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

Ok I'm going to throw my 2 cents in on this whole trade thing. If it was up to me I would just use a common sense/plausibility rule. Basically just ask yourself before proposing any trade "Would this trade ever happen in the actual NFL?" In this case ask yourself "Would the Pats, under any circumstances, ever trade Tom Brady (to a hated division rival nonetheless!)?" Same thing from the Jets perspective "Would they ever trade the best CB in the league while still in his prime?"

If you have a trade idea you post it in the thread for opinions on it(like was done here). If the majority of people who comment on the trade have a negative opinion of it then maybe it isn't such a good idea even if it is TECHNICALLY plausible. This is just my 2 cents on this, I have no horse in this race.
 
[quote name='Chetty12']I feel like you worry too much about how each team is handling their cap, when the commish should just be making sure that the compensation is fair and leaving it up to each owner to make sure they comply with cap rules.[/QUOTE]

Oh, what I "should" be doing. Well, I'm glad I have you to tell me that. I'm sure nobody else thinks that comes off pushy at all.

[quote name='Chetty12']Secondly, what i did was not mangling the Jets roster or trying to circumvent the cap by doing something outrageous. These are the players i cut to create enough cap room- Jordan White- 63 wr(440k), Patrick Turner-65 wr(860k), Tanner Purdum 46 te(400k), Konrad Reuland 58 te(390k), Hayden Smith 60 te(500 k), Nick Bellore 67 mlb(500k), Ricky Sapp 67 rolb(350k), Antonio Allen 65 ss(440k). Those cuts leave him with Holmes, Schillens, Gates, Kerley, D. Keller and Hernadez as receiving options. As well as Jeff Cumberland at Te. I also cut 1 mlb, 1 rolb and 1 ss. That leaves him with 4 mlb, 4 rolb and 4 safeties, having 5 at those positions would have been a waste and most of these players would be cut anyway.[/QUOTE]

You cut 8 players to make this trade go through. You don't think anybody would think that's a bit excessive? I'm not even going to personally comment on it. Let the facts speak for themselves. Regardless of their rating or standing with the team, 8 players had to be released to make room for Brady and Hernandez's contracts. The community can decide if that should be allowed.

[quote name='Chetty12']I did not think i was being argumentative by simply pointing out that the scheme ratings are pretty much useless. Just because Brady is a 95 in one scheme and a 86 in another does not mean he will play differently. In game he will play exactly the same. If you want to change up your depth chart in game, you'll see that they even list that depth chart by the stock overall rating, not the scheme rating. If anything those ratings only matter if we planned on simming games, which i don't think anyone actually intends on doing.[/QUOTE]

As I said, we have to evaluate trades somehow, and player ratings have to be a part of that. If the different ratings don't have any effect on how the player performs in that system, what purpose do they serve?

[quote name='Chetty12']Lastly, you say i have come across as argumentative. But throughout this entire thread you have come off as being condescending multiple times, acting as though being commissioner makes you better than the 31 other users and like your opinion is the only one that counts because you created the league. All i was trying to do is give a second opinion, i apologize if being vocal about having an opposing opinion of yourself has offended you.[/QUOTE]

Show me where I've acted like this? By default, being commissioner is a position of authority. It's not one that I try to lord over people. But decisions have to be made...and they're not always popular. I try to get as much community feedback as possible. But contrary to what your intentions were, you weren't giving feedback. You were telling me how I was wrong and what I should do instead. How do you think that's going to be received? And ultimately, like I said, if you think you can do better, go ahead. No one is stopping you.

[quote name='Chetty12']So you wait until everyone has picked their teams to bring this up? Many of us including myself picked teams we could build up under the premise that "trading is encouraged". Plus how would that system work with every player being a different scheme? If he's a 90 in my scheme but a 68 in another scheme would it count against me? Or would we just use their real overall?[/QUOTE]

Yup, this isn't true at all. The trade policy was discussed numerous times since this thread was created...way before teams were chosen. I stated the entire time that I'd like to not have to use the old trade cap, hoping that EA would do a good enough job with the salary cap that it wouldn't be needed. For the most part, I feel that they have. I just don't think anybody anticipated cutting 15% of your roster to make a trade go through.
 
