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

[quote name='Blade3D']I agree, you still have the opportunity to resign them before anyone, the only one who can screw that up is yourself. Anyone I plan on keeping I am going to make sure to pay...[/QUOTE]

Yeah, upon further reflection you're probably right. Of course you only get one crack at signing a player, so you're going to get screwed at some point. Still, as long as you have an idea on how many players will be departing, who you want to attempt to keep and make the effort, this really shouldn't big a game changer. You'll still be able to try and sign them in free agency as well.
 
Well if the resigning period is only a week, and the following week starts free agency, how can you have another shot at signing them?
 
[quote name='GpNinja']I don't see what's the problem with the contracts. They didn't want to sign so your losing them! Simple as that lol[/QUOTE]

[quote name='Blade3D']I agree, you still have the opportunity to resign them before anyone, the only one who can screw that up is yourself. Anyone I plan on keeping I am going to make sure to pay...[/QUOTE]

I'm not sure if we're all talking about the same thing, but are you guys saying don't see the potential problem with having 27 expiring contracts when you were only supposed to have maybe 18? In almost all cases, those players are going to want raises...so you most likely won't have enough money to re-sign all of them. Kenny Britt is a good example of this, as he was supposed to still be under his rookie contract for another year...and only be making about $2.3 million. Re-signing him early is surely going to cost a lot more. I guess you could argue that it's just forcing you to make a decision earlier, but it was still an unnecessary fuck up on EA's part.
 
[quote name='jza1218']Hakeem Nicks is still on a rookie contract that doesn't expire until after next year, but he's unsigned for 2013 in this game. Just awesome (and no DVO, he won't be hitting free agency, so don't bother looking into him).[/QUOTE]

everyone gets one shot at signing there players and everyone has the same issue. u either sign them or u dont nothing anyone can do to chance it really. maybe some of these players had a opt off of contract type thing and they opted out. plus if WRs hit the FA and once n8 says go im off to the races
 
Just want to throw this out there as an idea, do we want to put a cap on contract length for free agent offers? I know the other league had some issues with people getting players just by offering them 7-8 year deals (which of course automatically get backloaded), knowing full well that the league won't play that many seasons. Seems like a pretty shady way to make sure you get the free agent you want.
 
[quote name='CAGLeagueSports']Just want to throw this out there as an idea, do we want to put a cap on contract length for free agent offers? I know the other league had some issues with people getting players just by offering them 7-8 year deals (which of course automatically get backloaded), knowing full well that the league won't play that many seasons. Seems like a pretty shady way to make sure you get the free agent you want.[/QUOTE]

I'm ok with limiting it to five, but what are you going to do if someone goes to six? Do you have the power to release that player? And then next offseason, do we again limit it to five years? Or do we go to 4?
 
[quote name='CAGLeagueSports']Just want to throw this out there as an idea, do we want to put a cap on contract length for free agent offers? I know the other league had some issues with people getting players just by offering them 7-8 year deals (which of course automatically get backloaded), knowing full well that the league won't play that many seasons. Seems like a pretty shady way to make sure you get the free agent you want.[/QUOTE]

i dont think there should be a cap then we would have to do all 2 or 3 year deals and the cost of contracts would be crazy. and roster wouldnt be able to fill i think u should only be allowed to go 1 extra year than what the player wants in his contract so if they want a 5 year contract then the max u can offer is 6 years. and trust everyone will do the right thing. plus if everyone is allowed to do 7 year deals then it fair and then it all comes down to who pays more wins like a really contract battle goes in the real nfl. IMO that is all
 
[quote name='DVO21']i dont think there should be a cap then we would have to do all 2 or 3 year deals and the cost of contracts would be crazy. and roster wouldnt be able to fill i think u should only be allowed to go 1 extra year than what the player wants in his contract so if they want a 5 year contract then the max u can offer is 6 years. and trust everyone will do the right thing. plus if everyone is allowed to do 7 year deals then it fair and then it all comes down to who pays more wins like a really contract battle goes in the real nfl. IMO that is all[/QUOTE]

So everyone should make seven-year offers is what you're saying?
 
[quote name='CAGLeagueSports']Just want to throw this out there as an idea, do we want to put a cap on contract length for free agent offers? I know the other league had some issues with people getting players just by offering them 7-8 year deals (which of course automatically get backloaded), knowing full well that the league won't play that many seasons. Seems like a pretty shady way to make sure you get the free agent you want.[/QUOTE]

I'd highly endorse this.

It's too late for us since people already started doing it, pretty much everyone had to at that point or risk being at a disadvantage. Hell, I've done it myself now. If you can get out ahead of this, I think it would be a very good idea.

