PR Posted January 14 Share Posted January 14 2 minutes ago, TedLavie said: I'll need you to state a vote between 2A and 2B. if your primary option isn't voted for, i'll switch you to the other one 2B 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TedLavie Posted January 14 Share Posted January 14 (edited) So Proposal 2 is a mess. End of today, whichever option has the least votes is off and I'll ask people who voted for it to change their votes - if they didn't already. I already know bcb is a 2C -> no SirA and MD4L are a 2C -> 2A Scoundrel is everything but a no Pete doesn't care PR is a 2B -> 2A Blue and I are a 2B -> no @Scoundrel start the league as planned. We don't need this issue solved to start the league. Edited January 14 by TedLavie 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scoundrel Posted January 14 Author Share Posted January 14 25 minutes ago, TedLavie said: So Proposal 2 is a mess. End of today, whichever option has the least votes is off and I'll ask people who voted for it to change their votes - if they didn't already. I already know bcb is a 2C -> no SirA and MD4L are a 2C -> 2A Scoundrel is everything but a no Pete doesn't care PR is a 2B -> 2A Blue and I are a 2B -> no @Scoundrel start the league as planned. We don't need this issue solved to start the league. Oh I will. Nothing will stop me 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuskieTitan Posted January 14 Share Posted January 14 On 1/3/2024 at 1:52 PM, TedLavie said: Proposal #2 - Base the rookie scale on the 1st overall pick from previous draft Our rookie scale is a bit outdated we need to revamp it. My proposal is simple: have the 1.01 pick salary be at 75% (like the 3up ratio) of the previous' year, and the salaries decrease exponentially from there to $500 at 6.1 (to not touch anything related to sub500 cuts). Here's it what it would look like for 2025 if the Spotrac figures are correct (I can't guarantee that): https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1rQ_rT3ulL1EJuk5s6bFFB9m-c5G82Os8vz81OvS5EOY/edit#gid=472834359 My proposal is to have the rookie scale altered every year. So if say Shedeur Sanders gets picked 1.1 in 2025 and signs a 40M deal, then the 2026 BDL 1.01 salary would be $7,500 and everything below would move like presented in the google sheet. This is imho, the best way to: Stay in line with IRL numbers while taking into account BDL specifics (a straight up 75% of IRL picks would lead to a huge gap between pick 5.16 and 6.1 if we keep the latter at $500 for example) Not having to revisit this every few years and have 10 pages of discussion about it You can answer to this proposal No, Yes for 2025 only, Yes for 2025 and onwards BCB proposed scale: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Ntl-hnKTHvLQYApqtxab1TVcCTrhbmpmiEOZeIoV28Y/edit?usp=sharing 2a = 2025 only (5) - RedGold, Rags, rackcs, Pete, Scoundrel 2b = 2025 and onwards (5) - Ted, Blue, Pickle, IR, PR 2c = Bcb proposed scale (3) - bcb, SirA, MD4L No = Keep it as is (1) - Whicker What? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuskieTitan Posted January 14 Share Posted January 14 34 minutes ago, TedLavie said: So Proposal 2 is a mess. QFT. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TedLavie Posted January 14 Share Posted January 14 21 minutes ago, RuskieTitan said: QFT. If you vote for 2b, you never have to hear about these crazy talks again. 2a, 2c, or No demand you another vote in future years. And yes this is reductive. But also true 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirA1 Posted January 14 Share Posted January 14 (edited) 8 minutes ago, TedLavie said: If you vote for 2b, you never have to hear about these crazy talks again. 2a, 2c, or No demand you another vote in future years. And yes this is reductive. But also true If you vote for anything but 2B you keep free will alive! Basically if you are generally tight against the cap each year you will not want an ever increasing rookie scale. Edited January 14 by SirA1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MD4L Posted January 14 Share Posted January 14 24 minutes ago, SirA1 said: Basically if you are generally tight against the cap each year you will not want an ever increasing rookie scale. I can’t relate. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scoundrel Posted January 14 Author Share Posted January 14 I’ll be tight against the cap every year and I am not afraid of it going up Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whicker Posted January 14 Share Posted January 14 The price of FA is going to consistently go up and we lag one year behind the NFL in terms of cap. People should be rewarded for great drafting in this league and a discount on top players is a good thing. Keep it the same Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirA1 Posted January 14 Share Posted January 14 9 minutes ago, Whicker said: The price of FA is going to consistently go up and we lag one year behind the NFL in terms of cap. People should be rewarded for great drafting in this league and a discount on top players is a good thing. Keep it the same This is a valid opinion. But we increased it one time back in 2017 and that worked out fine. This doesn't affect those who draft great in the later rounds. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue Posted January 14 Share Posted January 14 The 75% on both 3 Ups and draft picks solves the year lag on cap pretty well already imo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ragnarok Posted January 14 Share Posted January 14 I want to see how 2A or 2C works before considering an auto-increase. I will vote yes to both 2A and 2C to get one of them to pass Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuskieTitan Posted January 14 Share Posted January 14 On 1/3/2024 at 1:52 PM, TedLavie said: Proposal #5 - New RFA Tag Starting the 2025 off-season, Introduce the RFA+ Tag. The RFA+ Tag will cost the same as the number one pick would cost for that year to tag but would result in the tagger receiving a 1st and 4th round pick as compensation if choosing to not match the offered contract. ICBR votes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuskieTitan Posted January 14 Share Posted January 14 2 hours ago, TedLavie said: If you vote for 2b, you never have to hear about these crazy talks again. 2a, 2c, or No demand you another vote in future years. And yes this is reductive. But also true So the chaos option eliminates 2b for me. Someone else pitch me on the other options 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.