Scoundrel Posted January 4 Author Share Posted January 4 @rackcs the super tag is your proposal do you want me to move it to start in 2025 or leave it for this off season? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bcb1213 Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 Issue one seems ok to me., so I vote yes I'll vote on these how we're supposed to cause principle...lol 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rackcs Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 14 minutes ago, Scoundrel said: @rackcs the super tag is your proposal do you want me to move it to start in 2025 or leave it for this off season? I think it's probably better off just holding till 2025 but I'm not opposed if people want it this off-season. I think it's a pretty flexible proposal. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scoundrel Posted January 4 Author Share Posted January 4 4 minutes ago, rackcs said: I think it's probably better off just holding till 2025 but I'm not opposed if people want it this off-season. I think it's a pretty flexible proposal. I put it for 2025 might get more support then Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scoundrel Posted January 4 Author Share Posted January 4 I have combined the draft increase proposals into one proposal. #2. Please either vote for Ted’s proposed increases linked in the workbook or BCB’s proposed increase linked to a separate sheet, or vote No for no draft pick salary increase. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scoundrel Posted January 4 Author Share Posted January 4 In the future we will run this one proposal at a time like BCB suggested. It’s cleaner that way. But this is my first time running it so here we are… 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scoundrel Posted January 4 Author Share Posted January 4 @TedLavie I changed the language for the RFA super tag to match whatever the cost is of the number one pick for that season. This should account for any increases in draft pick salary each year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 2 hours ago, SirA1 said: I think Bcb's numbers are more in line with our current contract structure in the BDL. 3 Ups are 75% of a players IRL contract. FA starts at 50% of an IRL contract as a base. The reasons for this is because we have much more concentrated Rosters of star players than NFL teams. So we need that cap wiggle room since we also trail a year behind the NFL for salary cap increases. The numbers you are proposing are 100% or more of actual rookie deals in the early rounds. CJ Stroud has an IRL real of $9,070 per season in BDL dollars. His current BDL salary of $6500 is at a 71% rate. If you want to compare Apples to Oranges Bryce Young's contract as the NFL #1 pick would be 68% using the same BDL salary. When we implemented the current Rookie Wage Scale back in 2017 it was designed to be bullet proof for a time but contracts have now caught up with us so an Increase is needed, just not such a large drastic one as you are proposing. You are basing a % of yearly cap increase which we don't know about until a year in advance to project that increase at a 100% rate for 80 players that we add to rosters each year. Basically we just need to decide on a starting number for the number 1 pick and then everything else is based off of that rather than trying to make each salary as close as possible. BcB's proposed staring number of $6,900 would have been 76% rate for this year's pick. If you want to make that a little more bullet proof for a few years then start it at $7K for the 2025 season and we can revisit every few years. I continue to see no reason why we aren't just taking 75% of the salaries for each draft slot in the current year's draft. This is how we handle 3 Ups and it works perfectly fine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scoundrel Posted January 4 Author Share Posted January 4 1 minute ago, Blue said: I continue to see no reason why we aren't just taking 75% of the salaries for each draft slot in the current year's draft. This is how we handle 3 Ups and it works perfectly fine. Is this your proposal? Lol I can add it to the list 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 (edited) 2 minutes ago, Scoundrel said: Is this your proposal? Lol I can add it to the list Sure, let's let chaos reign. Only through the 5th round, however; I am fine with leaving rounds 6-7 at 500 and lower for a bit longer, although I think we're reaching a point where we need to consider sub-1000 cuts instead of 500. I will vote Yes on both my own proposed cap increase and Ted's but No to Bcb's proposal and no increase. Edited January 4 by Blue Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TedLavie Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 2 hours ago, SirA1 said: I think Bcb's numbers are more in line with our current contract structure in the BDL. 3 Ups are 75% of a players IRL contract. FA starts at 50% of an IRL contract as a base. The reasons for this is because we have much more concentrated Rosters of star players than NFL teams. So we need that cap wiggle room since we also trail a year behind the NFL for salary cap increases. The numbers you are proposing are 100% or more of actual rookie deals in the early rounds.CJ Stroud has an IRL real of $9,070 per season in BDL dollars. His current BDL salary of $6500 is at a 71% rate. If you want to compare Apples to Oranges Bryce Young's contract as the NFL #1 pick would be 68% using the same BDL salary. When we implemented the current Rookie Wage Scale back in 2017 it was designed to be bullet proof for a time but contracts have now caught up with us so an Increase is needed, just not such a large drastic one as you are proposing. All of this makes sense. Based on these points, I'd be ok to reduce the starting numbers. But I don't think it should be below 75% of the IRL numbers. 75% of Bryce Young IRL is $7,125 so this should be the minimum 1.01 salary Quote You are basing a % of yearly cap increase which we don't know about until a year in advance to project that increase at a 100% rate for 80 players that we add to rosters each year. Basically we just need to decide on a starting number for the number 1 pick and then everything else is based off of that rather than trying to make each salary as close as possible. BcB's proposed staring number of $6,900 would have been 76% rate for this year's pick. If you want to make that a little more bullet proof for a few years then start it at $7K for the 2025 season and we can revisit every few years. I'm totally ok making an auto calculation based on the 1st overall pick. But imho, either we do it every year based on the previous 1st overall pick (so for instance next year the rookie scale will be based on 75% of Caleb/MHJ/whoever salary), or we need to bulletproof it by going over $7125. It's not complicated to do it every year, and the point of "we don't know it in advance" is moot for me since we're making decisions all the time not knowing what will be the cap numbers two years in advance. In any case, I've reviewed my proposal in the sheet. It starts at $7,125 for 1.01 and decreases at a similar rate than the 2017 rookie scale until 6.01 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bcb1213 Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 4 minutes ago, Blue said: I continue to see no reason why we aren't just taking 75% of the salaries for each draft slot in the current year's draft. This is how we handle 3 Ups and it works perfectly fine. the issue isn't so much the top as the back half. Youd be paying 6th and seventh rounders 600-750, which would eliminate them from the sub 500 cut Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 Just now, bcb1213 said: the issue isn't so much the top as the back half. Youd be paying 6th and seventh rounders 600-750, which would eliminate them from the sub 500 cut See my follow up post. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TedLavie Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 Just now, Blue said: Sure, let's let chaos reign. Only through the 5th round, however; I am fine with leaving rounds 6-7 at 500 and lower for a bit longer, although I think we're reaching a point where we need to consider sub-1000 cuts instead of 500. I will vote Yes on both my own proposed cap increase and Ted's but No to Bcb's proposal and no increase. Ideally, I'm down for that. I just don't know how to "painlessly" extract the IRL rookie salary numbers to make the calculation every year. My new proposal (which I posted just now) basically takes the idea you're submitting without making us do calculations every year. I think that's the better of all worlds. @Scoundrel I'd like to retract proposal #2 and instead change it to: Every year the salary of the BDL 1st overall pick is equivalent to the salary of the IRL 1st overall of the previous year. The rest of the rookie scale is deducted from that number until 6.01 old rookie scale (and salary under $500) still apply. Proposal in the google sheet 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bcb1213 Posted January 4 Share Posted January 4 and you already addressed that, but then you're looking at a huge pay gap between pick 5.16 and 6.1 of almost double salary 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.