2011 OFF-SEASON PRIMER

[Goodell]

Things will start to gradually be more and more available, but busy time for me as mentioned. Thought work project would be over by now, but it's never ending apparently... Will try to get some new pieces in there as time allows, though. Monday night or tuesday will turn ability to cut and restructure on, but have to make some programming changes to that with additional restructurings allowed this year versus last.

Trades probably not until I have a better idea of if any teams need replacement GMs this week.

[Royce R]

im fine with him going on open market. I just don't want to offer him a RFA tender. I want him as UFA but as a member of my team where I get unlimited bids on them.

[Goodell]

im fine with him going on open market. I just don't want to offer him a RFA tender. I want him as UFA but as a member of my team where I get unlimited bids on them.

I will have to search, but don't think we've done that in the past as an option. If not, would have to be a future rule change discussion. If you recall that happening in the past, send a link.

Might be seen as a smaller matter, though, for rules changes as if a guy wasn't in demand enough for 1M bid on the market, perhaps not enough demand to make him very difficult to sign to where a lot of advantages needed to keep someone with lower demand.

[Smooth Glitch]

I see what Royce is saying in the sense that we should not be forced to extend a tender to an RFA.

In the NFL a team has the choice whether to "extend" a tender to an RFA as in this example with the Ravens and Oniel Cousins:

http://www.rotoworld.com/player/nfl/4857/oniel-cousins

On the contrary, the Ravens initially extended a tenderto RFA Jalen Parmele, then "withdrew" the tender thus making him a free agent(essentially waiving/cutting the player) and then the following day the Ravens re-signed the player:

http://www.rotoworld.com/player/nfl/4844/jalen-parmele

This illustrates that a team has a choice of whether to apply a tender to an RFA or not(even withdraw one after extended). However, the team that chooses not to extend a tender in turn is waiving/cutting the player and forfeits the right to unlimited bids as said team no longer holds the rights to that player.

That would be my interpretation of it based on the above examples yet I would note that those examples were prior to the new CBA and although I don't know for sure, I strongly doubt the new CBA would have a component that would forcefully require a team to apply a tender to an RFA.

[Jared A]

Yeah, if you don't want him for the tendered amount, you shoudl have to cut him. All people are doing is hoping they can sneak him in on the cheap with unlimited bids. Shouldn't work that way.

[Goodell]

New rules and new ways of doing things would have to be applied to a future season if supported in off-season rules change discussions.

A team doesn't have to pay someone the RFA tender amount. They've never had to. But we haven't had it before where a team could have their cake and eat it too there where they can choose not to keep control of a player that they have the rights to restrict as RFA, and yet still manage to essentially restrict or control them despite passing on those RFA rights they had.

It's always been to my recollection that a team had a choice there. Either restrict them with their RFA eligibility or let them loose on the open market if the player not worth restricting.

It doesn't always have to stay that way, but once we begin we don't want to keep changing the rules all around. The rule regarding that wasn't changed this year or discussed before that I can recall. We can discuss it, though, but would change the rules the next time we change the rules for next season.

[Onyxgem]

Will trading be open before fa starts? Incase people trade for a ufa they want to franchise.

[Royce R]

i think the has to be franchised before traded.

[Goodell]

i think the has to be franchised before traded.

Yes, you can't trade unrestricted free agents. They are no longer under contract with you. We have way too much attempting to get value for free agents in the league generally.

Once a player is put under a 1-year restricted deal based upon their tag/tender, then we treat that as if the player signed that 1-year tender agreement at that salary and is again under contract and again can be dealt.

[Goodell]

Contract restructuring has been turned on. Every team has one additional contract restructuring allowed this year going up from one previously per year to two (2) for this season.

- Cut 2011 Annual Salary by 50%
- Defer today's savings until the last year of their contract
- Player gets additional signing bonus + $1M added or $2M for B+ or higher grade to agree to restructure (spread out over the remaining years of the deal)

Players can only have their contract restructured one time for the life of that deal. Teams can only restructure two contracts per season this year.

The link to restructure is near the top of your team roster above the player list. It will show you which players make the most sense to restruture their deal.

If you restructure a player's contract, you more than likely reduce the amount of time that they will be on your team by one year by escillating the last year of their contract to double-pay which could lead to them being cut a year early. Restructuring a contract also makes it more costly to cut or trade that player this season, increasing their cap hit with some added signing bonus for the restructuring.

So makes the most sense to restructure players you know you want on your team this year and in the near future, but are okay if you double their last year's salary and perhaps force an early exit from your squad for those financial reasons down the road.

You don't have to restructure any contracts at all, and you might also want to be patient before pulling any triggers there to see what the off-season brings. It hurts you to restructure a guy's contract now and then trade him in a couple weeks with a boosted cap hit to you.

We factor in real injuries and real retirements, so don't restructure a player's contract if they are retiring. We'll have a retired option available soon where you can get out from under their unguaranteed annual salary but still always will owe the guaranteed signing bonus left in all cases (retire, cut, trade, etc.)

Let me know if any questions or problems. Thanks