Scoundrel Posted May 2, 2019 Share Posted May 2, 2019 1 minute ago, Jlash said: It's pretty unacceptable IMO, and not like Rags at all. I'm hoping the rum was involved. That’s what I blame for all of my misguided tromps through BDL 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VigilantZombie Posted May 2, 2019 Share Posted May 2, 2019 (edited) 1 hour ago, Counselor said: Don’t use me for your examples chump. I vote we add a 17th team so Dingo can muck it up I'm game with that hey Dingo I want all of your draft picks LOL Edited May 2, 2019 by wwhickok 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hockey5djh Posted May 2, 2019 Share Posted May 2, 2019 9 hours ago, Ragnarok said: 1c. A team can resign guys to 100% of their current deal during an offseason. Are you talking about players who's contracts have expired being allowed to be 100%? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scoundrel Posted May 2, 2019 Share Posted May 2, 2019 30 minutes ago, wwhickok said: I'm game with that hey Danielle I want all of your draft picks LOL Dingo’s real name is Danielle... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VigilantZombie Posted May 2, 2019 Share Posted May 2, 2019 (edited) 7 minutes ago, Counselor said: Dingo’s real name is Danielle... That wouldn't really surprised me Edited May 2, 2019 by wwhickok 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirA1 Posted May 2, 2019 Share Posted May 2, 2019 1 hour ago, Jlash said: It's pretty unacceptable IMO, and not like Rags at all. I'm hoping the rum was involved. Oh I believe he's been waiting in ambush for this. I mean since the initial Danielle Hunter 3 Up pretty much no qualms with the other 23 3 Ups that have already been approved this offseason but when I do the rest of mine all of a sudden it's the straw that broke the camels back. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VigilantZombie Posted May 2, 2019 Share Posted May 2, 2019 Anyone care to address the question I posed about the three ups and a free agency? I'm just curious I don't have an issue with the three up system or anything like that I'm just curious what the logic is there to the statement was made or if I simply misunderstood the way the statement was intended Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirA1 Posted May 2, 2019 Share Posted May 2, 2019 9 hours ago, WFLukic said: You should be able to 3up a player whenever you want provided their proposed salary is higher than their current. How many owners actually use year round 3 ups though? I can give you a history lesson about it tomorrow. It's not an extensive list and is mainly used to loophole the 3 up deals to be cheaper because of adding the years outside of the Extensions. Putting a stop to that will be healthy for the league and get rid of the butt hurt people feel by losing out because they didn't have the cap space to abuse it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirA1 Posted May 2, 2019 Share Posted May 2, 2019 4 minutes ago, wwhickok said: Anyone care to address the question I posed about the three ups and a free agency? I'm just curious I don't have an issue with the three up system or anything like that I'm just curious what the logic is there to the statement was made or if I simply misunderstood the way the statement was intended I'll have more time tomorrow to go into details but 3 ups really don't effect FA that much IMO. We'll have to wait until the end of the month to see the effects of the 75% contract vs the 85% contract but so far there is not much difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hockey5djh Posted May 2, 2019 Share Posted May 2, 2019 6 minutes ago, SirA1 said: How many owners actually use year round 3 ups though? I can give you a history lesson about it tomorrow. It's not an extensive list and is mainly used to loophole the 3 up deals to be cheaper because of adding the years outside of the Extensions. Putting a stop to that will be healthy for the league and get rid of the butt hurt people feel by losing out because they didn't have the cap space to abuse it. I think you're talking about two different things IMO. Lukic is saying that we should lift the player restrictions on when a 3 up can be used aka most of the bullet points that are under 3ups explaining the situations in which they can and can't be used. I think you're referencing the "year round"/timing restrictions which is the loophole which allows the additional years. I agree with Lukic we should reduce the "player" restrictions. I believe there was already a proposal to limit the "year round/timing" issue which I agree should be addressed. Note: If there isn't a proposal to eliminate the "year round" 3up in favor of a specific window in which we can use a 3up please add it to the next league meeting agenda. