CAGLS: Madden 25 Fan's League! Season 3 Complete! Jets Win! Thanks Everybody!

Group 1 - May Choose a Free Agent Starting at 10:00 PM EST on 10/9

Team / Record / Point Differential / First Player Added / Second Player Added

1. New York Giants / 0-4 / -88 / Sheldon Brown, CB / Joe McKnight, RB

2. Green Bay Packers / 0-3 / -38 / Michael Turner, RB

3. Detroit Lions / 1-3 / -35 / JT Conheeney, WR / Ronnell Lewis, RE

4. Seattle Seahawks / 1-3 / -4

5. Oakland Raiders / 1-3 / -3 / Antoine Winfield, CB / Dontay Moch, ROLB

6. New York Jets / 2-2 / -25 / Chris Sentef, FS / David Buehler, K

7. Minnesota Vikings / 2-2 / -12

Group 2 - May Choose a Free Agent Starting at 10:00 AM EST on 10/10

Team / Record / Point Differential / First Player Added / Second Player Added

8. New Orleans Saints / 2-2 / -12

9. Dallas Cowboys / 2-2 / 1

10. Baltimore Ravens / 2-2 / 10 / Matt Flynn, QB

11. Cincinnati Bengals / 2-2 / 22 / Ryan Swope, WR / Jahvid Best, RB

12. Kansas City Chiefs / 2-2 / 30 / Mike Thomas, WR

13. Miami Dolphins / 2-2 / 33

14. Buffalo Bills / 2-2 / 39 / Willis McGahee, RB

Group 3 - May Choose a Free Agent Starting at 10:00 PM EST on 10/10

Team / Record / Point Differential / First Player Added / Second Player Added

15. Denver Broncos / 3-1 / 20 / John Abraham, LOLB / Reed Doughty, SS

16. Indianapolis Colts / 3-1 / 24 / Leon Washington, RB / Donald Jones, WR

17. Washington Redskins / 3-1 / 39 / Javier Arenas, CB / Bennie Logan, DT

18. Carolina Panthers / 3-0 / 49 / Stanford Routt, CB / Marcus Trufant, CB

19. Chicago Bears / 4-0 / 33 / Randy Moss, WR / Dennis Dixon, QB

20. Tennessee Titans / 4-0 / 42 / Tramaine Brock, CB / Quincy Black, LOLB

21. Philadelphia Eagles / 4-0 / 56 / Brandon Lloyd, WR

And again, if you did not sign a free agent during Week 5, you missed out on that round. Lucky for you, you have another crack at getting one player. Teams will have until we advance to Week 7 to make their selection. After that, we're going to close it back up again. I think the willy nilly signing of during the season is just too unstructured. If EA had handled it like they do offseason free agency, I think we could roll with leaving it open. But I really don't like the "just take who you want" style of it.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
dr0ppinL0adz said:
Oakland Raiders | jbake_11
Send:

2nd Round Draft Pick
3rd Round Draft Pick

Cap Space: $58.7 Million


Chicago Bears | dr0ppinL0adz
Send:

Tim Jennings
CB
Age 29
Overall Rating: 85
Contract Info: 2 total years, 1 year remaining, 2013: $2.07M, $0 signing bonus

Man Coverage 92
Zone Coverage 91
Press Coverage 54
Play Recognition 89
Speed 94

Cap Space: %5.46 Million

Raiders get a solid CB.
Bears are losing a lot of 1-year contract players at the end of the year so draft picks are needed for replacements. Also, Tim Jennings is not interested in re-signing with Chicago.
Click to expand...
Trade Rejected

Unanimous rejection. The committee felt that Jenning's attributes showed way more than an 85 OVR. That's a pretty damn good corner. And the value coming back from the 2nd and 3rd round picks wouldn't come close to equaling that.