[quote name='cgarb84']Ok I'm going to throw my 2 cents in on this whole trade thing. If it was up to me I would just use a common sense/plausibility rule. Basically just ask yourself before proposing any trade "Would this trade ever happen in the actual NFL?" In this case ask yourself "Would the Pats, under any circumstances, ever trade Tom Brady (to a hated division rival nonetheless!)?" Same thing from the Jets perspective "Would they ever trade the best CB in the league while still in his prime?"

If you have a trade idea you post it in the thread for opinions on it(like was done here). If the majority of people who comment on the trade have a negative opinion of it then maybe it isn't such a good idea even if it is TECHNICALLY plausible. This is just my 2 cents on this, I have no horse in this race.[/QUOTE]

This pretty much echoes my feelings as well.
 
I say let them do it if they want, I'll find it pretty funny if he needs one of those players he cut and has no cap room to get anyone.
 
Oh, what I "should" be doing. Well, I'm glad I have you to tell me that. I'm sure nobody else thinks that comes off pushy at all.

I was just expressing my opinion of what responsibilities i expected to be left up to the owners. Cap management was one of those i thought would be left to the Owners as long as it was in reason. I apalogize if you thought should was to pushy of a word. I feel if i said you "need to be" or you "have to be" are examples of what would have been pushy. Sorry if it came off that way.


You cut 8 players to make this trade go through. You don't think anybody would think that's a bit excessive? I'm not even going to personally comment on it. Let the facts speak for themselves. Regardless of their rating or standing with the team, 8 players had to be released to make room for Brady and Hernandez's contracts. The community can decide if that should be allowed.

When you say 8 players, it sounds like a lot. But then if you look at the numbers as a whole it's not that bad when it comes to the Jets situation. Currently they have 56 or 57 players set to their roster. They'd have to cut 3-4 of those players before week one anyway to get to the 53 maximum. That brings him down to 48 or 49, which is what i believe the minimum in madden. If he has an injury or two and he's light at a position, that's his fault for spreading his team thin. Why not allow him to make that mistake for himself if that's what he wants to do with his team?


As I said, we have to evaluate trades somehow, and player ratings have to be a part of that. If the different ratings don't have any effect on how the player performs in that system, what purpose do they serve?

I honestly thought it was common knowledge that these ratings were b.s and didn't actually effect anything in game. Like i said it might effect something in simulation but as far as in game goes, those ratings arn't very meaningful.

Show me where I've acted like this? By default, being commissioner is a position of authority. It's not one that I try to lord over people. But decisions have to be made...and they're not always popular. I try to get as much community feedback as possible. But contrary to what your intentions were, you weren't giving feedback. You were telling me how I was wrong and what I should do instead. How do you think that's going to be received? And ultimately, like I said, if you think you can do better, go ahead. No one is stopping you.

Maybe you didn't intend to sound a certain way. Maybe it's you being defensive or just trying to express your authority, but like i said to ME it doesn't come off in the most respectful tone. And to you thinking i wasn't getting feedback, that was my intention. You posted your points about how the trades was incorrect and i provided a counter-argument, once again i apologize if you thought my tone was too harsh or i was trying to tell you how things needed to be done but all i was trying to do and what i feel i did was provide a counter-argument.

Yup, this isn't true at all. The trade policy was discussed numerous times since this thread was created...way before teams were chosen. I stated the entire time that I'd like to not have to use the old trade cap, hoping that EA would do a good enough job with the salary cap that it wouldn't be needed. For the most part, I feel that they have. I just don't think anybody anticipated cutting 15% of your roster to make a trade go through.

If it was discussed i apologize, but when it says trades are encouraged i felt like people would be free to trade who they want for fair compensation as long as they arn't ripping off someone. I'm not even opposed to the trade system you proposed to regulate the amount of trades, i think that's fine. I also feel there should be a better way than scheme overall, because like you said it varies from team to team and Bush for the Dolphins is a 92 but for a power running team he's low 70's, when he's actually something in between. So whatever you feel is necessary to regulate it is fine.
 
