Jump to content



Photo
* * * * * 1 votes

CAGLS: Madden 13 Gentlemen's League - We Finished! Thanks for Playing!


  • Please log in to reply
11970 replies to this topic

#6631 CAGLeagueSports

CAGLeagueSports

    CAGiversary!

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 09 January 2013 - 11:53 PM

We would like to submit this trade again. I've accounted for the cap issue raised before, my solution to that is listed at the end:

Bucs send

RB Doug Martin: 24 years old
86 OVR
87 SPD
95 ACC
83 ELU
84 CAR

contract:

3 years remaining, $3.2 M bonus

2013: $1.56 M
2014: $1.78 M
2015: $2.08 M


WR Vincent Jackson:

88 OVR
88 CTH
94 CIT
88 RTE
95 RLS
90 SPD
86 AWR

4 years remaining, $25 M bonus
2013: $9.31 M
2014: $10.61 M
2015: $12.29 M
2016: $14.47 M

Team cap space: $1.54 M (the original $1.98 M minus Eric Decker's 440K salary once that trade goes through.)

Ravens send

RB Ray Rice: 26 years old

96 OVR
91 SPD
97 ACC
93 ELU
95 CAR

2 years remaining, $7.66 M bonus

2013: $5.21 M
2014: $9.32 M

Ravens 2nd round pick

Ravens cap space: $13.87 M


In order to account for my cap space issue of $4.02 M (the $3.58 M plus Decker's contract), I would cut the following players if the deal was approved by the committee:

QB Dan Orlovsky: 1 year remaining, $1.2 M
TE Todd Heap: 1 year remaining, $1.72 M
DT Gary Gibson: 1 year remaining, $1.0 M
CB Myron Lewis: 1 year remaining, $510 K (contract is 710K and I incur a 200K penalty for him, so net 510K)

This would free up $4.43 M in cap space for me, enough to absorb Rice's contract. I would also still meet the minimum depth requirements at each position. If this satisfies the committee's concerns about my cap situation, then I request this trade be reviewed. Thank you!


Trade Rejected

I sent this idea on to the committee, and I haven't gotten one positive response yet (in 4 responses) about needing to cut so many players to clear cap space.

I know this isn't your intent, and you wouldn't abandon your team, but you have to realize this is basically the same situation the Panthers put themselves in. They pushed themselves to the cap limit (and over it), without even having a full roster on their team.

The most agreeable response I got from a committee member was that you would need to replace the players you're cutting with low level free agents to put yourself back at 53 players. But nobody liked the idea of allowing a team to operate with less than 53 players as a means for clearing cap room.

Another member suggested that it might be in your best interest to just wait until the offseason when you have contracts expiring and see what your cap space looks like then. I hate to be the bearer of bad news, and I personally appreciate the thought and work you've put into the trade, but most everyone agreed that allowing this kind of thing just wasn't a good idea.
Do you have what it takes to compete?

#6632 Ultimate Matt X

Ultimate Matt X

Posted 10 January 2013 - 12:00 AM

I'm logging in to play the Colts now.

#6633 GamerDude316

GamerDude316

    CAGiversary!

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 10 January 2013 - 12:08 AM

Replacing those guys with low level players was a thought as well, and 3 of those guys are 3rd stringers or worse, Heap is the only one who has or would see the field all year. I guess I just don't see why it's an issue if I have 49 or 50 players for a week while I adjust my roster as long as I have the depth requirements at each position. There is nothing in the rules in the OP about having less than 53 players (obviously it is not ideal) as long as depth requirements are met. But if the committee feels that's best than I will respect that.

Edited by GamerDude316, 10 January 2013 - 12:20 AM.


#6634 Blade3D

Blade3D

    Grandmaster Swag

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 10 January 2013 - 12:26 AM

Replacing those guys with low level players was a thought as well, and 3 of those guys are 3rd stringers or worse, Heap is the only one who has or would see the field all year. I guess I just don't see why it's an issue if I have 49 or 50 players for a week while I adjust my roster as long as I have the depth requirements at each position. There is nothing in the rules in the OP about having less than 53 players (obviously it is not ideal) as long as depth requirements are met. But if the committee feels that's best than I will respect that.