Not to mention, the question was raised of whether EA fixed whether or not players who are "not interested" in negotiating will even negotiate with their new team once traded. Otherwise, this would be a half-season rental. Anybody know if this is any different than it was last year?

 
I'm aware of the potential risk with losing the player, but it was a risk reward I was willing to accept. I feel really held down by the trade committee. This was a trade that helped out both sides and im baffled.
 
jbake_11 said:
I'm aware of the potential risk with losing the player, but it was a risk reward I was willing to accept. I feel really held down by the trade committee. This was a trade that helped out both sides and im baffled.
Click to expand...
Sorry. The reality of it is approving trades with unknown factors isn't good for anyone. If you're allowed to re-sign Jennings, then you got a franchise CB for a couple decent picks. But if you can't negotiate with Jennings, then the Bears got 2 picks for basically nothing. Since we don't know what will happen, we evaluated it as though the contract wasn't a factor. And every person on the committee didn't think it was balanced.

 
jbake_11 said:
I'm aware of the potential risk with losing the player, but it was a risk reward I was willing to accept. I feel really held down by the trade committee. This was a trade that helped out both sides and im baffled.
Click to expand...
My issue was that Jennings, with his speed and MCOV/ZCOV, was worth more than 2 picks that won't match his value. The way this league drafts, most good players in the draft will be gone by then. I figured you knew the contract risk and that didn't factor into my decision. There's just no way I'd ever take those two picks over a CB like Jennings.
 
KasterDB said:
My issue was that Jennings, with his speed and MCOV/ZCOV, was worth more than 2 picks that won't match his value. The way this league drafts, most good players in the draft will be gone by then. I figured you knew the contract risk and that didn't factor into my decision. There's just no way I'd ever take those two picks over a CB like Jennings.
Click to expand...
As a 1 year rental, what would you place his value at? I'm losing him no matter what at the end of the season so I would like something in return rather than nothing at all.
 
KasterDB said:
My issue was that Jennings, with his speed and MCOV/ZCOV, was worth more than 2 picks that won't match his value. The way this league drafts, most good players in the draft will be gone by then. I figured you knew the contract risk and that didn't factor into my decision. There's just no way I'd ever take those two picks over a CB like Jennings.
Click to expand...
It's not fair to look at that trade without considering the bears were dumping a CB who already refused to resign. That plays a huge roll in his value. A 2nd and 3rd sounds pretty good for a player who you are losing to FA and it absolutely matches the value of a player who can't possibly contribute to your team next season. Like me with Santana Moss, the bears will now be losing a player to FA with no compensation simply because someone else wouldn't have made that trade and happens to have veto power.

My other issue with this is my understanding of the trade committee. I thought they were in place to make sure ridiculous trades weren't being made. Like Tom Brady for Tim Tebow. If a trade seems relatively reasonable and both teams are happy with the value then why is it being restricted? We already have a trade cap in place to keep trading to a reasonable amount. Asking both parties to have perfectly identical trade values is unreasonable. At some point you have to extend a little bit of trust to players allowing them to build their team as they see fit and not go off the deep end. Just because you wouldn't make a specific trade doesn't mean it that someone else wouldn't, shouldn't, or is stupid for doing so. It definitely seems like there is to much subjectivity in these reviews and not enough objectivity.

Edit: And don't misunderstand me. I know it requires time and effort to run this thing and I appreciate everyone's involvement. I'd just like see a little more freedom to manage our team the way we see fit.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
JoelyPoley said:
It's not fair to look at that trade without considering the bears were dumping a CB who already refused to resign. That plays a huge roll in his value. A 2nd and 3rd sounds pretty good for a player who you are losing to FA and it absolutely matches the value of a player who can't possibly contribute to your team next season. Like me with Santana Moss, the bears will now be losing a player to FA with no compensation simply because someone else wouldn't have made that trade and happens to have veto power.

