Fragafootball Posted February 20, 2018 Share Posted February 20, 2018 1 minute ago, mountainpd said: You are correct if it is not changed people will do this even if they don't really want to for the remainder of the mock to ensure they get players for fear of missing out. I also suspect some people will try everything in their power to find another way to manipulate the system, Although I hope that's not the case. I will be home from work in about an hour and I can try a number of contracts out if you like to see what I can break. Where is the fun in that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forge Posted February 20, 2018 Share Posted February 20, 2018 1 minute ago, Fragafootball said: I am in favor of moving forward as is and limiting the W/O and Roster Bonuses from her on now. Looking into that Solder deal... how does that get approved? No excuse and completely unrealistic. I have to agree on that. But we learn and move forward. Personally I am playing this as a simulation, my goal is to make this a close to realistic as possible. We don't actually win anything here so it is all in the spirit of good fun. I will continue to behave as realistic as possible no matter what "loopholes" are exposed and I hope everyone will as well. And honestly, I think that is the intention of most people (to approach it as a sim). Yes, we do have some crazy managers every year, and honestly, that is kind of fun, but I like to think most of us look at it in a SIM way. Unfortunately, because the individual contracts just have to pass the formula, we don't approve the contracts on a case by case basis (but trust me, we did notice and discuss while reviewing the FA bids before declaring winners). We simply don't have the time to review each contract bid individually. The formula is the best we have (and you'd be surprised by how many offers will fail the requirements) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D82 Posted February 20, 2018 Share Posted February 20, 2018 @ny92jefferis I can offer Lawrence an extension now, correct? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ny92mike Posted February 20, 2018 Share Posted February 20, 2018 Just now, Fragafootball said: We could exclude those that abuse the loopholes from here on from future Mocks. The whole concept of this mock is for us not to become "Agents" in determining who goes where but to let the formula determine this. The system has been the staple of this mock draft. Until today this loophole was never exploited so it was simply overlooked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forge Posted February 20, 2018 Share Posted February 20, 2018 Just now, Desperado82 said: @ny92jefferis I can offer Lawrence an extension now, correct? LOL This is my favorite post given what else is going on and how active this thread is because of it....then @Desperado82 comes back in with this, like "hey, I got moves to make" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mountainpd Posted February 20, 2018 Share Posted February 20, 2018 1 minute ago, Fragafootball said: I am in favor of moving forward as is and limiting the W/O and Roster Bonuses from her on now. Looking into that Solder deal... how does that get approved? No excuse and completely unrealistic. I have to agree on that. But we learn and move forward. Personally I am playing this as a simulation, my goal is to make this a close to realistic as possible. We don't actually win anything here so it is all in the spirit of good fun. I will continue to behave as realistic as possible no matter what "loopholes" are exposed and I hope everyone will as well. lets not take the fun out of it I agree. I like my fellow posters to recognise me as a genius for constructing not just the best roster but the best roster for the resource I have. Best value sometimes outways best player in my book. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squire12 Posted February 20, 2018 Share Posted February 20, 2018 3 minutes ago, ny92jefferis said: The quick fix doesn't prevent you from making the same type of contract. It just reduces the roster and w/o values when comparing them to other contracts. Why are you fighting us on this? I am just looking at consistency in the process. We have someone using past precedent to not change the process of DEN being able to rescind an offer on one of the QB's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D82 Posted February 20, 2018 Share Posted February 20, 2018 Just now, Forge said: LOL This is my favorite post given what else is going on and how active this thread is because of it....then @Desperado82 comes back in with this, like "hey, I got moves to make" Hey, all my contracts were realistic and within the rules. Can't help other guys try and game the system. Onward ho! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ny92mike Posted February 20, 2018 Share Posted February 20, 2018 1 minute ago, Desperado82 said: @ny92jefferis I can offer Lawrence an extension now, correct? Hold off on anything until we get this contract stuff sorted out man. Sorry, this is the first year we've encountered this issue and we're working to get it resolved. If we need to extend the schedule to provide teams the time needed if we can't get this sorted out in the next few hours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BringinDaPain Posted February 20, 2018 Share Posted February 20, 2018 4 minutes ago, bcb1213 said: i'd also consider firing based upon "gaming the system" clause I was getting ready to post it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forge Posted February 20, 2018 Share Posted February 20, 2018 2 minutes ago, squire12 said: I am just looking at consistency in the process. We have someone using past precedent to not change the process of DEN being able to rescind an offer on one of the QB's. Yep...and we aren't going to rescind the FA offers that Houston put in. There's the consistency. We have always tweaked and adjusted minor things when warts come up or things that are discovered, that's what we are doing here. That's the consistency. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ny92mike Posted February 20, 2018 Share Posted February 20, 2018 2 minutes ago, squire12 said: I am just looking at consistency in the process. We have someone using past precedent to not change the process of DEN being able to rescind an offer on one of the QB's. rescinding fa bids has never been an option in tcmd. Consistency is what we are, we found a loophole and we're fixing it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EaglesPeteC Posted February 20, 2018 Author Share Posted February 20, 2018 3 minutes ago, Desperado82 said: Hey, all my contracts were realistic and within the rules. Can't help other guys try and game the system. Onward ho! No need for name calling Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scoundrel Posted February 20, 2018 Share Posted February 20, 2018 Since everyone is going crazy can I trade Luck now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ny92mike Posted February 20, 2018 Share Posted February 20, 2018 3 minutes ago, BringinDaPain said: I was getting ready to post it. I don't really consider this gaming the system. The workbook allowed for it, I see this as a loophole, not gaming the system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.