I say go cut and sign cheaper players now if you want the deal to go through. That way none of this is hypothetical and you will know if you have the cap space or not.
Posted ImagePosted Image

#6635 CAGLeagueSports

CAGLeagueSports

    CAGiversary!

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 10 January 2013 - 12:27 AM

Replacing those guys with low level players was a thought as well, and 3 of those guys are 3rd stringers or worse, Heap is the only one who has or would see the field all year. I guess I just don't see why it's an issue if I have 49 or 50 players for a week while I adjust my roster as long as I have the depth requirements at each position. There is nothing in the rules in the OP about having less than 53 players (obviously it is not ideal) as long as depth requirements are met. But f the committee feels that's best than I will respect that.


Come on, man. Please don't use the "it's not in the OP" argument. As I've said before, it's next to impossible to think of every little thing that people could come up with to try to get what they want. Sometimes, you just have to address stuff as it becomes an issue. And we have had a similar case before (when the Pats and Jets were in discussions for the Brady/Revis trade), and most people weren't comfortable then with having to cut several players to get the trade to pass. But the Pats owner reneged on the deal anyway, so it was never put to the test.

I tried to keep an objective view in this trade though and recognize that free agency is open now and people are free to cut/sign players as they please. So, to ME, the bigger issue was fielding a team of 53 players...which is what every NFL team does. And I don't think it's unreasonable to not allow teams to fill their payroll on less than 53 players. If we were all operating under that principle, you would have seen teams cutting players left and right just so they could offer top free agents even more money. It's just not something that is in the best interest of the league.
Do you have what it takes to compete?

#6636 Blade3D

Blade3D

    Grandmaster Swag

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 10 January 2013 - 12:30 AM

I agree, add having 53 players on your roster during the regular season to the OP if need be (excluding the Panthers for now).
Posted ImagePosted Image

#6637 GamerDude316

GamerDude316

    CAGiversary!

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 10 January 2013 - 12:39 AM

Come on, man. Please don't use the "it's not in the OP" argument. As I've said before, it's next to impossible to think of every little thing that people could come up with to try to get what they want. Sometimes, you just have to address stuff as it becomes an issue. And we have had a similar case before (when the Pats and Jets were in discussions for the Brady/Revis trade), and most people weren't comfortable then with having to cut several players to get the trade to pass. But the Pats owner reneged on the deal anyway, so it was never put to the test.

I tried to keep an objective view in this trade though and recognize that free agency is open now and people are free to cut/sign players as they please. So, to ME, the bigger issue was fielding a team of 53 players...which is what every NFL team does. And I don't think it's unreasonable to not allow teams to fill their payroll on less than 53 players. If we were all operating under that principle, you would have seen teams cutting players left and right just so they could offer top free agents even more money. It's just not something that is in the best interest of the league.


I can understand that, I'm just saying that given there has never been an official mandate of "you must have 53 players at all times" I didn't think it would be an issue for me to cut 3 scrubs and one overpaid backup TE. We are free to sign/cut players as you said so I could have just cut them before anyway.

#6638 CAGLeagueSports

CAGLeagueSports

    CAGiversary!

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 10 January 2013 - 01:27 AM

I can understand that, I'm just saying that given there has never been an official mandate of "you must have 53 players at all times" I didn't think it would be an issue for me to cut 3 scrubs and one overpaid backup TE. We are free to sign/cut players as you said so I could have just cut them before anyway.


And if anyone was caught doing so, we would all have the same opinion that we do now, and it wouldn't be allowed. Come on, dude. At least have the decency to acknowledge that you're trying to exploit a loophole. Teams are supposed to have 53 players. That should be common sense. If people want to function outside of the realm of common sense, it gets a little difficult to pre-emptively disallow things. If your main gripe is really that it's not in the OP, I'll add it the next chance I get. It's a reasonable expectation...and one that we all should follow.
Do you have what it takes to compete?

#6639 CAGLeagueSports

CAGLeagueSports

    CAGiversary!