We might think about capping it starting next offseason, but it's still a discussion we need to have.
 
it would end that problem pretty quick and easy. people should be able to offer wut they want for contracts alot of people try to stay away form bonus so if they trade them or cut them they dont lose money that wouldnt work in real life either and could be considered just as cheap. it really comes down to who has a better contract and if that player would rather play with that team or not.
 
[quote name='DVO21']that wouldnt work in real life either and could be considered just as cheap.[/QUOTE]

The majority of players in the NFL are on contracts which can be cut without cap penalty. Plenty of stars also have contracts which can be cut without cap penalty (many such contracts are in the game already). It definitely happens in real life.
 
But you're basically endorsing people offering disingenuous contracts. You know that we won't play seven years, so load that baby up and you'll get a player you want without really having to pay him, since the deal is backloaded.
 
I dont see whats wrong with a 5 year deal since many players in real life do sign for that long...I'd rather have that then everybody sign 2-3 year deals which cause everyone's contracts to be front-loaded. I think that 1 year beyond what the player wants is reasonable.
 
The problem with the one year beyond what the player wants is that there really is no way to regulate it, unless someone takes the time to log it for everyone.
 
[quote name='DVO21']it would end that problem pretty quick and easy. people should be able to offer wut they want for contracts alot of people try to stay away form bonus so if they trade them or cut them they dont lose money that wouldnt work in real life either and could be considered just as cheap. it really comes down to who has a better contract and if that player would rather play with that team or not.[/QUOTE]

How is it "realistic" for people to overpay on a backloaded contract that they know they won't have to follow through with because the league won't last that long? That isn't "strategy". It's gaming the system. The only potential problem I could see coming out of it is players who WANT long-term deals like you said.

I haven't done extensive research or anything, and I'm really just thinking out loud, but my basic idea would be that you can only offer the player the EXACT amount of years they're asking for. Then, if people want to overpay, that's their business and will be to the detriment of their team. I also don't know how common it is for players to request 7-8 year deals. But it's insulting to act like this wasn't a legitimate problem when tanabeo started it in the other league.
 
well if we only polan on playing 2 or 3 years then we should only offer 2 or 3 years contracts and then people will be paying crazy amounts. lets say u have a young WR thats a star or young QB u dont think a team in real life would offer them a 7 year deal or u think they just give him a 2 or 3 or 4 year deal i think a contract depends on a players long term value to the team not how long we are going to play. we should offer contracts in a realistic type form
 
[quote name='CAGLeagueSports'] I also don't know how common it is for players to request 7-8 year deals.[/QUOTE]

I've never seen it.

[quote name='CAGLeagueSports']But it's insulting to act like this wasn't a legitimate problem when tanabeo started it in the other league.[/QUOTE]

I can officially state from the office of the commissioner that it is a problem. Unfortunately it's one we're stuck with, at least for the present. And I'm not saying this from on high either, I got down in the muck myself and extended a couple of my guys to long deals. Once other people started though, there really wasn't much choice.

I'd highly urge you guys to follow this suggestion, I think it will create a much more realistic FA system in the long run. You all have the benefit of being behind us as we make our way through this quagmire that is Connected Careers. It would be silly not to learn from our mistakes.
 
[quote name='DVO21']well if we only polan on playing 2 or 3 years then we should only offer 2 or 3 years contracts and then people will be paying crazy amounts. lets say u have a young WR thats a star or young QB u dont think a team in real life would offer them a 7 year deal or u think they just give him a 2 or 3 or 4 year deal i think a contract depends on a players long term value to the team not how long we are going to play. we should offer contracts in a realistic type form[/QUOTE]

My initial thought was no less than 4 years (as getting through 5 seasons is still a fairly realistic goal for this league). I wouldn't be opposed to 5 year deals...but if the player isn't asking for it...I don't see why it's necessary. An argument of "But then I can't sign all the star players!" isn't a good enough reason. I still find it mildly amusing that some people still think all the trades they make and all these crazy moves are realistic. You SHOULD be forced to juggle your finances when assembling your roster. That's kind of the point of the salary cap.
 
I've noticed that most guys in my offline career ask for 5 years or less. Very rarely (for example, Matt Ryan did) guys ask for 6 years. I've never seen anyone ask for 7.
 