Ok, one final thought on this. It's been brought to my attention that despite electing to start with the 53 man roster, the game still started us with preseason rosters so we'd have cuts to make (which explains what Chetty was saying with players "being cut anyway"). I have no problem with the players involved in the trade. But if we're having to worry about cutting our roster down to 53 players anyway,

I think we need to hold off on all trades until Week 1 so we know for sure what the cap space situation is for all teams. The other league is actually requiring people to wait until Week 3 before any trading is done, so this idea isn't unprecedented. So, hopefully at least waiting until Week 1 is a fair compromise. If the trade can go through free and clear then, then I won't have any objections. It seems the biggest point of contention was mainly a misunderstanding.
 
[quote name='Blade3D']I say let them do it if they want, I'll find it pretty funny if he needs one of those players he cut and has no cap room to get anyone.[/QUOTE]

This. If someone goes light on a position and is low on cap and can't sign replacements, it's their own fault. If someone gets low on cap and can't resign their star player they just traded for, it's their own fault. I just think if people are going to make mistakes, let them and they will learn from it if theyre smart and if not they will pay for it. Sometimes the risk will pay off for them too.
 
LOL.. when did I ever say I was going to cut 8 players?? That is how HE did it. My plan was to cut/trade Jason Smith who makes I believe 4 million this year. Since I have Howard starting at RT, I could wait til we allowed free agency and grab a cheap backup if I couldnt make a trade for him.

You're telling me the Jets wouldn't, or any team for that matter, wouldn't release one of their backups in order to get a top 3 QB to fit under the cap? I understand I'd be giving up the best corner in the NFL, but it's a videogame. To me, Cromartie can replace him, and I like Wilson enough to start him. I use a lot of zone, 2 man under, and double coverage, so upgrading a great deal at the QB and TE (I run a lot of 2 TE sets), and not losing too much defensively gameplan-wise, is the reasoning behind my trade.

And yes, the chances of this trade actually happening in the NFL is close to 0%, but 2 years ago, who would have ever thought the Colts would release Peyton Manning, and allow him to CHOOSE his next team? I'm just saying, I don't believe I would be abusing the salary cap system by any means. I'm not dumb enough to release 1/3 of my team and have cap penalties for the next 3 seasons.

I'm fine either way. Obviously I'd prefer to have the trade, but if it's problematic to some of you, I understand your reasons, and I'm ok dropping the trade. I'll just build through the draft. I just remember reading these Calvin Johnson trade posts so I thought this was the norm. I am definitely down for a super-realistic NFL season (on the field, and GM-wise) if that's what we're going for.
 
My opinion is that if a trade is going to put you over the cap, you should post that you are aware of the fact and have moves planned to remedy that fact. That is an important part of the discussion.
 
Well, that's probably why Chetty making such a lengthy case for the trade shouldn't have happened. Either way, this issue needed to be sorted out because like I said, we've never had to deal with it before, and it was bound to come up sooner or later. And just the fact that dr0ppinL0adz planned on handling it by looking to move one player, while Chetty would have done it by moving 8 basically illustrates why we do need some kind of policy for dealing with moves that put you over the cap.

I exchanged some PM's with the commissioners in the other league, and one idea that was brainstormed was allowing a player to be cut, but limiting it to one player. That way, the team with no cap space really has to decide if the move is still worth it if they have to get rid of a $4 million player...and it prevents them from bleeding their roster by getting rid of special teamers and backups.

And in all honesty, if this plan had been mentioned from the beginning much of this back and forth could have been avoided. This was a pretty huge trade, so knowing that both sides were aware that it would cause a cap problem would have been helpful. Let's try to include this kind of stuff with the proposals in the future. It'll save us a lot of arguing.
 
[quote name='DarkTower80']My opinion is that if a trade is going to put you over the cap, you should post that you are aware of the fact and have moves planned to remedy that fact. That is an important part of the discussion.[/QUOTE]

Agreed, which is what the majority of this is about.
 