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 10 January 2013 - 01:32 AM

Jets send:

Matt Schaub, QB, 32 yrs old
7/7 years remaining. 62.3 Mil total contract, bonus of 12.6 Mil
2013: 4.62 Mil
2014: 5.47 Mil
2015: 6.57 Mil
2016: 8.01 Mil
2017: 9.87 Mil
Cut Savings: 2.82 Mil

Schaub's ratings:
OVR 86
THP 88
SAC 91
MAC 85
DAC 83
PAC 92
AWR 87

and

5th round pick - 2013


Vikings send:

1st round pick - 2013
3rd round pick - 2013

Vikings Cap Space: $8.09M

Reasoning:
Vikings need a QB.
Jets don't need Schaub. I like the versatility of Tebow a lot more.


Trade Approved
Do you have what it takes to compete?

#6640 staticz

staticz

    FortySixin

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 10 January 2013 - 01:42 AM

Has anyone taken the shit hole Panthers yet? I'm still listed as the owner in the OP...I might be up for the challenge if no one opposes.
XBL - staticzV2
Steam - stat1cz

#6641 L4WII

L4WII

Posted 10 January 2013 - 01:51 AM

Chiefs vs Raiders going down @9est

#6642 GamerDude316

GamerDude316

    CAGiversary!

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 10 January 2013 - 01:56 AM

And if anyone was caught doing so, we would all have the same opinion that we do now, and it wouldn't be allowed. Come on, dude. At least have the decency to acknowledge that you're trying to exploit a loophole. Teams are supposed to have 53 players. That should be common sense. If people want to function outside of the realm of common sense, it gets a little difficult to pre-emptively disallow things. If your main gripe is really that it's not in the OP, I'll add it the next chance I get. It's a reasonable expectation...and one that we all should follow.


Not trying to exploit any loophole at all. If you dont want teams having less than 53 players thats fine and I totally respect that, but it has never been said before so again I really didn't see any issue with having 49 or 50 players if it would keep me under the cap, especially asking the commish beforehand. The only expectation I've seen was to have at least the minimum number of players at each position as listed in the roster breakdowns in-game. But again I completely respect the decision and will be happy to keep Martin and VJax on my team.

#6643 Flyersfan

Flyersfan

Posted 10 January 2013 - 01:57 AM

Chiefs vs Raiders going down @9est



If I can connect to XBL. This is the second time this has happened on a game I had scheduled:-(


#6644 Ultimate Matt X

Ultimate Matt X

Posted 10 January 2013 - 02:04 AM

Well, having Hillis and Richardson is nice. After one game I'm not sure if I want to move a RB, but I do have these needs:

-Defensive backs
-Offensive line
-Wide receivers

I'm open to offers including of those. I wouldn't be against giving up draft picks.

#6645 n8rockerasu

n8rockerasu

    Shhh...I'm Invisible

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 10 January 2013 - 02:05 AM

Has anyone taken the shit hole Panthers yet? I'm still listed as the owner in the OP...I might be up for the challenge if no one opposes.


I think when it was brought up before, a couple people expressed that you were too good for this league. Although, if you can get an explanation out of Doom's brother for why he fucked up the Panthers so bad, that could sway my opinion, lol. That team is so messed up, the conspiracy theorist in me starts to wonder if it was intentional. I think even an explanation of "I don't get math" would suffice for me, haha.

#6646 staticz

staticz

    FortySixin

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 10 January 2013 - 02:14 AM

I think when it was brought up before, a couple people expressed that you were too good for this league. Although, if you can get an explanation out of Doom's brother for why he fucked up the Panthers so bad, that could sway my opinion, lol. That team is so messed up, the conspiracy theorist in me starts to wonder if it was intentional. I think even an explanation of "I don't get math" would suffice for me, haha.


I think 47 players and -$3 million in cap space would make up for missing the playoffs since season 2 of last year in the other league (admittedly I'll most likely make it this season). It's up to you guys though.

As for why he did that, no idea. I can't even figure out what kind of team he was trying to build. Who the hell trades Cam Newton? Got me.
XBL - staticzV2
Steam - stat1cz

#6647 Blade3D

Blade3D

    Grandmaster Swag

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 10 January 2013 - 02:35 AM

I think 47 players and -$3 million in cap space would make up for missing the playoffs since season 2 of last year in the other league (admittedly I'll most likely make it this season). It's up to you guys though.

