FanGM

We adjusted the free agency bid score a couple seasons ago attempting to make it easier to counter-bid some of the most unpopular/unrealistic bid strategies and added minimums based upon franchise tag values for QBs and elite players. Last year we had some additional discussions around maximizing SB amounts and other topics, but pretty mixed feedback.

Current bidscore is a bit convoluted as we kept adjusting how we value cap value per year versus overall contract value and guaranteed signing bonus factors. https://fangm.com/football/freeagency-bidscore.php

I think it was improved last free agency, but always room for improvement.

A GM sent me an idea on a bidscore spreadsheet that factored in experience, and there's been some comments on that at times. I believe the logic would be that young players would have different opinions on contract structures than older players. Maybe bidscores for young players (single-digit years experience) would value total value where big commitments over many years are more favored, while a veteran player's bidscore focused more on the capvalue per year for typically shorter deals.

Another idea that may have come up at times is factoring in other considerations that a real player might, such as the bidscore making things easier for winning franchises to counter than losing franchises as arguably happens in reality. Really bad franchises sometimes have to over-pay in reality to get someone to go to a bad team, while more players seem to be willing to lineup for a shot at a championship. But also some sim league fairness considerations there, although arguably is another incentive to encourage not tanking too hard or might be labeled a loser franchise harder to get players to sign with.

If we get some time to get in there and really tweak the bidscore further, would be open to great ideas on that. What kinds of bids are the most frustrating to counter that you'd like to see changed?

Proposed formula for discussion:

Bid Score = (1 + 1/2 x Guaranteed Percentage of SB/Total + Highest Total Value Percentage Bonue) x [3 x Total Contract Value (millions) + 0.75 x Guaranteed SB + First Year Salary + W cap hit x Cap Hit Per Year]

Final Sore = Bid Score x (1 + Position Premium + Age Factor + Market Comparison Bonus)

First-Year Salary Now Counts as Guaranteed

Helps align with NFL contracts, where most first-year salaries are effectively guaranteed.

Signing Bonus Weight Reduced to 0.75x

Prevents SB-heavy contracts from being overpowered in bid comparisons.

Dynamic Cap Hit Weighting by Contract Length

Short deals (1-2 years) = 5x weight (heavier impact)
Mid deals (3-4 years) = 4x weight
Long deals (5+ years) = 3.5x weight (lighter impact on cap hits)
More accurately reflects NFL salary cap strategy.
Formula Incorporates Percentage Bonuses for Total Contract Value

The current formula doesn’t account for market trends like positional demand, player age, or recent contracts, making bid comparisons less realistic.

To fix this, a Market Adjustment Factor (MAF) is introduced:

Premium positions (QB, Edge, LT) get a +5% boost
Older players (30+) receive a -2% penalty
Contracts above the league average get an additional premium
This adjustment better reflects real NFL negotiations, where certain positions drive higher bidding wars and market conditions influence contract values.

The current counter-offer rule requires a flat 10% increase in Bid Score, which can be unrealistic—especially for already strong bids. In real NFL negotiations, higher initial bids shouldn’t require large increases, while lower bids should be easier to outbid.

The solution is a progressive counter scale:

Low bid scores (<50) require a 12% increase
Mid-range bids (50-75) keep the 10% increase
Higher bids (75-100) need only an 8% increase
Elite bids (100+) require just a 5% increase
This approach prevents frustrating counters where strong offers get rejected due to unnecessary bid inflation while making it fairer to outbid weaker offers.

Definitely need a change from last year as longer contracts with higher salary was better than shorter contracts with more guaranteed money. No NFL player is taking a 6 yr deal with 12M guaranteed with 15M salary over a 3 yr 31M contract with 25 guaranteed, which happened last year.

Brian, I've never found you more appealing than in this moment

I'm fully on board this hype train. There would be a (steep) learning curve and I would suggest a "practice run" of sorts for everyone if it passed, but this is an absolute home run of a proposal, IMO.

Thanks, Jon.

I’ll leave the coding feasibility for Troy to determine. But my proposed changes hit on some of the themes in the poll options. I can build a tool to test and create some examples as data points, if needed.

Some great ideas expressed. Thanks!

Because we're on a time crunch, I can't overhaul the bidscore methodology tremendously, but testing out a couple tweaks. I had a difficult time getting formula that adequately dealt with some of the biggest complaints over the years (1-year huge SB bids being unrealistically unbeatable to many and conversely guaranteed money still being most important), so I figured the easiest way might be to have a couple of conditions adjusting the bid score calculations differently for older players (guaranteed money valued), younger players (cap/yr magnified for this largest list of players with cap/yr being most important in our cap space game) and 1-year offers (easier to counter with total value of deals being more meaningful in those cases so player more likely to favor multi-year commitment than 1-yr temporary deal but guaranteed money still a big consideration overall).

I'm still tweaking it but wanted to get it out there for any feedback. Think these might be the biggest conditions to consider, but we may further adjust how to best factor each. I simplified the calculations for this and slightly adjust the math depending upon those different conditions. This somewhat goes along with a first year salary being somewhat guaranteed adding it to the guaranteed SB as the base of most of the calculations.

Take a look and let me know.
https://fangm.com/football/freeagency-b ... -test1.php

- Older Players (over 10yr exp): (SB + Salary + RB)+ Cap/yr
- Younger Players (under 10yr exp): (SB + Salary + RB)+(5 x Cap/yr)
- If Only 1-Year Offers: (SB + Salary + RB)+Total Contract
- Counter offers must be 5% higher bid score to be successful
- If No SB: Must be at least 5% increase in Salary+RB

Bar for counter offers lowered to 5% across the board but we can also take a look at making that dynamic at different contract value ranges if helpful to best results. Still a lot of testing of different situations to see if there are problems to further adjust for.

We still have last year's bid score still intact if we can't improve it, but hopefully in testing this a couple days if there's a better way found and positive responses maybe we'll have an improved bid score for counter-offers that make the most sense ahead.