My other issue with this is my understanding of the trade committee. I thought they were in place to make sure ridiculous trades weren't being made. Like Tom Brady for Tim Tebow. If a trade seems relatively reasonable and both teams are happy with the value then why is it being restricted? We already have a trade cap in place to keep trading to a reasonable amount. Asking both parties to have perfectly identical trade values is unreasonable. At some point you have to extend a little bit of trust to players allowing them to build their team as they see fit and not go off the deep end. Just because you wouldn't make a specific trade doesn't mean it that someone else wouldn't, shouldn't, or is stupid for doing so. It definitely seems like there is to much subjectivity in these reviews and not enough objectivity.

Edit: And don't misunderstand me. I know it requires time and effort to run this thing and I appreciate everyone's involvement. I'd just like see a little more freedom to manage our team the way we see fit.
Click to expand...
If you look at what I said, that's not what happened at all. The Bears dumping a CB who refused to sign was absolutely considered. The problem is we don't know if the Raiders are RECEIVING a CB who will refuse to sign. That makes a huge difference (and I'm not sure why you're operating under the assumption that the Raiders wouldn't be able to negotiate with him. Nobody has verified that to be true yet). If Jennings allows the Raiders to negotiate and they resign him to a 5 year deal or something, then he got a stud CB for a 2nd and 3rd round pick. It was the trade committees opinion that that is not a realistic trade. All his key Madden attributes are in the 90s. Are you serious?

Conversely, if Jennings doesn't allow the Raiders to offer him a new deal and opts to become a free agent, of course it decreases his value. But right now, we don't now if that's the case. That would have been a much better point to research and argue, rather than just bitching about the trade approval process. This is the reason the committee is necessary. Because 99% of the time, the people submitting trades don't give us a reasonable argument for why the trade makes sense, and we have to do the legwork ourselves. If you're not coming to us with valid facts to back up your stance, don't waste my time whining about a UNANIMOUS decision.

Another wildcard that nobody has brought up is whether or not the Raiders could just franchise tag him. Did any of you think of that? Seriously, a 2nd and 3rd is not enough for a player with 92 MCV, 91 ZCV, 89 PRC, 94 SPD. The Bears would be lucky to turn that into 2 >70 OVR players. If Jennings was being traded for a 77 OVR player and a 71 OVR player, I'm pretty sure that wouldn't be approved either.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
There was a reasonable argument, we run the teams and we both agreed to the trade. You just look for a reason to say no.
 
jbake_11 said:
There was a reasonable argument, we run the teams and we both agreed to the trade. You just look for a reason to say no.
Click to expand...
Yes, trade committee conspiracy theories are back! It's not a madden league without people accusing the trade committee of conspiring against them.
 
jbake_11 said:
There was a reasonable argument, we run the teams and we both agreed to the trade. You just look for a reason to say no.
Click to expand...
And you didn't understand what was written. I can't even respond to this. If you don't like it, the door is always open. I can't explain the process any better than I already did.

 
I'm going to go ahead and drop from the league. It's been fun guys. Good luck to whoever takes over the Redskins.
 
jbake_11 said:
This unfair bullshit is enough for me. I'm out. Good luck guys
Click to expand...
Congrats.

In all honesty, my favorite thing about the trade committee this year is we've all been around the block now. We all seem to be looking at the "Madden stats" and not letting people get away with the cheap shit. If you want a Madden stud, you better be giving up something substantial as well. That's the only similarity between this and the Moss trade. In both instances, the Raiders were trying to give up jack shit.

He knew that Woodson was likely to retire and he knew that he could franchise tag Jennings. So, when the dust settled, he would have 94 SPD (87+ almost everything else) Santana Moss, and 92 MCV, 91 ZCV, 94 SPD Tim Jennings while really only losing a 2nd and 3rd round pick. I sincerely apologize that the committee wasn't willing to buy into that.

