Advertisement

Register for free to remove this ad

Originally Posted by ubernes I'd rather wait til the offseason but my trade was a salary dump for next season anyway. But it sounds like that may be our best bet for all these deals.

I plan on waiting as well, at least on that trade. Hopefully staticz is cool with that (he was the only one getting a starter in the deal after all).

it sucks cause i really needed and wanted porter this season but whatever the commitee decides is best. this whole situation is crazy.

I think it could work case by case. I could very easily cut Greene and mog can send me those picks in the offseason for a placeholder player. Greene was recently resigned but he's cheap so mog can probably resign him easily/cheaply.

it would work for mine and chetty trade to cause they are 1 year or cheap contracts

that would be a decent idea to do it case by case

man this probowl vote is bullshit staffords got the best stats in the nfc

Wow, that's cool that you can get updates on the vote!

Tracy Porter = leading AFC vote getter at CB. Suck on that, trade committee.

Edit: But yeah, some of the votes seem a bit screwed up. Seems Eli's only qualification to be the leading vote getter at QB is that he has the most yards...

LOL. Eli is crushing the QB competition. I don't get that.

If my trade for Peterson had went through, I would've had a QB, a RB, a WR, and a TE among the leading vote-getters.

Originally Posted by pitfallharry219 If my trade for Peterson had went through, I would've had a QB, a RB, a WR, and a TE among the leading vote-getters.

I'm leaning towards letting people decide on a case-by-case basis whether they want to risk the cut-and-sign method. Obviously both owners would have to be fully on board.

Originally Posted by bvharris I'm leaning towards letting people decide on a case-by-case basis whether they want to risk the cut-and-sign method. Obviously both owners would have to be fully on board.

when will we know if you decide to do it case by case or ir if its not allowed. and the trade that were proposed before that have not been approved or denied yet any idea on when that will happen???

Originally Posted by Hemingway012 when will we know if you decide to do it case by case or ir if its not allowed. and the trade that were proposed before that have not been approved or denied yet any idea on when that will happen???

I'm still sorting that out. I want to talk more with the other commissioners about it as well. Not everyone has as little to do on a Saturday night as me.

As for the unapproved trades, if we do go this route we'll probably still review them as normal and then give those owners the same option (unless of course they tell us that they don't want to do cut-and-sign, in which case there's no need to review them).

Wow this sucks, everyone I traded for was going to be a starter...

Originally Posted by Blade3D Wow this sucks, everyone I traded for was going to be a starter...

Definitely sucks. I can't help but blame myself since I assumed that "week 9" meant the end of week 9, not the beginning. It wouldn't have been too hard to test, it just didn't occur to me that it might have been this way (or that we'd be unable to change it). Sorry guys.

Originally Posted by bvharris I plan on waiting as well, at least on that trade. Hopefully staticz is cool with that (he was the only one getting a starter in the deal after all).

Man, wtf EA? I'm stuck with Stanzi for the whole season

That is not what I wanted to come home to, but I definitely understand.

Originally Posted by staticz Man, wtf EA? I'm stuck with Stanzi for the whole season That is not what I wanted to come home to, but I definitely understand.

If you guys still want to do it I'm not unwilling. Sanchez is one guy whose contract might actually get smaller.

In other news, good to see Rivers get a Pro Bowl shoutout on CAG twitter despite his crap TD-INT ratio. And Landry won DPOW in the AFC! Crazy game with a pick, at least one FF, maybe a recovery in there and a score.

Originally Posted by bvharris If you guys still want to do it I'm not unwilling. Sanchez is one guy whose contract might actually get smaller.

I'm not sure the length of Stanzi's or Weeden's deal but we could potentially add/drop your part of the trade and do Sanchez in the offseason.

Originally Posted by ubernes I'm not sure the length of Stanzi's or Weeden's deal but we could potentially add/drop your part of the trade and do Sanchez in the offseason.

I'm not sure how it would all work. I've got cap room to resign Weeden, so no worries there. If you guys would rather wait I understand, not a huge deal. Stanzi is better than Cassel.

My only concern would be the XP Weeden would miss out on, which I stated in my email. If we can work it out I'd like to have him, but we should probably figure out the ramifications.

BSETI and my trade we would like to do.

Pitfall and my trade I am not sure about since that is a much bigger trade with much longer contracts.

Originally Posted by staticz I'm not sure how it would all work. I've got cap room to resign Weeden, so no worries there. If you guys would rather wait I understand, not a huge deal. Stanzi is better than Cassel. My only concern would be the XP Weeden would miss out on, which I stated in my email. If we can work it out I'd like to have him, but we should probably figure out the ramifications.

You'd have to talk to BV about it. I assume he wanted Sanchez this year, as well as the following but if he wants to do the Stanzi for Weeden deal through add/drop and wait for Sanchez for the offseason then that works for me.