine intent to keep him on my 53 man roster. Otherwise, I've gone back and forth 3 times or more with another team cycling the guy through waivers if he was originally on my squad.

If this is malicious, there is nothing we can do about it, but I think it would help to change the language on the leagues reports for players cut to practice squad. Right now, you can't tell if that guy is headed to a PS or not without a waiver search. If the report specifically states the player was cut to PS rather than cut, hopefully people will be more aware not to just claim and cut that guy themselves.

[Ben C.]

Personally, I don't put waiver claims out on players while trying to cut down my own roster unless it is a player I want to add to my 53 man roster.

What made you think that I don't want to add a player to my roster? At cut-down time there can be hundreds of players cut. I narrow that down to the ones I want, and would be thrilled if a player I put a waiver claim on lands on my roster. It's just that sometimes you can put in more claims than you have spots for, and that leads to someone getting cut after being claimed.

If I then cut the player, the original team has the option of either putting in a claim or waiting for him to clear waivers and then adding him to the PS.

I really don't see an issue here.

[robroach]

It appears this is a problem that should definitely be addressed. I believe the team that drafted the player should get first crack at signing him to their practice squad, as this is the case 90% of the time (if not greater) in the NFL.