sparky151 Posted March 27, 2018 Share Posted March 27, 2018 5 hours ago, ny92jefferis said: agree...I think we need to take a look at the formula for finding the high bid. agree..this has been mentioned several times. This has been mentioned before but toward the end of the mock all players are asking for the vet min which at that price they aren't counting against the cap. You lost me though when you mentioned comp pick and veterans. Break it down for me please. It's not really part of TCMD but some teams try to maximize the number of comp picks they get. Bengals are one of them. In the mock we were going to get a 2019 3rd round comp pick for AJ McCarron. But teams only get comp picks to the extent they lose more qualified free agents than they sign. Players who have been cut don't count, nor do players on the minimum salary benefit deals, players who are signed after June 1, and those who don't make the 53 man roster. So late round free agents who sign 1 year deals for veteran minimum and get $90K or less in bonus or incentives are useful. It's why the Bengals signed 3 free agents in round 10. They count on the cap at the minimum salary of a 3rd year player. http://cba.whitfield.football/article-27-minimum-salary-benefit/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deadpulse Posted March 27, 2018 Share Posted March 27, 2018 So one of the big reasons I started a War Room thread was so that I could poll those who participated. My War Room died and died fast. The number 1 reason when I polled people, the spread sheets. Now, please understand, I like the spread sheets and I appreciate and understand how much work @ny92jefferis puts into them, but they are not designed for a team. I think the sheets are perfect for what this is, a single GM mock for the hardcores. I think if the idea is to design a mock based around group participation, then 90%-100% of the mock needs to be on the boards with little to no support from auxiliary applications. Posters are turned off quickly when they are forced to navigate off of FF. Also, a long list of rules/guidelines/how to's to make everything work will also turn off most casual posters. Keeping things simple is key. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ny92mike Posted March 28, 2018 Author Share Posted March 28, 2018 4 hours ago, Deadpulse said: So one of the big reasons I started a War Room thread was so that I could poll those who participated. My War Room died and died fast. The number 1 reason when I polled people, the spread sheets. Now, please understand, I like the spread sheets and I appreciate and understand how much work @ny92jefferis puts into them, but they are not designed for a team. I think the sheets are perfect for what this is, a single GM mock for the hardcores. I think if the idea is to design a mock based around group participation, then 90%-100% of the mock needs to be on the boards with little to no support from auxiliary applications. Posters are turned off quickly when they are forced to navigate off of FF. Also, a long list of rules/guidelines/how to's to make everything work will also turn off most casual posters. Keeping things simple is key. This isn't the first time I've heard this, but without the workbooks to keep track of and to help with sorting free agency, managing it would be a nightmare, even with a larger staff, but I get it. Perhaps just running a second tcmd at the individual level is all I need to do. Just wanted to provide the forum with a mock draft that brought in more than just 32 members. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D82 Posted March 28, 2018 Share Posted March 28, 2018 If it hasn't been already, I propose making it an option to cut a recently signed player. #stillbitter #justkidding #wellonlyslightly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deadpulse Posted March 28, 2018 Share Posted March 28, 2018 59 minutes ago, ny92jefferis said: This isn't the first time I've heard this, but without the workbooks to keep track of and to help with sorting free agency, managing it would be a nightmare, even with a larger staff, but I get it. Perhaps just running a second tcmd at the individual level is all I need to do. Just wanted to provide the forum with a mock draft that brought in more than just 32 members. Consider cutting FA out. Or simplifying it. Have them bid cap space for the year rather than an actual contract. Most posters won't understand or care about the intricacy of the contracts. I think the best move for a more inclusive mock would be to cut FA and focus on the draft. Is there a way to manage it on the workbooks without making participants use the workbooks? Idk if that would make it easier to manage or just add too much extra work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bcb1213 Posted March 28, 2018 Share Posted March 28, 2018 Yea I didn't get a single reply to anything in the Falcons sub thread. Idk if you're gonna find a lot of success going through some of the teams Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deadpulse Posted March 28, 2018 Share Posted March 28, 2018 2 hours ago, bcb1213 said: Yea I didn't get a single reply to anything in the Falcons sub thread. Idk if you're gonna find a lot of success going through some of the teams That's a different problem lol Back in the heyday of FFMD, in those subs that were less