Scoundrel Posted January 4 Author Share Posted January 4 6 minutes ago, MD4L said: I’d like to narrow the rule because I’d understandably respect concerns about this. What do you want me to put Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MD4L Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 QBs from the shark tank can be traded for ONLY PFA picks. A QB can be traded if 1. He’s been in the NFL for at least one season 2. He has started at least 1 game during the season That way it deincentivzes teams from stacking up QBs to trade them in season. Also makes teams with good multiple QBs evaluate if a comp pick is worth trading a backup QB. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EaglesPeteC Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 1- yes 2- No (picks going up every single year rather than a one time increase was the kicker for me) 3- yes 4- yes 5- No- (we don’t need special QB rules) 6- yes 7- No (again special QB rules are unnecessary) 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EaglesPeteC Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 Also yes to punch and pie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedGold Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 #1 - Yes #2 - No, 1 year increase. Revisit in 2 years #3 - Yes #4 - Week 16 #5 - Yes #6 - Yes #7 - No Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scoundrel Posted January 4 Author Share Posted January 4 16 minutes ago, EaglesPeteC said: Also yes to punch and pie No Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 No to Proposal 7 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WFLukic Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 5 hours ago, Scoundrel said: Proposals: #1 100% extension (all year long): You can extend an unlocked player at 100% of his IRL salary as long as it doesn’t decrease his BDL salary and the player is on an IRL contract other than their NFL Rookie deal. Unlocked player is defined as one with a BDL contract with years remaining so you cannot 100% extend a UFA #2 Yearly increase of draft pick salaries for rounds 1-5 starting with the 2025. Proposed amount increase linked here Proposed Draft Slot Salary Increase under the Cap Proposal Tab. #3 PFAs become 3 year contracts same as rounds 5-7 in place of the current one year contracts. #4 Bizz Bowl to be played week 16 not week 17 of the NFL season to avoid confusion #5 Introduce the RFA+ Tag. The RFA+ Tag will cost $6500 same as the number one pick 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. #6 RFA Tag increases of $500 per slot starting this offseason 1st Round- $4,000 2nd Round- $3,500 3rd Round- $3,000 4th Round- $2,500 5th Round- $2,000 6th Round- $1,750 7th Round- $1,500 #7 QBs from the shark tank can be traded for ONLY PFA picks. A QB can be traded if 1. He’s been in the NFL for at least one season 2. He has started at least 1 NFL game during the season 1. Yes 2. Yes 3. Yes 4. Yes 5. Yes 6. Yes 7. Yes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WFLukic Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 I would however be comfortable with Week 17 for the bizzbowl, if anybody who plays a game in either week 16 or week 17 is available. Obviously our intention here is to mimic the superbowl, which is fine. However with the superbowl, no one gets injured in the week between. In the BDL, you could have your best player play week 16, get injured in that match and then be out week 17. So if a player plays week 16, 17 or both, then they are available for the bizzbowl if we have it in week 17. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scoundrel Posted January 4 Author Share Posted January 4 3 minutes ago, WFLukic said: I would however be comfortable with Week 17 for the bizzbowl, if anybody who plays a game in either week 16 or week 17 is available. Obviously our intention here is to mimic the superbowl, which is fine. However with the superbowl, no one gets injured in the week between. In the BDL, you could have your best player play week 16, get injured in that match and then be out week 17. So if a player plays week 16, 17 or both, then they are available for the bizzbowl if we have it in week 17. Then you need to create a separate proposal. Written out word for word how you want it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirA1 Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 I'll vote on Monday. This looks like a normal Owners meeting so far. Half the people will get things they want and what does get approved will work in ways not intended. Lol 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scoundrel Posted January 4 Author Share Posted January 4 19 minutes ago, SirA1 said: I'll vote on Monday. This looks like a normal Owners meeting so far. Half the people will get things they want and what does get approved will work in ways not intended. Lol It’s going fine. Always going to have this happen with so many personalities. To expect anything different would be more shocking. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TedLavie Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 I vote NO on Proposal 3. I like the ERFA decision Proposal 5 and proposal 6 : If we change the rookie scale, wouldn't those numbers change as well? Proposal 7 - NO: No to any specific rule for a specific position. I understand MD4L worry about hoarding QBs but, realistically, no one does it and for a good reason: investing in many QBs in Shark Tank would result in lack on investment elsewhere. So unless we have an owner willing to sacrifice his season to screw someone else - which would be a big problem for the league and not for the QB hoarding stuff - this shouldn't be an issue 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirA1 Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 14 hours ago, RedGold said: It is likely there for a reason. But I would propose PFA’s start as 3 year deals after drafted similar to 5th-7th rounders. This seems like an innocent change but will actually have tons of ramifications I think. Originally the PFA Scramble was meant to simulate the UDFA signings of the NFL after the NFL Draft. It used to be very Random similar to Waiver claims but was changed to be a snake draft to simplify things and take some of the Chaos out of the process. You got to select from the remaining players and know where they landed if it was a team you liked or went much higher IRL in the draft because of something you missed. To balance out this foreknowledge you got the player for 1 year at a reduced cost but then had to commit to a second season of the player being locked on your roster by signing them as an ERFA the following season. I know most teams just resign all their guys because they can but not all do. What this change will do is twofold IMO. 1. These players will be under a cheaper deal for longer and it will greatly reduce the number of ERFAs in the league so that really the only way that will happen is though Shark Tank/Waivers now. 2. These players will also be tradable assets in year two so teams that like to trade will just have more ammunition and will stockpile more PFA picks. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirA1 Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 14 hours ago, Scoundrel said: I also propose a raise in the RFA tag amounts with the cap increase RFA Tag increases of $500 per slot 1st Round- $4,000 2nd Round- $3,500 3rd Round- $3,000 4th Round- $2,500 5th Round- $2,000 6th Round- $1,750 7th Round- $1,500 14 hours ago, Scoundrel said: For fun I propose something Rack has talked about in the past as the RFA+ tag for QBs. RFA+ tag can only be used on QBs and will cost $6500 same as the number one pick to tag but would result in the tagger receiving a 1st and 3rd round pick as compensation if choosing to not match the offered contract. For the same Reasons as the Draft Scale change should take place in 2025/2-26 these changes should also be implemented then if approved. This has both Cap Issues and compensation issues. 1 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.