bcb1213 Posted February 20, 2018 Share Posted February 20, 2018 realism went out the window when a player gets 65 million for a single season in a contract Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BringinDaPain Posted February 20, 2018 Share Posted February 20, 2018 1 minute ago, BowserBroncos said: I have no problem on having both QBs now....I only bid on both because I though I would be outbid on Cousins....as matter of fact I almost did not bid for Cousins because I as think I would be throwing away a bid on him. I'm not asking to make McCarron available again because of his cap too...I would have no problem on sticking with his cap and free him just for realism that both guys won't go to the same team. It's not you Bowser, it's the other GM's guess they were waiting on Cousins APY to drop? No clue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daineraider Posted February 20, 2018 Share Posted February 20, 2018 4 minutes ago, squire12 said: So those teams are the only ones that can abuse it. If we are going for realism, then keeping the rules the same throughout does that more than changing the rules mid way through. I would usually agree to keep things the same, but I have no intention of using those loopholes to give ridiculous contracts. I would prefer to have them cut down, something as easy as limiting contracts to 2-3 years max so the cap hits come this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BowserBroncos Posted February 20, 2018 Share Posted February 20, 2018 3 minutes ago, bcb1213 said: realism went out the window when a player gets 65 million for a single season in a contract I agree, but that wasn't my case....neither contracts from Cousins or McCarron are unrealistic.....if the Browns or the Jets had bid on Cousins, both should have outbid me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winitall Posted February 20, 2018 Share Posted February 20, 2018 1 hour ago, jch1911 said: Even if you throw out that last year ($63M), nobody offered $60M guaranteed to Solder (which is what Texans offered). The contracts reward guaranteed $$$. I don't think anyone else came close to offering Solder $60M guaranteed. This is the same as showing up to a test with all the answers written on your arm but not using it. Just because you didn’t need to use it doesn’t mean the intent wasn’t there. You wouldn’t have given him the $63 million the last year if you didn’t think it would have an impact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deadpulse Posted February 20, 2018 Share Posted February 20, 2018 @ny92jefferis Option 2 is my vote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ny92mike Posted February 20, 2018 Share Posted February 20, 2018 lets focus on one thing please. I'm trying to see if anything really needs to be done if the contracts can't exceed 5 years. Since I obviously missed the loophole I need someone else to create a fake contract in their workbooks to see if the same type of abuse can be done. So please someone help me out and let me know what you find out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winitall Posted February 20, 2018 Share Posted February 20, 2018 44 minutes ago, ny92jefferis said: We talked about making the contract lengths not to exceed more than 5 years prior to the start and didn't, now I wish we had, it would of curved those massive final contract year. I wouldn’t blame yourself for any of the problems that have occurred with this. People are going to abuse the system. If you close one loophole, a new one will probably take its place. I think the key is trying to ensure that the rule about intentionally gaming the system is upheld. I have no issues with him offering Solder and Fuller a combined $68 million a year. It’s not my team and if he wants to do that go for it. My problem is that the burden of those contracts isn’t going to be felt in this mock. That’s more of a gaming the system issue than anything else. The only rule I can come up with off the top of my head is that yearly cap hits can go up by the percentage or $5 million per year whichever is less. That would put a limit to the crazy backloading with roster bonuses. I haven’t seen the full Fuller contract but I am guessing that the final year of Solders they are going to be a combined $100+ million cap hit for that year. Two players taking up over 50% of the cap. They will likely be cut by then but it still doesn’t make any sense. Just for reference, I offered Jarvis Landry ~13 a year and I am 99% sure that his year one cap hit would have been higher than Solders who is making ~38 a year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedGold Posted February 20, 2018 Share Posted February 20, 2018 5 minutes ago, ny92jefferis said: lets focus on one thing please. I'm trying to see if anything really needs to be done if the contracts can't exceed 5 years. Since I obviously missed the loophole I need someone else to create a fake contract in their workbooks to see if the same type of abuse can be done. So please someone help me out and let me know what you find out. This is how I’d fix it. Just throw out any contract over that Don’t mess with the formula mid draft. Honestly I’d go down to 4 years though. It’s not that often a guy goes more than 4 years without some type of restructure to his contact. I will play with the contract during my lunch in a bit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DTMW78 Posted February 20, 2018 Share Posted February 20, 2018 7 minutes ago, ny92jefferis said: lets focus on one thing please. I'm trying to see if anything really needs to be done if the contracts can't exceed 5 years. Since I obviously missed the loophole I need someone else to create a fake contract in their workbooks to see if the same type of abuse can be done. So please someone help me out and let me know what you find out. I did one mike. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winitall Posted February 20, 2018 Share Posted February 20, 2018 8 minutes ago, ny92jefferis said: lets focus on one thing please. I'm trying to see if anything really needs to be done if the contracts can't exceed 5 years. Since I obviously missed the loophole I need someone else to create a fake contract in their workbooks to see if the same type of abuse can be done. So please someone help me out and let me know what you find out. I can play around with it in a couple hours if no one else volunteers first. I will also probably post some free agency grades in a couple hours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bcb1213 Posted February 20, 2018 Share Posted February 20, 2018 16 minutes ago, BowserBroncos said: I agree, but that wasn't my case....neither contracts from Cousins or McCarron are unrealistic.....if the Browns or the Jets had bid on Cousins, both should have outbid me they can always trade you for one i suppose Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BringinDaPain Posted February 20, 2018 Share Posted February 20, 2018 1 minute ago, bcb1213 said: they can always trade you for one i suppose Can't trade players that were signed via UFA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bcb1213 Posted February 20, 2018 Share Posted February 20, 2018 Just now, BringinDaPain said: Can't trade players that were signed via UFA. be more realistic then letting him just drop one...haha. but i think just making him keep both is the way to go. I'm sure McCcarron would take that money to backup Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BringinDaPain Posted February 20, 2018 Share Posted February 20, 2018 Just now, bcb1213 said: be more realistic then letting him just drop one...haha. but i think just making him keep both is the way to go. I'm sure McCcarron would take that money to backup Can't cut a player signed via UFA either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.