[quote name='Blade3D']Almost positive the max that can be offered is 6 year deals[/QUOTE]

I think it's 7 total, so if you're offering a deal to a guy during the season the max is 6, and it gets tacked on with the last season of his existing deal. In the offseason, you can offer the full 7.
 
ya matt ryan asked me for a 6 year deal i nthe other league but once signed him to that deal it said 7 years but im guessing that becuz he was still under the other contract they just added on to the deal as one deal
 
[quote name='KasterDB']I've noticed that most guys in my offline career ask for 5 years or less. Very rarely (for example, Matt Ryan did) guys ask for 6 years. I've never seen anyone ask for 7.[/QUOTE]

Well, does limiting it to only being able to offer the exact years the player is asking for seem reasonable then? I mean...I know we can't undercut what they're asking for. They just won't sign if we do that. But if the contract length is standard for everyone...and it's just the dollar amount that's variable, one would think that would cause the people who really NEED the position to bid higher...since we would all know we're working from the same scale. Again, I'm just thinking as I go, but that sounds fair to me.
 
[quote name='CAGLeagueSports']
I haven't done extensive research or anything, and I'm really just thinking out loud, but my basic idea would be that you can only offer the player the EXACT amount of years they're asking for. Then, if people want to overpay, that's their business and will be to the detriment of their team. I also don't know how common it is for players to request 7-8 year deals. But it's insulting to act like this wasn't a legitimate problem when tanabeo started it in the other league.[/QUOTE]

That makes sense to me. Only problem is making sure everyone follows the rule. I always see the same few guys posting in this thread. Makes me wonder how many out of the 32 team owners actually follow it. I could easily see someone offer a long deal, then say they never saw that it wasn't allowed because they don't follow the thread. I do like the idea of only offering the contract length that the player is requesting. No more or less.
 
[quote name='jza1218']Well if the resigning period is only a week, and the following week starts free agency, how can you have another shot at signing them?[/QUOTE]
I meant that happens during the season.
 
that would work but how would u really know when they are signing there own guys if there telling the truth. i think allowing people to go 1 year under and 1 year over wut the person wants is fair. i have plenty of cap space still even with eli's contract so this doesnt really effect me that much but i think that the 1 year over and under is pretty fair
 
[quote name='Konfusion']That makes sense to me. Only problem is making sure everyone follows the rule. I always see the same few guys posting in this thread. Makes me wonder how many out of the 32 team owners actually follow it. I could easily see someone offer a long deal, then say they never saw that it wasn't allowed because they don't follow the thread. I do like the idea of only offering the contract length that the player is requesting. No more or less.[/QUOTE]

I completely agree...and I feel like we'd just have to rule with an iron fist on that one. I'll send out a PM to everyone outlining how we're approaching the offseason, so no one can claim they didn't know the rules (I'll also add it to the "Free Agents" section of the OP). And then, anybody who breaks the rule, they have to cut the player. Plain and simple. If anybody doesn't like it, oh well, follow the rules next time.
 
I'd suggest just putting in a hard cap, say 5 years. Whatever seems sufficient to mitigate the problem of backloading. Because you really have no way of knowing what length of deal guys in their contract year are asking for in-season.
 
[quote name='DVO21']that would work but how would u really know when they are signing there own guys if there telling the truth. i think allowing people to go 1 year under and 1 year over wut the person wants is fair[/QUOTE]

Is re-signing your own players really an issue though? At that point, you're only competing with yourself. From what I saw, it seemed to be more of a problem in the bidding war style of free agency.
 
[quote name='bvharris']I'd suggest just putting in a hard cap, say 5 years. Whatever seems sufficient to mitigate the problem of backloading. Because you really have no way of knowing what length of deal guys in their contract year are asking for in-season.[/QUOTE]

But what happens to the players who are asking for more than that? That's my only concern.
 
[quote name='bvharris']I'd suggest just putting in a hard cap, say 5 years. Whatever seems sufficient to mitigate the problem of backloading. Because you really have no way of knowing what length of deal guys in their contract year are asking for in-season.[/QUOTE]

but they may stop talking to u if u under cut them in years as well this is a really sticky situation never know how it could fail or turn out good
 
[quote name='CAGLeagueSports']Is re-signing your own players really an issue though? At that point, you're only competing with yourself. From what I saw, it seemed to be more of a problem in the bidding war style of free agency.[/QUOTE]

It's not just the bidding war, it's also the cap space. That's just as much a factor with in-season signings. Yeah, you're only bidding against yourself, but stretching out the big cap hits to the later years allows you much more flexibility to take on more payroll.

I'll throw myself under the bus and say that the long deal I signed Darren McFadden to during the season almost criminally underpays him in the first few season. I actually ended up with more current year cap space than before he re-upped.
 
[quote name='DVO21']but they may stop talking to u if u under cut them in years as well this is a really sticky situation never know how it could fail or turn out good[/QUOTE]

Yeah, that's why I thought just offering what they're asking was the best way to go. And for re-signing your own guys, I guess we'd just have to not worry about it too much. Honestly, that's a similar system to what the NHL has been trying to set up...setting a max contract length for free agents, but allowing a longer length for their current team, to give that team a bit of an advantage in keeping their own players (which is good for the fans).