[quote name='Chetty12']This. If someone goes light on a position and is low on cap and can't sign replacements, it's their own fault. If someone gets low on cap and can't resign their star player they just traded for, it's their own fault. I just think if people are going to make mistakes, let them and they will learn from it if theyre smart and if not they will pay for it. Sometimes the risk will pay off for them too.[/QUOTE]

I agree with this completely.
 
1. I don't like the trade. It's flat out ridiculous.

2. I think the core player trade rules should go into effect, personally. There should also be an "elite" or "franchise" section of 94 or 95+ overall players, where those players must command a certain price or be untradeable.
 
[quote name='Chetty12']This. If someone goes light on a position and is low on cap and can't sign replacements, it's their own fault. If someone gets low on cap and can't resign their star player they just traded for, it's their own fault. I just think if people are going to make mistakes, let them and they will learn from it if theyre smart and if not they will pay for it. Sometimes the risk will pay off for them too.[/QUOTE]

[quote name='Rapid shot']I agree with this completely.[/QUOTE]

The problem with this logic is when someone just obliterates their team and then decides that they're not having any fun anymore, and drops from the league, we won't be able to find a replacement because nobody is going to want a team with no cap space and only 46 players. There at least has to be limits. I hope that having a policy of allowing one player to be cut to get a trade under the cap limit is acceptable. In my opinion, that's a decent compromise.

[quote name='Hemingway012']alright so is the trade okay or not thats all i want to know?[/QUOTE]

We're still going to wait till Week 1 to see how the roster cuts go and see where the final salary cap numbers are. Just let the deal simmer for now.
 
I'm really not a fan of this trade either. I think it flat out stinks, on multiple levels. That said, I do think you should have to cut a high-priced player to get under the cap.
 
Maybe I missed it but I figured we would be starting with the current 53 man roster which means no cuts in the first preseason anyways.
 
[quote name='CAGLeagueSports']The problem with this logic is when someone just obliterates their team and then decides that they're not having any fun anymore, and drops from the league, we won't be able to find a replacement because nobody is going to want a team with no cap space and only 46 players. There at least has to be limits. I hope that having a policy of allowing one player to be cut to get a trade under the cap limit is acceptable. In my opinion, that's a decent compromise.



We're still going to wait till Week 1 to see how the roster cuts go and see where the final salary cap numbers are. Just let the deal simmer for now.[/QUOTE]

Well I guess that's true I would hate to penalize future team owners because someone made a stupid mistake and quit. So with that in mind I wouldn't mind adding to the trade rules that if a player is rated 90+ then they are arent allowed to be traded.
 
[quote name='dr0ppinL0adz']LOL.. when did I ever say I was going to cut 8 players?? That is how HE did it. My plan was to cut/trade Jason Smith who makes I believe 4 million this year. Since I have Howard starting at RT, I could wait til we allowed free agency and grab a cheap backup if I couldnt make a trade for him. )



Just wanted to point out what the jets owner said. he doesnt plain on cutting 8 people he is thinking about one player.
 
[quote name='JoelyPoley']Maybe I missed it but I figured we would be starting with the current 53 man roster which means no cuts in the first preseason anyways.[/QUOTE]

On some rosters they still put IR/PUP/practice squad players, so it brings the number higher than 53 for some teams.
 
[quote name='JoelyPoley']Maybe I missed it but I figured we would be starting with the current 53 man roster which means no cuts in the first preseason anyways.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, rosters are all over the place. The Jets have 56 players. The Titans have 68. Really weird.
 
Just curious...what "stinks" or is "flat out ridiculous" about this trade?. I'd like to hear your reasoning just in case I'm not seeing something clearly. It seems fair to me. He wants to rebuild with Mallett, Brady will just hold Mallett's progression back. Revis for Brady. Backup TE for a possible future WR1, def WR2 (remember Stephen Hill is a rookie drafted 2nd rd. If i remember correctly, jets traded up to get him). Sanchez for 3rd and 6th. Tebow went for a 4th and 6th.

