Jump to content
ny92mike

TCMD '18 GM mock draft build (open discussion)

Recommended Posts

Truly blessed that Palmer retired before TCMD so that I have a little bit of wiggle room compared to most years:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Need your opinions on Tender Offer Sheets.

For RFA Tender Offer Sheets the current plan is as follows:

The team making the offer sheet is a fixed 3 year contract and the minimum APY is (Tendered Amount * 150%) for example if the ROFR tender amount is 1,531,170 then the lowest amount the tender offer APY amount is 2,296,755.

For Tagged Tender Offer Sheets the idea is as follows:

Team making the offer sheet must offer the player a contract no less than the player's expected contract length, not to exceed 5 years.  The minimum APY you can offer is the tagged amount.

Need you thoughts on this by tomorrow.  Sorry for the rush.  If we don't come up with a better solution we'll roll with the above.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, ny92jefferis said:

Need your opinions on Tender Offer Sheets.

For RFA Tender Offer Sheets the current plan is as follows:

The team making the offer sheet is a fixed 3 year contract and the minimum APY is (Tendered Amount * 150%) for example if the ROFR tender amount is 1,531,170 then the lowest amount the tender offer APY amount is 2,296,755.

For Tagged Tender Offer Sheets the idea is as follows:gs

Team making the offer sheet must offer the player a contract no less than the player's expected contract length, not to exceed 5 years.  The minimum APY you can offer is the tagged amount.

Need you thoughts on this by tomorrow.  Sorry for the rush.  If we don't come up with a better solution we'll roll with the above.

 

Sounds doable.. although I would prefer a little gamesmanship ;)

For example, Atlanta tags a player.  Cleveland offers a front loaded contract that deescalates. $15M in year 1; $13M in year 2; $11M in year 3.  Falcons could match, but they will be hamstrung and non-players in big time FA.  So they have to make a decision.  I have seen teams offer reasonable contracts that the "home team" feels no problem matching because contract is reasonable for either team.

Anyway... just my $.02

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, jch1911 said:

Sounds doable.. although I would prefer a little gamesmanship ;)

For example, Atlanta tags a player.  Cleveland offers a front loaded contract that deescalates. $15M in year 1; $13M in year 2; $11M in year 3.  Falcons could match, but they will be hamstrung and non-players in big time FA.  So they have to make a decision.  I have seen teams offer reasonable contracts that the "home team" feels no problem matching because contract is reasonable for either team.

Anyway... just my $.02

I agree with this.  Since there are likely to be less players in this situation, it would add more real elements in line with the NFL set up.  

Not sure how much more work it would be for @ny92jefferis, which is something that should be considered.

Edited by squire12

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, ny92jefferis said:

Need your opinions on Tender Offer Sheets.

For RFA Tender Offer Sheets the current plan is as follows:

The team making the offer sheet is a fixed 3 year contract and the minimum APY is (Tendered Amount * 150%) for example if the ROFR tender amount is 1,531,170 then the lowest amount the tender offer APY amount is 2,296,755.

For Tagged Tender Offer Sheets the idea is as follows:

Team making the offer sheet must offer the player a contract no less than the player's expected contract length, not to exceed 5 years.  The minimum APY you can offer is the tagged amount.

Need you thoughts on this by tomorrow.  Sorry for the rush.  If we don't come up with a better solution we'll roll with the above.

 

Looks good to me.

The team offering can still out pay the original team like jch1911 said.

This just sets a min amount you can offer.

That's my take on it, if I've read it correctly.

Edited by DTMW78

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, jch1911 said:

Sounds doable.. although I would prefer a little gamesmanship ;)

For example, Atlanta tags a player.  Cleveland offers a front loaded contract that deescalates. $15M in year 1; $13M in year 2; $11M in year 3.  Falcons could match, but they will be hamstrung and non-players in big time FA.  So they have to make a decision.  I have seen teams offer reasonable contracts that the "home team" feels no problem matching because contract is reasonable for either team.

Anyway... just my $.02

Not sure I follow.  Give it to me again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, ny92jefferis said:
4 hours ago, jch1911 said:

Sounds doable.. although I would prefer a little gamesmanship ;)

For example, Atlanta tags a player.  Cleveland offers a front loaded contract that deescalates. $15M in year 1; $13M in year 2; $11M in year 3.  Falcons could match, but they will be hamstrung and non-players in big time FA.  So they have to make a decision.  I have seen teams offer reasonable contracts that the "home team" feels no problem matching because contract is reasonable for either team.

Anyway... just my $.02

Not sure I follow.  Give it to me again.

Not @jch1911, but I will try to infer what he is saying.  