I don't think that's a terrible idea, as like I said, when you're re-signing guys during the season (and even in the re-sign week after the Super Bowl), you're just competing with yourself. After that though, you're trying to outbid other teams...and that's when the fairness issue really comes into play. Does that make sense to anyone else?
 
[quote name='bvharris']It's not just the bidding war, it's also the cap space. That's just as much a factor with in-season signings. Yeah, you're only bidding against yourself, but stretching out the big cap hits to the later years allows you much more flexibility to take on more payroll.

I'll throw myself under the bus and say that the long deal I signed Darren McFadden to during the season almost criminally underpays him in the first few season. I actually ended up with more current year cap space than before he re-upped.[/QUOTE]

I hear you. I'm just not really sure EA gave us a feasible way to regulate it. Like most things with EA, it feels like we're just trying to make the best of a shitty situation.
 
[quote name='CAGLeagueSports']Yeah, that's why I thought just offering what they're asking was the best way to go.[/QUOTE]

I've had several guys who stopped talking to me after I offered them exactly what they asked for. If their interest is "low" or thereabouts, which it almost always is given the crappy legacy score of our coaches, you really do need to overpay them (at least in terms of dollars if not years) to get them to sign.
 
[quote name='CAGLeagueSports']Yeah, that's why I thought just offering what they're asking was the best way to go. And for re-signing your own guys, I guess we'd just have to not worry about it too much. Honestly, that's a similar system to what the NHL has been trying to set up...setting a max contract length for free agents, but allowing a longer length for their current team.

I don't think that's a terrible idea, as like I said, when you're re-signing guys during the season (and even in the re-sign week after the Super Bowl), you're just competing with yourself. After that though, you're trying to outbid other teams...and that's when the fairness issue really comes into play. Does that make sense to anyone else?[/QUOTE]

i think that makes it fair sign players that were already on ur team to wut u want and when it comes to open FA u have a 5 year hard cap that everyone must go by
 
[quote name='DVO21']i think that makes it fair sign players that were already on ur team to wut u want and when it comes to open FA u have a 5 year hard cap that everyone must go by[/QUOTE]

That makes sense as long as some shifty character doesn't sign a player to an inflated 1-year deal and then tack on a 6-year extension once they've signed. :D
 
[quote name='bvharris']I've had several guys who stopped talking to me after I offered them exactly what they asked for. If their interest is "low" or thereabouts, which it almost always is given the crappy legacy score of our coaches, you really do need to overpay them (at least in terms of dollars if not years) to get them to sign.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, I was only talking about the length of the deal. The dollar amount can vary. Like I said, at least that way, teams that really NEED the player would have to pay more if they really want him.

[quote name='DVO21']i think that makes it fair sign players that were already on ur team to wut u want and when it comes to open FA u have a 5 year hard cap that everyone must go by[/QUOTE]

No, not 5 years, lol. Just whatever length the player is asking for you can't go over (hmm...probably wouldn't be anything wrong with going under if you wanted right?). As we've talked about, not many players ask for over 5 year deals, but I at least want to have a contingency plan for those that do, so it's ok to offer them the length they're asking for. You follow me? lol
 
[quote name='DVO21']well u just gave everyone that idea so thats been ruined now[/QUOTE]

I understand the Madden criminal mind. I'm like those hackers that companies hire to try and compromise their security. ;)
 
[quote name='bvharris']That makes sense as long as some shifty character doesn't sign a player to an inflated 1-year deal and then tack on a 6-year extension once they've signed. :D[/QUOTE]

Geez...all right, Dr. Tanabeo Evil. I didn't even think of that one. Damn...that one year deal would have to be incredibly inflated though for the player to take it over a 4-5 year deal wouldn't you think? I'm trying to think of how to regulate that, but at some point, I feel like there's only so much we can do...other than just request that people not be evil d-bags, lol.

The only thing I can think of is just to tell people that it's not allowed, and if anyone is caught doing it, it's a strike and they have to cut the player, no questions asked.
 
[quote name='bvharris']Must be a good football game on.[/QUOTE]

This is probably the only time I'll pull for the Patriots. If Houston loses, that puts the Colts in control of their own destiny for the AFC South title.
 
[quote name='pitfallharry219']This is probably the only time I'll pull for the Patriots. If Houston loses, that puts the Colts in control of their own destiny for the AFC South title.[/QUOTE]

Lets go Texans!!!
 
Rooting for Houston so Denver can have a bye round 1. Also I might be able to go to the playoff game if they're hosting a game in round 2 :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top