Limiting trading 1 elite player per year and only allow dropping 1 player to fit a trade under the cap sounds fair to me. But what is considered "elite"? If an 85 rated player on my team is a 92 on a different team (and vice versa) is he elite or not?
 
[quote name='Chetty12']Another thing i noticed and i know was discussed, are we keeping the injury slider on 50?[/QUOTE]

I've only had 3 injuries in 3 ccm seasons. None lasted more than 5 weeks. Has anybody else had problems with serious injuries happening all the time? I'm sure the bears wish they could turn injuries off after losing forte lol.
 
Honestly I think the trade should go through, and then let these guys figure out how to work out the cap. If he has to cut 8 players to get under the cap, then let him do it. I don't see the big deal.

This is a video game. Comparing it to what a real life team would do is silly. People are supposed to have fun playing this game and if they want certain guys on their team we should let that happen.

I'm not in favor in placing all these restrictions on trading because it really hurts the people who got stuck with shitty teams(like me, the Browns). I feel like all they do is ensure i'll be stuck with a crap team for the duration of this league.
 
[quote name='dr0ppinL0adz']Just curious...what "stinks" or is "flat out ridiculous" about this trade?. I'd like to hear your reasoning just in case I'm not seeing something clearly. It seems fair to me. He wants to rebuild with Mallett, Brady will just hold Mallett's progression back. Revis for Brady. Backup TE for a possible future WR1, def WR2 (remember Stephen Hill is a rookie drafted 2nd rd. If i remember correctly, jets traded up to get him). Sanchez for 3rd and 6th. Tebow went for a 4th and 6th.
[/QUOTE]

Not really offering an opinion on the trade since I'm not in this league, but you're saying "backup TE" like people don't know who Aaron Hernandez is. Almost anyone controlling the Patriots will have him on the field for every snap, which he is for the actual Pats. It's a 2-TE offense, neither him nor Gronk ever leave the field. Hernandez would be the best TE on almost every team in the league.
 
[quote name='bvharris']Not really offering an opinion on the trade since I'm not in this league, but you're saying "backup TE" like people don't know who Aaron Hernandez is. Almost anyone controlling the Patriots will have him on the field for every snap, which he is for the actual Pats. It's a 2-TE offense, neither him nor Gronk ever leave the field. Hernandez would be the best TE on almost every team in the league.[/QUOTE]

What I think you're missing from my statement is that Hernandez is being traded for another player that can replace him in the starting lineup (in the future) and will be on the field most plays now. Just because the Pats use a 2 tight end offense, does that mean the user controlling the Pats has to as well? You could have Gronk, Lloyd, Welker, and Hill every play if you want to. Plus, Lloyd and Welker won't be there forever. Stephen Hill is like 6'4" or 6'5" and one of the fastest players. What good is a 2 TE set with no WR's?
 
[quote name='dr0ppinL0adz'] What good is a 2 TE set with no WR's?[/QUOTE]

Hernandez can play WR, and does so with regularity. Hell, the dude plays halfback from time to time. He's rated 79 at WR in the Patriots scheme (I know because I use them in my offline franchise) which makes him their third best WR in these rosters. He's also 22.

Like I said, I'm not arguing the trade since I don't have a horse in the race, but anyone who watches any football at all knows that Stephen Hill does not equal Aaron Hernandez (which is how you put it in your post).
 
[quote name='JoelyPoley']I've only had 3 injuries in 3 ccm seasons. None lasted more than 5 weeks. Has anybody else had problems with serious injuries happening all the time? I'm sure the bears wish they could turn injuries off after losing forte lol.[/QUOTE]

I've only had two minor injuries to Jacoby Ford in my Raiders career, which honestly is not surprising. They've definitely fixed it from last year where everyone was made of glass.

Question: are we starting with pre-existing injuries on?
 
[quote name='bvharris']Hernandez can play WR, and does so with regularity. Hell, the dude plays halfback from time to time. He's rated 79 at WR in the Patriots scheme (I know because I use them in my offline franchise) which makes him their third best WR in these rosters. He's also 22.

