ny92mike Posted February 22, 2021 Author Share Posted February 22, 2021 @mountainpd So I have a compromise for adding the 4th ufa/resign bid slot, let me know what you think. @squire12 Thoughts on this, I think it does what we were talking about earlier and resolves *mountains concerns about it pulling too many, but still allows for a higher win percentage. Just hate it when we sometimes strike out in these bidding rounds. An early hit like that, takes the sails down real quick. @bcb1213 I am right? We set it up like this; If the 3 ufa and fixed resign bids don't land you at least 2 players then the 4th ufa bid is included would be the only rule we'd need to create. No "what ifs" the rules would remain as is and the only way this new rule gets implemented is if you are awarded 2 or less. This 4th bid goes in and would still have to beat out any other bid on him. Long read I know....helps me keep my mind busy with something else. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mountainpd Posted February 22, 2021 Share Posted February 22, 2021 55 minutes ago, ny92mike said: @mountainpd So I have a compromise for adding the 4th ufa/resign bid slot, let me know what you think. @squire12 Thoughts on this, I think it does what we were talking about earlier and resolves *mountains concerns about it pulling too many, but still allows for a higher win percentage. Just hate it when we sometimes strike out in these bidding rounds. An early hit like that, takes the sails down real quick. @bcb1213 I am right? We set it up like this; If the 3 ufa and fixed resign bids don't land you at least 2 players then the 4th ufa bid is included would be the only rule we'd need to create. No "what ifs" the rules would remain as is and the only way this new rule gets implemented is if you are awarded 2 or less. This 4th bid goes in and would still have to beat out any other bid on him. Long read I know....helps me keep my mind busy with something else. My thoughts remain the same. The buzz for me is the bidding knowing you could score big or miss out completely this takes away from that and still waters down the pool quicker. (I think this would have led this year if I read it right that 8 additional players would have been awarded for teams who won 2 or less players add in 4 non bidding teams which could add an additional 3 players each then 20 extra players could go in round 1.) We have said to start mock later but under normal circumstances and with combine etc I expect this to be about 2-3 weeks. I am keen not to have a void in the middle of the mock. We are at round 4 and with a couple of teams not bidding now or during first few rounds we still have a situation where most of the starters are only sitting in the pool whilst people wait for the apy to drop. I believe this would kick in a round earlier and so round 4-7 would be meh for a lot of people. So even with 3 rounds per week it would drop off(This is the void I speak of) maybe I need to do my calculations on the schedule a little more but it seems unless you are suggesting we only do 2 weeks of free agency, say 6 rounds and the apy drops like 20-25% per round then I see a void. I hope this waffled response makes some sense, but this is just my opinion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeT14 Posted February 22, 2021 Share Posted February 22, 2021 Suggestion for now and the future. Can you make it so the Big Board Round column can be re-sorted in order? It's difficult to currently rearrange if we need to. It might also be good to make the rankings adjustable to sort them as well. Round Rank 1st 1 1st 2 1st 3 1st 4 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ny92mike Posted February 22, 2021 Author Share Posted February 22, 2021 7 hours ago, MikeT14 said: Suggestion for now and the future. Can you make it so the Big Board Round column can be re-sorted in order? It's difficult to currently rearrange if we need to. It might also be good to make the rankings adjustable to sort them as well. Round Rank 1st 1 1st 2 1st 3 1st 4 Yes...I can set up the filter. Have some additional questions. Does this section help you out at all? Select Position to change drop down player listing QB Or would it be easier to just list all the players in the drop down list? Once added to the big board the name doesn't show up again in the drop down list. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeT14 Posted February 22, 2021 Share Posted February 22, 2021 46 minutes ago, ny92mike said: Yes...I can set up the filter. Have some additional questions. Does this section help you out at all? Select Position to change drop down player listing QB Or would it be easier to just list all the players in the drop down list? Once added to the big board the name doesn't show up again in the drop down list. Saw your message. I’ll have to check in the morning. My home computer is at the shop. I’d probably prefer to lose the filter and do what you’re saying. Could it be searchable? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JetsandI Posted February 22, 2021 Share Posted February 22, 2021 29 minutes ago, MikeT14 said: Saw your message. I’ll have to check in the morning. My home computer is at the shop. I’d probably prefer to lose the filter and do what you’re saying. Could it be searchable? More work. You use position drop to find your player for that row only. For next row, you have to go back to position drop to select different position and then go back to that row to find your player. So go on for your BB. Most important in that part is to ignore red triangle on upper right corner (key for invalid). I don't think it is what you ask for. Unless I misunderstood your request, you want to have same prospects on your BB but just change BB priorities without do over for new order (priority) whenever you wish to adjust your BB. