Blue Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 2a simply kicks the can down the road and we will be having this exact same conversation in a few years. Tie it to the IRL rookie numbers and be done with it, IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scoundrel Posted January 12 Author Share Posted January 12 8 minutes ago, Blue said: 2a simply kicks the can down the road and we will be having this exact same conversation in a few years. Tie it to the IRL rookie numbers and be done with it, IMO. Is 2B tied to irl rookie numbers? Because those are the two options we have. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 10 minutes ago, Scoundrel said: Is 2B tied to irl rookie numbers? Because those are the two options we have. Yes. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scoundrel Posted January 12 Author Share Posted January 12 7 minutes ago, Blue said: Yes. I vote yes for both. Whichever gets the most votes is fine with me Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TedLavie Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 4 hours ago, Scoundrel said: I guess move me to 2A Ted since you only have me choosing one option 2b includes 2a. That's why I tied you to 2b. Basically 2b is 2a + auto increment Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TedLavie Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 As for prop 2, I really really don't see the point of having the discussion every X years when this can be a system with relatively low variance from year to year and low complexity. Why create 5 pages off debate in an owners meeting when we don't have to? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rackcs Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 I'll vote yes on 2A Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scoundrel Posted January 12 Author Share Posted January 12 5 hours ago, TedLavie said: As for prop 2, I really really don't see the point of having the discussion every X years when this can be a system with relatively low variance from year to year and low complexity. Why create 5 pages off debate in an owners meeting when we don't have to? Maybe because people are comfortable with how it’s been but also agree it should go up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TedLavie Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 8 minutes ago, Scoundrel said: Maybe because people are comfortable with how it’s been but also agree it should go up. Realistically, the YtoY variance between the salaries of 1.1 IRL is low, so the impact YtoY would be really low here too. Why force ourselves to adjust every 4 years when we can address this issue once and for all? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bcb1213 Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 If those scales are my only option then i am No on 2. I still think the numbers are too randomly jumping for my taste 5 is fine, if someone wants to pay a dude an extra 3k to try to get a fourth round pick, good for them Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scoundrel Posted January 12 Author Share Posted January 12 5 minutes ago, TedLavie said: Realistically, the YtoY variance between the salaries of 1.1 IRL is low, so the impact YtoY would be really low here too. Why force ourselves to adjust every 4 years when we can address this issue once and for all? I get that but I just explained people may be comfortable with how it’s been 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeT14 Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 7 hours ago, Scoundrel said: I vote yes for both. Whichever gets the most votes is fine with me Reading into it, I would agree to this. I like 2a, just to make sure it works fine and we're good and if so just adopting it. I get some of you don't want to revisit it AGAIN. Understandable. I don't think it hurts to check in, make sure everything went smoothly, and then we could just adopt 2b at that point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirA1 Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 5 hours ago, TedLavie said: As for prop 2, I really really don't see the point of having the discussion every X years when this can be a system with relatively low variance from year to year and low complexity. Why create 5 pages off debate in an owners meeting when we don't have to? For me it is simply a matter of uncertainty. The justification you and Blue are using is that since we do 3 Ups that way then the Rookie scale should be done that way as well. There were 41 3 Ups last year. Which is out of a max of 48. Most players go to FA where the min bids start at 50%. So using 3 Ups as an argument when you are going to apply that principle to 80 rookies every year seems a bit extreme. I would just rather revisit it as needed every few years in case something drastic happens in the NFL with their rookie scale. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bcb1213 Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 heres a nice consistent scale btw https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Ntl-hnKTHvLQYApqtxab1TVcCTrhbmpmiEOZeIoV28Y/edit?usp=sharing Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scoundrel Posted January 12 Author Share Posted January 12 The proposal has been made. I’m opening the league on Monday at 12:00am regardless of where these votes are 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.