Scoundrel Posted January 4 Author Share Posted January 4 2 minutes ago, InjuredReserve said: Where I stand on Proposal Votes #1 - Yes #3 - Yes #4 - Yes #6 - Yes Holding off on the others for now (either paused or I am unsure) @TedLavie that should be 9 for #1. So that passes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whicker Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 I….. abstain 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 (edited) 40 minutes ago, Scoundrel said: I am down for this if the price of placing this tag is equally costly to the tagger meaning a pretty hefty tag amount The proposal already states that the RFA+ tag would cost the same as the first overall pick, which is nearly a 300% increase on the current 1st round tag amount. Shall we increase the compensation to three 1st round picks? EDIT: I'm not sure why Ted's post says 1st and 4th round picks when Scoundrel's proposal says 1st and 3rd, but it doesn't really matter because neither pick is going to dissuade anyone from bidding. Edited January 4 by Blue Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scoundrel Posted January 4 Author Share Posted January 4 4 minutes ago, Blue said: The proposal already states that the RFA+ tag would cost the same as the first overall pick, which is nearly a 300% increase on the current 1st round tag amount. Shall we increase the compensation to three 1st round picks? EDIT: I'm not sure why Ted's post says 1st and 4th round picks when Scoundrel's proposal says 1st and 3rd, but it doesn't really matter because neither pick is going to dissuade anyone from bidding. I changed it to 1st and 4th before Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 Just now, Scoundrel said: I changed it to 1st and 4th before well that's even worse Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scoundrel Posted January 4 Author Share Posted January 4 2 minutes ago, Blue said: well that's even worse That’s just like your opinion man Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scoundrel Posted January 4 Author Share Posted January 4 9 minutes ago, Blue said: The proposal already states that the RFA+ tag would cost the same as the first overall pick, which is nearly a 300% increase on the current 1st round tag amount. Shall we increase the compensation to three 1st round picks? EDIT: I'm not sure why Ted's post says 1st and 4th round picks when Scoundrel's proposal says 1st and 3rd, but it doesn't really matter because neither pick is going to dissuade anyone from bidding. It’s Racks proposal so I’m fine either way Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 Just now, Scoundrel said: Nearly? A 300% is $10,500… $6,500 is closer to $3,500 I'm currently voting for the 1st overall pick to be close to $9k. While that doesn't look like it's going to pass, the first pick is going to be worth substantially more than $6500 no matter what going forward. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bcb1213 Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 ok, so lets figure out where we'd like to start pick 1 at and i'll make it work from there. i saw 7k, is that acceptable, should we got a bit higher to make it work for a few more years, say 7200 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scoundrel Posted January 4 Author Share Posted January 4 1 minute ago, bcb1213 said: ok, so lets figure out where we'd like to start pick 1 at and i'll make it work from there. i saw 7k, is that acceptable, should we got a bit higher to make it work for a few more years, say 7200 Are we starting in 2025 or this years draft? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TedLavie Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 (edited) 14 minutes ago, bcb1213 said: ok, so lets figure out where we'd like to start pick 1 at and i'll make it work from there. i saw 7k, is that acceptable, should we got a bit higher to make it work for a few more years, say 7200 $7180. It's 75% of this year 1st overall pick salary Edited January 4 by TedLavie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TedLavie Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 1 hour ago, RedGold said: No I don't plan on actually making that work. There's like 102 ERFA's. All of those have to be touched in sheet manually, as most are kept for the low cost. We can delete the proposal, my main reasoning was since most are kept.. it would be less work to do the Sub500 cut list, than the Tag list. It would only reduce it by the 32 PFA's, but it'd be less work. You sure you want to delete it? Cause I'm considering changing my vote to a yes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scoundrel Posted January 4 Author Share Posted January 4 22 minutes ago, TedLavie said: $7180. It's 75% of this year 1st overall pick salary Let’s make it $7,200 and I’m down Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TedLavie Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 4 minutes ago, Scoundrel said: Let’s make it $7,200 and I’m down Rookie scale will start in 2025. In 2025 the IRL 1.01 salary will change so the 1st overall pick under the new scale wouldn't be $7,180 either. It's just the starting point this year for bcb to make the first scale Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirA1 Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 4 minutes ago, Scoundrel said: Let’s make it $7,200 and I’m down I think we are still talking about 2 different things. Ted wants to automate things going forward to a set amount each year based off a percentage (75%) and starting point of the previous year's #1 NFL contract. (So forever and always the Rookie Wage Scale will be increasing going forward.) Bcb is wanting to do a baseline number that we agree works and then we just revisit every few years. (Basically a continuing resolution of what we currently have just with higher numbers) 2 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.