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ny92mike Posted February 22, 2021 Author Share Posted February 22, 2021 5 minutes ago, JetsandI said: More work. You use position drop to find your player for that row only. For next row, you have to go back to position drop to select different position and then go back to that row to find your player. So go on for your BB. Most important in that part is to ignore red triangle on upper right corner (key for invalid). I don't think it is what you ask for. Unless I misunderstood your request, you want to have same prospects on your BB but just change BB priorities without do over for new order (priority) whenever you wish to adjust your BB. The red triangle pops up because when the name is removed the from list, it thinks there is an error. Which technically there is but the error is intentionally created. I'm not a fan of the position cell because you're right you keep bouncing back and forth to adjust the names being listed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pwny Posted February 23, 2021 Share Posted February 23, 2021 I personally think the 4th/contingency bid should be tied to a player at a position [or similar e.g. EDGE, IDL, off ball LB, OL] you bid on that round. So that a situation like what you mentioned before with all the RBs in a certain tier don’t go all at once and you miss out on 3-4 of your targets solely because you missed the one you bid on. Personally, that’s been the worst part of the bidding process. We just missed out on one player at a position we really wanted to target, and watched all of the other guys we would have went after also go at the same round, and now we’re without that player. I don’t really much care about the number we miss out on, just missing someone and then watching a positional run hit alongside of that is rough. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JetsandI Posted February 23, 2021 Share Posted February 23, 2021 (edited) 7 minutes ago, pwny said: I personally think the 4th/contingency bid should be tied to a player at a position [or similar e.g. EDGE, IDL, off ball LB, OL] you bid on that round. So that a situation like what you mentioned before with all the RBs in a certain tier don’t go all at once and you miss out on 3-4 of your targets solely because you missed the one you bid on. Personally, that’s been the worst part of the bidding process. We just missed out on one player at a position we really wanted to target, and watched all of the other guys we would have went after also go at the same round, and now we’re without that player. I don’t really much care about the number we miss out on, just missing someone and then watching a positional run hit alongside of that is rough. I like that.. If first player to try is failed, I move to next target for same amount or similar on same position within the round. Edited February 23, 2021 by JetsandI Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ny92mike Posted February 23, 2021 Author Share Posted February 23, 2021 6 minutes ago, pwny said: I personally think the 4th/contingency bid should be tied to a player at a position [or similar e.g. EDGE, IDL, off ball LB, OL] you bid on that round. So that a situation like what you mentioned before with all the RBs in a certain tier don’t go all at once and you miss out on 3-4 of your targets solely because you missed the one you bid on. Personally, that’s been the worst part of the bidding process. We just missed out on one player at a position we really wanted to target, and watched all of the other guys we would have went after also go at the same round, and now we’re without that player. I don’t really much care about the number we miss out on, just missing someone and then watching a positional run hit alongside of that is rough. We had some discussions on this either last year or the year prior. Just never really nailed down a solution. This was almost spot on for what I wanted to implement, where the 4th bid slot had to be tied to a similar position. So I'd be happy to revisit this again. I'll see if I can't find a link to the previous discussion to see where we left off on that. Thanks for the feedback. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JetsandI Posted February 23, 2021 Share Posted February 23, 2021 5 minutes ago, ny92mike said: We had some discussions on this either last year or the year prior. Just never really nailed down a solution. This was almost spot on for what I wanted to implement, where the 4th bid slot had to be tied to a similar position. So I'd be happy to revisit this again. I'll see if I can't find a link to the previous discussion to see where we left off on that. Thanks for the feedback. I don't want to overuse that part. Maybe first 2 or 3 rounds and thats it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ny92mike Posted February 23, 2021 Author Share Posted February 23, 2021 4 hours ago, JetsandI said: I don't want to overuse that part. Maybe first 2 or 3 rounds and thats it. Going back and deleting the bid slot would be a pain, but what if it turned into a fixed resign bid after round 2 or 3? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ny92mike Posted February 23, 2021 Author Share Posted February 23, 2021 4 hours ago, pwny said: I personally think the 4th/contingency bid should be tied to a player at a position [or similar e.g. EDGE, IDL, off ball LB, OL] you bid on that round. So that a situation like what you mentioned before with all the RBs in a certain tier don’t go all at once and you miss out on 3-4 of your targets solely because you missed the one you bid on. Personally, that’s been the worst part of the bidding process. We just missed out on one player at a position we really wanted to target, and watched all of the other guys we would have went after also go at the same round, and now we’re without that player. I don’t really much care about the number we miss out on, just missing someone and then watching a positional run hit alongside of that is rough. @mountainpd Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ny92mike Posted February 23, 2021 Author Share Posted February 23, 2021 Thoughts on setting up the contract extensions similar to how we do the restructures, with the allotted dollar amount that we're allowed to push to future years. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sparky151 Posted February 23, 2021 Share Posted February 23, 2021 9 hours ago, ny92mike said: Thoughts on setting up the contract extensions similar to how we do the restructures, with the allotted dollar amount that we're allowed to push to future years. That's a good idea. Extensions became simply cap management tools rather than team building tools. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.