populated posters from other teams would assemble a rag tag staff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ny92mike Posted March 28, 2018 Author Share Posted March 28, 2018 8 hours ago, Deadpulse said: Consider cutting FA out. Or simplifying it. Have them bid cap space for the year rather than an actual contract. Most posters won't understand or care about the intricacy of the contracts. I think the best move for a more inclusive mock would be to cut FA and focus on the draft. Is there a way to manage it on the workbooks without making participants use the workbooks? Idk if that would make it easier to manage or just add too much extra work. I had considered a reduced structure that would contain a limited free agency, basically what you mentioned with simple one year deals. I personally have never been a fan of just a draft only mock at least earlier in the off season, once irl teams have signed the majority of the FA then it works out well. The main workbook that I can't manage without it is the free agency workbook. Most of the others can be managed without the GM having access. edit: The workbooks allow me to manage all the transactions and salary cap in a timely manner. I can't imagine not having them and trying to run a mock. There was one year where I helped the mods out and kept the workbooks up to date for them, it actually worked out really well with the exception of the free agency. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ny92mike Posted March 28, 2018 Author Share Posted March 28, 2018 9 hours ago, Desperado82 said: If it hasn't been already, I propose making it an option to cut a recently signed player. #stillbitter #justkidding #wellonlyslightly My fear is that this would create a loophole. For example, a team with a ton of cap could sign players to prevent others from signing them and once the team has missed out and moves on to another play, they release the player back to fa. Most of the time if you're bidding on a player, its because you want them, and trading or drafting players at that position shouldn't change that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ny92mike Posted March 28, 2018 Author Share Posted March 28, 2018 What do you guys think, if you make multiple offers on a player for example. I offer Nate Solder two contracts, the first is worth 60 million the second is worth 65 million. If my 60 million offer is higher than any other team's offer then I'm signing the player at the 60 million, if another team has a higher than 60 m offer then the 65 million offer is used. This uses two of the three UFA offers but if its a must sign then it gives you a higher percentage chance of being awarded the player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squire12 Posted March 28, 2018 Share Posted March 28, 2018 5 minutes ago, ny92jefferis said: What do you guys think, if you make multiple offers on a player for example. I offer Nate Solder two contracts, the first is worth 60 million the second is worth 65 million. If my 60 million offer is higher than any other team's offer then I'm signing the player at the 60 million, if another team has a higher than 60 m offer then the 65 million offer is used. This uses two of the three UFA offers but if its a must sign then it gives you a higher percentage chance of being awarded the player. Why would a player take the lesser of the offers? If the basis of TCMD is the player awarding is based on the highest contract value, why add an option to alter that process. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ny92mike Posted March 28, 2018 Author Share Posted March 28, 2018 Just now, squire12 said: Why would a player take the lesser of the offers? If the basis of TCMD is the player awarding is based on the highest contract value, why add an option to alter that process. This was something that several wanted to see if it was possible to work into the system. Don't consider it a lesser amount. Consider it more of a back and forth bidding war, where I'm offering a contract but if the bidding gets higher than planned I can increase my offer and still have a sense of blind bidding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ny92mike Posted March 28, 2018 Author Share Posted March 28, 2018 13 minutes ago, squire12 said: Why would a player take the lesser of the offers? If the basis of TCMD is the player awarding is based on the highest contract value, why add an option to alter that process. Rather than making two separate contracts, this could be something as simple as checking a box that would increase your contract offer by x percentage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ny92mike Posted March 28, 2018 Author Share Posted March 28, 2018 What struggles did you guys have with managing your teams war room? Any suggestions on fixing those issues? @Desperado82 @squire12 @EaglesPeteC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squire12 Posted March 28, 2018 Share Posted March 28, 2018 52 minutes ago, ny92jefferis said: Rather than making two separate contracts, this could be something as simple as checking a box that would increase your contract offer by x percentage. That seems like it would cater to the teams with more cap space. They could set a price and then check a box as a safeguard to increase their offer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.