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hockey5djh Posted May 2, 2019 Share Posted May 2, 2019 (edited) 4 hours ago, wwhickok said: Allow me to pose a question here. Maybe I don't really understand but hypothetically speaking how does increasing the cost of a 3 up hurt free agency? Whereas you're saying reducing that cost improves it. If you're talkin from the aspect of what a team loses or does not lose I am suppose I understand that but if you're talkin about the availability of players in free agency I completely disagree making it cheaper for me to resign my own free agent doesn't make free agency for everybody else better because they're really good free agents well they're not going to be free agent if you look at the actual free agency list right now almost everyone that has any relevance has been either sign on a restricted free agency tender or whatever or has gotten a three up. To say the free agency class that exists for this league is underwhelming would be an understatement. So I guess what I'm asking is what exactly are you saying in terms of how free agency is affected by the three up system His argument is essentially that if you make 3ups more expensive then less teams will use them and more players will be available in FA. I think you misunderstood what Rags was saying. Edited May 2, 2019 by Hockey5djh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirA1 Posted May 2, 2019 Share Posted May 2, 2019 1 minute ago, Hockey5djh said: I think you're talking about two different things IMO. Lukic is saying that we should lift the player restrictions on when a 3 up can be used aka most of the bullet points that are under 3ups explaining the situations in which they can and can't be used. I think you're referencing the "year round"/timing restrictions which is the loophole which allows the additional years. I agree with Lukic we should reduce the "player" restrictions. I believe there was already a proposal to limit the "year round/timing" issue which I agree should be addressed. Note: If there isn't a proposal to eliminate the "year round" 3up in favor of a specific window in which we can use a 3up please add it to the next league meeting agenda. Yes I am looking at a Feb-May window for 3 ups, which will then remove the need for lots of the other bullet points for 3 ups. It should be as straight forward as possible. If certain players get a deal here or there that is beneficial to an owner every now and then there shouldn't be a rule just for those outlier situations. We don't have control over what NFL teams do with their contracts. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hockey5djh Posted May 2, 2019 Share Posted May 2, 2019 1 minute ago, SirA1 said: Yes I am looking at a Feb-May window for 3 ups, which will then remove the need for lots of the other bullet points for 3 ups. It should be as straight forward as possible. If certain players get a deal here or there that is beneficial to an owner every now and then there shouldn't be a rule just for those outlier situations. We don't have control over what NFL teams do with their contracts. Got my vote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hockey5djh Posted May 2, 2019 Share Posted May 2, 2019 Also while I'm thinking of it. I would like to officially put something on the Owners meeting agenda to address the "Franchise tag" rule part of the 3up. I'm not sure that we need to completely get rid of it (pending Rags proposal of 100% extensions gaining footing) but It does need to be addressed. For those keeping track at home, the "Franchise tag" rule for 3ups is that if you're using a 3up on someone that has been franchise tagged you must pay 100% of the Franchise tag (not the 75% discount the 3up offers other players) BUT if said player signs an long term extension that year you can "convert" your 1 year 100% contract into a multi year, 75% contract. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirA1 Posted May 2, 2019 Share Posted May 2, 2019 (edited) 19 minutes ago, Hockey5djh said: Also while I'm thinking of it. I would like to officially put something on the Owners meeting agenda to address the "Franchise tag" rule part of the 3up. I'm not sure that we need to completely get rid of it (pending Rags proposal of 100% extensions gaining footing) but It does need to be addressed. For those keeping track at home, the "Franchise tag" rule for 3ups is that if you're using a 3up on someone that has been franchise tagged you must pay 100% of the Franchise tag (not the 75% discount the 3up offers other players) BUT if said player signs an long term extension that year you can "convert" your 1 year 100% contract into a multi year, 75% contract. Yep planning on addressing that as well. Basically it should be 75% and then if a player signs a long term deal it converts to that deal instead. The reasons it was done the way it is now because of cap concerns which I don't think are valid anymore. I think this should be the case for all 1 year deals like RFA/5th year etc to get everything in line under a similar process. Less confusing and easier to keep track of. That being said I am expecting a ton of push back from owners that don't want change just for the sake of change. But it really needs to be overhauled. Edited May 2, 2019 by SirA1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts