Bdl opt out vote

[Jlash]

If the majority of us want to vote this way, that's fine. I'll just abstain. Not a big deal.

[MD4L]

It’s less than 10 total players who received the stipend. We should reflect by giving them $150.

[SirA1]

20 hours ago, pheltzbahr said:

Of these proposals,  I vote for Ted's.

1k Cap relief

This is what would benefit me the most so I should vote for it right?

I honestly don't really care. I have 2 Guys that cost me $1200. I normally have about $10K per year allocated to IR players because that just how it goes.

I do agree that it should not be broken down and we should just narrow down the top options with rounds of voting until there is a winner.

Edited August 20, 2020 by SirA1

[bcb1213]

I don't get how half the people are like hey let's do 350 cause that's the same as the NFL and want in the same proposal.... Hey let's make it so we can pay them full price unlike the NFL. Mainly why I'm against the last option tbh 

[PR]

2 minutes ago, bcb1213 said:

I don't get how half the people are like hey let's do 350 cause that's the same as the NFL and want in the same proposal.... Hey let's make it so we can pay them full price unlike the NFL. Mainly why I'm against the last option tbh 

It's because they are wanting the freedom to take on the contract so they have them under contract one less year instead of extending out one year. 

[rackcs]

I don't think anyone's reasoning for the 350 thing is that we want to be just like the NFL, we just are acknowledging that it seems like a fair price point for those who want that option to have the contract toll. And those who don't and would rather keep their contract running like normal should have that option. Both are reasonable solutions for certain teams and I don't think either gives a particular advantage over the other for every team.

[bcb1213]

2 minutes ago, rackcs said:

I don't think anyone's reasoning for the 350 thing is that we want to be just like the NFL, we just are acknowledging that it seems like a fair price point for those who want that option to have the contract toll. And those who don't and would rather keep their contract running like normal should have that option. Both are reasonable solutions for certain teams and I don't think either gives a particular advantage over the other for every team.

That's why two people are voting it tbh. Hell one even keeps laboring on about 150 

Edited August 20, 2020 by bcb1213

[MD4L]

Less than 20 percent of the opt outs are actually making the $350 stipend.

[Pickle Rick]

So what we thinking here?

I'm not a fan of the locked status 

Edited August 20, 2020 by Pickle Rick

[Scoundrel]

Can we throw players back in that opted out and redraft? Thanks. Can’t believe still I didn’t trust my gut and board and passed on Terry McLaurin for Christian Miller on “need”.

[SirA1]

8 hours ago, bcb1213 said:

That's why two people are voting it tbh. Hell one even keeps laboring on about 150 

Because the Majority of players are taking the $150 option?

[bcb1213]

Just forget about it. Start a new poll I'll be voting 50% anyhow