Like I said, I'm not arguing the trade since I don't have a horse in the race, but anyone who watches any football at all knows that Stephen Hill does not equal Aaron Hernandez (which is how you put it in your post).[/QUOTE]

If we're going the realistic route...no way the pats line up Hernandez as their #1 WR 3 years from now when lloyd and welker are gone. Obviously they are not exact equals right now, one is a rookie. His ratings could easily soar or plummet by Week 8. Especially with 5 players involved, no way each will equal in current value. I was under the impression since he wants to start Mallett that he's looking to the future. Im giving him his future #1 WR if he progresses him correctly and the current Nfl #1 CB. I get a young #1 TE and Brady - who will play at his current level for what...3 years tops? He's 35 yrs old right now. i get your point that hernandez > hill, but i also think revis > brady. It's a trade so there is give and take.
 
[quote name='Twick87']This is getting ridiculous. maybe we should've just done a fantasy draft...[/QUOTE]

You think that would have stopped people from wanting to trade? lol. It's just a little conversation. I don't think anyone is going to get hurt from it. Thia issue was going to come up one way or another. Better to get it sorted out now.
 
[quote name='n8rockerasu']You think that would have stopped people from wanting to trade? lol. It's just a little conversation. I don't think anyone is going to get hurt from it. Thia issue was going to come up one way or another. Better to get it sorted out now.[/QUOTE]

Besides, compared to some of the trade discussion bloodbaths from the other league last year, this is basically Ladies' Society Garden Club Afternoon Tea. :lol:
 
Mr. L0adz,

just tossing in my opinion, but i too, have no horse in this race.

In my opinion, it looks like you're honestly selling snake oil when you're tying to hype up Stephen Hill.

The part you keep bringing up is "down the road, stephen hill will be great'.

The part you're leaving out(and perhaps dont realize), is that this (and most other leagues) probably wont REACH 3 seasons this year.

Guys get bored, get burned out. I'm not seeing stephen hill progressing enough to Replace Brady OR hernandez in a 1:1 swap. Great, you're giving him revis for Brady. But Hernandez is a top 5 TE in the real NFL, how does this translate to the pats trash in this league?

I'll just leave you with this bite of knowledge:

Had Hernandez not missed two games last year, he would have finished with over 80 receptions and 1,000 receiving yards.

Stats like those are better than most wide receivers.
 
I don't think anyone is denying Hernadez is light years ahead of Hill. But this is madden and speed is boss when it comes to madden.
 
[quote name='Chetty12']I don't think anyone is denying Hernadez is light years ahead of Hill. But this is madden and speed is boss when it comes to madden.[/QUOTE]

Not for nothing, but the only tight end in the entire game faster than Hernandez is Vernon Davis (90 to 89). Fast WRs are a dime a dozen.

I do understand trading away Brady and Hernandez though (after all, I traded away both as the Pats last year), and I don't really think it's the end of the world. Hell, I traded Brady for Colt McCoy (and others).

The only thing that confuses me is why the Pats are willing to take on Mark Sanchez's big ass contract if they don't even intend to start him. I know it probably needed to be that way to make the money work for the Jets, but it just seems kind of strange that the Pats would trade away two elite players and still need to take on that poison pill of a contract. His cap hit only goes up every year, he could be a major anchor around their neck in a season or two.

Anyway, I realize I've slipped into evaluating the trade, which I said I wouldn't do, so I'll shut up now. Carry on, gents. :D
 
so under "more..."-"statistics"-"coach stats" I noticed the game puts all made user coaches as using west coast offense and spread defense

also "more..."-"my career"-"my goals" and your weekly game goals are all passing oriented, some teams which we know many teams aren't suited for these type goals

looked in OS and it looks like there really isn't an answer right now, the best thread I found was this
http://www.operationsports.com/forums/madden-nfl-football/570077-how-change-coach-schemes-ccm.html
 
Lost in all this discussion today is the fact that 10 people still have not joined the league. PM's have been sent to everyone too. I'm going to give them through tomorrow. But come Monday morning, we may start looking for replacements. There is going to be an expectation to play a game once every 4 days. It shouldn't take 2 days to log on and accept an invitation.
 