As for why he did that, no idea. I can't even figure out what kind of team he was trying to build. Who the hell trades Cam Newton? Got me.


Idk but I appreciated it.
Posted ImagePosted Image

#6648 KasterDB

KasterDB

    CAGiversary!

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 10 January 2013 - 02:47 AM

FYI people: my dad (Pittsburgh) and I (Minnesota) are going to be out of town in Denver. I'll be back Sunday evening and he won't be back until Wednesday afternoon. While its somewhat unfortunate for the league, being in Denver for skiing and the playoff game is really really exciting for a Broncos fan like myself.

#6649 irideabike

irideabike

Posted 10 January 2013 - 02:47 AM

Lucky man.

#6650 irideabike

irideabike

Posted 10 January 2013 - 04:12 AM

Only 3 games left:

Falcons panthers (CPU)
Giants cowboys (any word on when it's going down?)
Bears skins (any word on when it's going down?)

#6651 jza1218

jza1218

    CAGiversary!

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 10 January 2013 - 04:16 AM

We've rescheduled Giants-Cowboys for tomorrow morning. Sucks to have been that far along in the game and have that happen but c'est la vie.

#6652 irideabike

irideabike

Posted 10 January 2013 - 04:19 AM

For sure it does :(

Pitfall where you at man get at us with the bears time or joely for that matter!

#6653 GamerDude316

GamerDude316

    CAGiversary!

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 10 January 2013 - 05:02 AM

For sure it does :(

Pitfall where you at man get at us with the bears time or joely for that matter!


Pitfall posted a few pages back saying it probably wasnt gonna happen till Thursday night.

#6654 irideabike

irideabike

Posted 10 January 2013 - 05:09 AM

:(

#6655 DVO21

DVO21

    Non-Pro League

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 10 January 2013 - 01:35 PM

Yeah, I wasn't really impressed with his response. The idea that ANY human owner is better than a CPU owner isn't the way I want to run this league. We've got enough members pushing the limits as it is.



i mean i could agree with is statement id much rather play a human than a computer. and his skill level isnt above anyone elses in here. Hes just a guy that wants to get better and thats what this leagues for. i understand that he backed out of the league but thats before the ball was officially rolling. and i know he had one bad moment in the other league with me. but thats one bad moment we have all had them. i dont understand the reasoning of not wanting to let him in. if he comes in and that other guy that was going to buy madden we would we one team away from having this league back at full strength. i find that to be a giant step foward for us.

Madden 25

Official League Team: Bengals

Season 1: 0-0

 

Fans League Team: Possibly Chiefs

Season 1: 0-0


#6656 irideabike

irideabike

Posted 10 January 2013 - 01:55 PM

agree to disagree?
There are no shortcuts. No do-overs. What happened, happened. Trust me. I know. All of this matters.

Gentleman's League Record:
Season 1: 7-9 Missed Playoffs
Season 2: 18-1 Superbowl Champs

#6657 jza1218

jza1218

    CAGiversary!

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 10 January 2013 - 04:57 PM

Well I'm not sure where the cowboys are. We were supposed to play at 1130, but there's no sign of him as of yet.

#6658 JoelyPoley

JoelyPoley

    CAG Veteran

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 10 January 2013 - 05:00 PM

Yea Pitfall and I will be playing at 9:45 eastern tonight. I've had family visiting since last Thursday so that has kind of taken up most of my time recently.
ASCII stupid question... get a stupid ANSI!

#6659 jza1218

jza1218

    CAGiversary!

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 10 January 2013 - 05:14 PM

And I'm done waiting. I guess Giants-Cowboys can be simmed.

#6660 irideabike

irideabike

Posted 10 January 2013 - 05:15 PM

There is no reason for you to sim it. Contact n8 and have him be put on auto.
There are no shortcuts. No do-overs. What happened, happened. Trust me. I know. All of this matters.

Gentleman's League Record:
Season 1: 7-9 Missed Playoffs
Season 2: 18-1 Superbowl Champs