Say PITT offers Anthony Chickillo a original round RFA 6th round pick.  PIT is tight against the cap so very little wiggle room

Any team with significant cap can offer a more front loaded contract that PIT essentially can't match due to limited cap space.  I think jch911 just wants the ability to have it be really consistent with real NFL dynamics.  

If that is already in place, then no problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, squire12 said:

Not @jch1911, but I will try to infer what he is saying.  

Say PITT offers Anthony Chickillo a original round RFA 6th round pick.  PIT is tight against the cap so very little wiggle room

Any team with significant cap can offer a more front loaded contract that PIT essentially can't match due to limited cap space.  I think jch911 just wants the ability to have it be really consistent with real NFL dynamics.  

If that is already in place, then no problem.

Still missing it.  If you're wanting the offer sheet to allow a team to make an offer that Pit (example) can't afford so that they don't match, that's there as teams can offer any amount they want above the min values.  Explain what "consistent with real nfl dynamics" is.  So far what you're saying is built into the system.

where's my dunce hat?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, ny92jefferis said:

Still missing it.  If you're wanting the offer sheet to allow a team to make an offer that Pit (example) can't afford so that they don't match, that's there as teams can offer any amount they want above the min values.  Explain what "consistent with real nfl dynamics" is.  So far what you're saying is built into the system.

where's my dunce hat?

If that is what is able to be done, then I think we are all good.   When I read through what you had, it did not seem like that was the case.  Maybe some rewording of who is offering the contracts...Original team, outside team.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, ny92jefferis said:

Need your opinions on Tender Offer Sheets.

For RFA Tender Offer Sheets the current plan is as follows:

The team making the offer sheet is a fixed 3 year contract and the minimum APY is (Tendered Amount * 150%) for example if the ROFR tender amount is 1,531,170 then the lowest amount the tender offer APY amount is 2,296,755.

For Tagged Tender Offer Sheets the idea is as follows:gs

Team making the offer sheet must offer the player a contract no less than the player's expected contract length, not to exceed 5 years.  The minimum APY you can offer is the tagged amount.

Need you thoughts on this by tomorrow.  Sorry for the rush.  If we don't come up with a better solution we'll roll with the above.

 

Sounds doable.. although I would prefer a little gamesmanship ;)

For example, Atlanta tags a player.  Cleveland offers a front loaded contract that deescalates. $15M in year 1; $13M in year 2; $11M in year 3.  Falcons could match, but they will be hamstrung and non-players in big time FA.  So they have to make a decision.  I have seen teams offer reasonable contracts that the "home team" feels no problem matching because contract is reasonable for either team.

Anyway... just my $.02

8 hours ago, ny92jefferis said:

Still missing it.  If you're wanting the offer sheet to allow a team to make an offer that Pit (example) can't afford so that they don't match, that's there as teams can offer any amount they want above the min values.  Explain what "consistent with real nfl dynamics" is.  So far what you're saying is built into the system.

where's my dunce hat?

it was more about the contract length (TWSS) for RFA than the minimum APY.... but I realize it may be just extra work for you.  So I am good with 3 year offers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, jch1911 said:

Sounds doable.. although I would prefer a little gamesmanship ;)

For example, Atlanta tags a player.  Cleveland offers a front loaded contract that deescalates. $15M in year 1; $13M in year 2; $11M in year 3.  Falcons could match, but they will be hamstrung and non-players in big time FA.  So they have to make a decision.  I have seen teams offer reasonable contracts that the "home team" feels no problem matching because contract is reasonable for either team.

Anyway... just my $.02

it was more about the contract length (TWSS) for RFA than the minimum APY.... but I realize it may be just extra work for you.  So I am good with 3 year offers.

gotcha....the reason I went with 3 year fixed for RFA is because of their age, just didn't think a rfa would sign a cheap salary deal long term.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, ny92jefferis said:

gotcha....the reason I went with 3 year fixed for RFA is because of their age, just didn't think a rfa would sign a cheap salary deal long term.

So original team assigns a original round RFA.

Outside team contract offer is automatically a 3 year length with APY minimums being necessary.

Can the original team match the APY but alter the structure to backoad the contract, or are they matching the exact contract structure?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would say it would have to be a exact match.

Plus I would have thought the player would rather take the money now instead of later.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, DTMW78 said:

I would say it would have to be a exact match.

Plus I would have thought the player would rather take the money now instead of later.

 

I am not sure the player has a choice as to which contract they take.  Once there is an offer from an outside team, the decision is on the original team, not the player for RFA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, squire12 said:

So original team assigns a original round RFA.

Outside team contract offer is automatically a 3 year length with APY minimums being necessary.

Can the original team match the APY but alter the structure to backoad the contract, or are they matching the exact contract structure?

From my understanding the orig. team would need to match the contract terms exactly.  I'll see if I can't find any examples of irl situations where the orig team matched the offer but restructured the deal.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×