Had Hernandez not missed two games last year, he would have finished with over 80 receptions and 1,000 receiving yards.

Stats like those are better than most wide receivers.


Stats like this are misleading. Lol nobody is denying hernandez is a great receiving tight end in the nfl. But thats what he is...a receiving TIGHT END. Please show me where he's lined up on the outside on a regular basis against the defense's #1 corner. That's all i'm saying. Dont get me wrong, i think he's a great player, but you got to understand the team he is on when looking at stats. Its not like the patriots pound the ball and use clock. Plus theres the beast of a man Gronk playing alongside him.

I see your point of not going over 3 seasons, which would basically null my reasons for hill.and defeat the purpose of developing young talent. if you think my trade is too lopsided, what do you (Or anyone else) think would be fair compensation?
 
[quote name='bvharris']Not for nothing, but the only tight end in the entire game faster than Hernandez is Vernon Davis (90 to 89). Fast WRs are a dime a dozen.

I do understand trading away Brady and Hernandez though (after all, I traded away both as the Pats last year), and I don't really think it's the end of the world. Hell, I traded Brady for Colt McCoy (and others).

The only thing that confuses me is why the Pats are willing to take on Mark Sanchez's big ass contract if they don't even intend to start him. I know it probably needed to be that way to make the money work for the Jets, but it just seems kind of strange that the Pats would trade away two elite players and still need to take on that poison pill of a contract. His cap hit only goes up every year, he could be a major anchor around their neck in a season or two.

Anyway, I realize I've slipped into evaluating the trade, which I said I wouldn't do, so I'll shut up now. Carry on, gents. :D[/QUOTE]

The main reason for the inclusion of Sanchez is bc the pats only have 2 qbs right now. The minimum is 2, and if we cant pick up free agents til week 4, then this trade cant happen. The money also factors in. He could also release Sanchez and not incur penalties. I believe the bonuses are to be paid by the original team. Please correct me if im wrong. And feel free to evaluate the trade hahaha. It's cool to have an unbiased 3rd party. What would make it "fair"?
 
[quote name='Hemingway012']Just wanted to point out what the jets owner said. he doesnt plain on cutting 8 people he is thinking about one player.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, his way of handling it was at least deemed reasonable by most people. Conversely, cutting 8 guys, and lowering your team to 48 players isn't acceptable. Like I said though, that's why we needed to get this sorted out, to come up with a policy that is fair to everyone. Cutting one player to get under the cap isn't nearly as damaging to the team.

[quote name='fsecreast']Honestly I think the trade should go through, and then let these guys figure out how to work out the cap. If he has to cut 8 players to get under the cap, then let him do it. I don't see the big deal.

This is a video game. Comparing it to what a real life team would do is silly. People are supposed to have fun playing this game and if they want certain guys on their team we should let that happen.

I'm not in favor in placing all these restrictions on trading because it really hurts the people who got stuck with shitty teams(like me, the Browns). I feel like all they do is ensure i'll be stuck with a crap team for the duration of this league.[/QUOTE]

These restrictions are meant to protect the integrity of the teams. Nobody here signed a contract to play for 5 seasons. Wait till somebody takes a string of 5-6 losses, you'll start hearing people talking about being "burnt out". If they completely destroyed their team along the way, it's going to hurt the longevity of the league. I'm speaking from experience here. I'm not just making this stuff up.

[quote name='hammurabi1337']Question: are we starting with pre-existing injuries on?[/QUOTE]

Again, the settings and rules are listed in the OP. Please check it in the future. You'll find an answer to your questions most of the time. But no, pre-existing injuries are not on.

[quote name='siradam134']The part you're leaving out(and perhaps dont realize), is that this (and most other leagues) probably wont REACH 3 seasons this year.[/QUOTE]

Not sure how to take this comment. We started in November last year, with half the league full, and still completed 3 seasons. I think we can do better than that this year. I agree, the members will probably change, but with a full league this time, why would completing 3 seasons be any harder than last year?
 