 
Redskins and Raiders are open if there are any fans who may want them.

bfauble83 has first crack at the Redskins if he would like to switch.

 
pitfallharry219 said:
Making sure this didn't get lost among the debate. I haven't turned on Madden to check yet, so apologies if it's been done.
Click to expand...
Just did that now.

Also, to lighten the mood, this is probably inappropriate, but oh well. I still think it's pretty funny.

tumblr_mu3yqgLG6K1rlo1q2o1_500.gif


 
Last edited by a moderator:
I say this as a complete noob to this league, but if you have two willing participants who know their shit that want to pull off a trade, how is that any worse than the free agent moves the CPU makes that we have to accept? So much of it is based on speculation and it seems everyone is overthinking it.

I don't have a horse in this race because I will most likely never offer or accept a trade under any circumstances, so I really don't care at all. I can just understand why someone would have an issue with it. It's like Stern vs CP3 every week in here... lol
 
We try to keep it balanced because we've seen people destroying teams and then leaving the league happen too many times. Nobody wants to take over a team that's in the shitter with little hope of pulling them out of it. It's what happened with the Panthers last year.

 
chriscolbert said:
I say this as a complete noob to this league, but if you have two willing participants who know their shit that want to pull off a trade, how is that any worse than the free agent moves the CPU makes that we have to accept? So much of it is based on speculation and it seems everyone is overthinking it.

I don't have a horse in this race because I will most likely never offer or accept a trade under any circumstances, so I really don't care at all. I can just understand why someone would have an issue with it. It's like Stern vs CP3 every week in here... lol
Click to expand...
Does this seriously need to be gone over again? Trades are evaluated to make sure they are fair. Look how easy and willing jbake and joelypoley (who are friends IRL, so yeah...not a huge shock) were to just quit the league at the drop of a hat. If we allowed any and all trades to go through, and somebody decides they don't like something (or just gets too busy) and abandons their team...that team has to be capable for a potential future owner. You guys act like we go through all this shit because it's fun for us.

For that matter, it's stupid that the situation escalated so quickly. This wasn't like the Moss trade where Woodson just wasn't a good trade candidate (due to his likelihood of retiring). This was just rejected because every single person in the committee didn't think a 2nd and a 3rd were enough for a CB with those attributes. Whether or not the Raiders would be able to negotiate with Jennings (which it seems like they wouldn't) becomes irrelevant if they can franchise tag him.

What was trying to be determined was if an option would exist where the Raiders would be guaranteed to not lose Jennings to potentially signing with another team. If that option existed, then a 2nd and 3rd round pick wasn't a fair trade. But rather than help us figure it out and possibly restructure the trade, jbake told the committee to rethink it and then started throwing conspiracy accusations around. How was any of that helpful?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Duece's phone was stolen today and he won't be able to check anything on the thread for a day or two if you need him contact him on Xbox live.
 
I play the CPU, so I'll have my game done before the deadline. Just haven't been feeling well lately and the gaming has been kept to a minimum for the past few days.
 
I'm going to have to step out... I feel like the lag is just too horrendous online and it really kills any fun for me.  I know I had talked to Darktower about it a couple times.  I hadn't played a Madden game online since I think '10, and thought I'd give a league a try this year. Unfortunately, I feel like they really haven't improved the connections which was a big reason why I stopped playing online way back then. It just seems like it is impossible to do anything half the time because I'm playing stop motion football.

Good luck to everyone.

 
mvp828 said:
I'm going to have to step out... I feel like the lag is just too horrendous online and it really kills any fun for me. I know I had talked to Darktower about it a couple times. I hadn't played a Madden game online since I think '10, and thought I'd give a league a try this year. Unfortunately, I feel like they really haven't improved the connections which was a big reason why I stopped playing online way back then. It just seems like it is impossible to do anything half the time because I'm playing stop motion football.

Good luck to everyone.
Click to expand...
I really haven't had a lot of lag (maybe 1 or 2 ranked games). I think if it was that bad of a problem, there'd be more press about it. You sure it's not on your end? Honestly, I probably get more lag in NHL 14 (when playing Canadians) than I do in Madden.