[quote name='dr0ppinL0adz']The main reason for the inclusion of Sanchez is bc the pats only have 2 qbs right now. The minimum is 2, and if we cant pick up free agents til week 4, then this trade cant happen. The money also factors in. He could also release Sanchez and not incur penalties. I believe the bonuses are to be paid by the original team. Please correct me if im wrong. And feel free to evaluate the trade hahaha. It's cool to have an unbiased 3rd party. What would make it "fair"?[/QUOTE]

I assume that the new team assumes all of the financial responsibilities for the player. I suppose it could be the way you're suggesting, but I doubt that the game works that way. Someone should definitely confirm that, since it'll be a factor in plenty of trades.

If I were the Pats, I'd rather have Tebow if it's just to be a backup, since his contract is much more reasonable. Although if I were the Pats, I'd never make this trade to begin with. That's the Pats fan in me talking though, since even getting the best CB in the game wouldn't make up for having to see Tom Brady in green and white.
 
Here's some random notes about the players left to join. I was sending everyone in the league friend request and with the ones that havn't joined i sent a message on xbox live to their gt saying you sent them a p.m and were waiting for them to join.

Dvo- We all know his situation.

Steggy- He was talking to me about trades earlier this week and hasn't been on xbox live for a couple days so i feel like he's just busy and hasn't been on cag the last few days.

H3adkilla- His profile says he hasn't been on live since 9/7 and he hasn't checked into the thread. That just seems a little fishy to me.

Swift900- In the OP his gt is listed as swiftfix, when i do a friend request it says the GT doesn't exist.

The rest of them seem to havn't have been on madden or checked in for the last couple of days.
 
[quote name='bvharris']I assume that the new team assumes all of the financial responsibilities for the player. I suppose it could be the way you're suggesting, but I doubt that the game works that way. Someone should definitely confirm that, since it'll be a factor in plenty of trades.[/QUOTE]

In past maddens, the way it has worked is that the team that traded away a player was responsible for the bonus money and would absorb the cap penalties during the trade. Therefore, a team that traded for a player, wouldn't incur any cap penalties for cutting a player they traded for. You'd have to ask him but i don't think he planned on cutting him anyway. But someone might have to test it out to see if they changed it or not.
 
[quote name='Chetty12']And another question, more about the cag pm'ing system, how come it doesn't save my sent messages?[/QUOTE]

If you send them from the mobile version of the site, it won't save them.

[quote name='Chetty12']In past maddens, the way it has worked is that the team that traded away a player was responsible for the bonus money and would absorb the cap penalties during the trade. [/QUOTE]

There's never been salaries or caps in past online franchises, so I wouldn't assume anything. :D
 
[quote name='bvharris']
There's never been salaries or caps in past online franchises, so I wouldn't assume anything. :D[/QUOTE]

That's how they worked them in offline franchises, i probably should have stated that. And yeah i wouldn't assume it either, it just hasn't been something i've tested out because trades with the cpu are either impossible or they just give you draft picks in return.
 
[quote name='bvharris']If you send them from the mobile version of the site, it won't save them.[/QUOTE]

Thanks, i use the mobile site on my phone but i've sent a couple messages from my laptop this weekend and it hasn't saved those. Maybe because the mobile site is active on my phone?
 
[quote name='Chetty12']H3adkilla- His profile says he hasn't been on live since 9/7 and he hasn't checked into the thread. That just seems a little fishy to me.

Swift900- In the OP his gt is listed as swiftfix, when i do a friend request it says the GT doesn't exist.[/QUOTE]

h3adkilla is one of DVO's friends that he brought in. I don't know if he's got the same situation as him, but more info would be nice.

Swift900, I can't remember what his actual GT is, but he added me as a friend after he signed up, so I was able to send the invite that way.

[quote name='Chetty12']And another question, more about the cag pm'ing system, how come it doesn't save my sent messages?[/QUOTE]

If you sent the PM from a computer, it should save the message. Just change the pull down box from "inbox" to "sent", and it should be there. I haven't noticed a problem with the messages I sent yesterday.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top