Also, man...what a difference a week makes. I barely squeaked by Seattle last week, and didn't have a defensive stop until late in the 4th quarter (which set up my game winning field goal). I couldn't stop Marshawn Lynch to save my life, and Russell Wilson was basically perfect.

Fast forward a week, and the 49ers couldn't touch me. Kaepernick was getting sacked (5 times) and turning the ball over (3 times) and they couldn't tackle for shit. Chris Johnson had 4 TDs in the 1st half...on 10 carries (but still only had like 113 yards...shows how many short fields I had). CJ ended up averaging like 9 ypc, then Shonn Greene played the 4th quarter and averaged 7 ypc. Was not expecting that kind of game at all out of San Fran. This game is weird sometimes.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The CPU Rams may have just played the worst game I have ever seen. I think Bradford threw six (?) interceptions. Absolutely ridiculous.
 
The lag is definitely still an issue.  I just had a really laggy game against Kaster.  Had no real impact on the game as I couldn't get anything going on offense or defense but it definitely makes the game a lot less fun.

 
DarkTower80 said:
The lag is definitely still an issue. I just had a really laggy game against Kaster. Had no real impact on the game as I couldn't get anything going on offense or defense but it definitely makes the game a lot less fun.
Click to expand...
Yeah, but everybody knows Kaster doesn't have real internet. This has been going on for years. I think he has to pedal a bicycle to keep his electricity on, lol. :lol:

 
n8rockerasu said:
Yeah, but everybody knows Kaster doesn't have real internet. This has been going on for years. I think he has to pedal a bicycle to keep his electricity on, lol. :lol:
Click to expand...
Then he needs to pedal harder :D

On one of his kickoffs the kicker froze three times before getting to the ball.

 
Just played a ranked game, and the lag was minimal (basically as expected). Anybody who's getting lag in EVERY one of their games, you might want to give your ISP a call or at least run a speed test or something.

 
n8rockerasu said:
Just played a ranked game, and the lag was minimal (basically as expected). Anybody who's getting lag in EVERY one of their games, you might want to give your ISP a call or at least run a speed test or something.
Click to expand...
See this is the only game I get it in though. NHL and COD are near perfect for me. I think one of the only games I didn't have much was against Matt.
 
mvp828 said:
See this is the only game I get it in though. NHL and COD are near perfect for me. I think one of the only games I didn't have much was against Matt.
Click to expand...
When I started up my game with Miami I had massive lag and I got an error message after calling a play which said something along the lines of "EA servers are no longer available". I think I got kicked off because of using too much internet at once (I was downloading a game on PS3, girlfriend was streaming Netflix, and then Madden). Anyways, after shutting down the PS3 and Netflix, I was able to finish our game with no problems.

EDIT: FWIW I also have Comcast

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I have Charter, which I have actually really like and have never had any problems with.  I haven't tried Madden on Comcast at all, but I have on UVerse and it was a little better than not much.  Which really isn't saying anything.

I don't know what the deal is... No one else was using the internet, and even then the lag is minimal in other games.  I have had a couple files downloading on my laptop while playing COD before and experienced a little lag, but nothing compared to what I've had in all of my Madden games.  It sucks, but there is no way I am going to continue to punish myself and keep playing when all it does is make me want to throw my 360 through my tv.

 
n8rockerasu said:
Yeah, but everybody knows Kaster doesn't have real internet. This has been going on for years. I think he has to pedal a bicycle to keep his electricity on, lol. :lol:
Click to expand...
Come on Nate, I told you that bicycle thing in confidence! Don't give up the secret now!

In all seriousness, I am stuck with my wildly inconsistent college internet. Some days it runs like a dream and my games are nice and smooth. And other days are like last night, where everything is choppy and field goals are a terrifying proposition.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top