2014 Forum Mock: Announcement Thread

[JO_75]

We are picking teams/starting out later on in the week....

 

 

 

We will make the thread at 4:30 pm(my time. Add Three Hours if on east coast) 

 

So what about signups?

[SecretAgentMan]

So what about signups?

We shall consult and create the meeting date

[JO_75]

We shall consult and create the meeting date

 

Ok. I'm ready whenever. I already have a team in mind and have been working out what I want to do with that team. 

[stm85]

Ok. I'm ready whenever. I already have a team in mind and have been working out what I want to do with that team. 

 

Same here. Just make it late enough for those of us who have work to have an equal shot at every team.

[NFLfan123]

'Sup

[ClintLB8]

Yeah, I have a team I've been watching closely that I really want. Perfect scenario for how I like running my teams.

[The Oakland Cathedral]

I have a plan set in place for my top 3 teams. If I get my top team I think I can turn them into Super Bowl contenders on paper really easily.

[Guest Mr. Nobody]

We are picking teams/starting out later on in the week....

We will make the thread at 4:30 pm(my time. Add Three Hours if on east coast) 

add five more east way over the pond and yep was sleeping fast past midnight...

[SecretAgentMan]

add five more east way over the pond and yep was sleeping fast past midnight...

Well then send me or someone else your top 3. That's the only time I'm free lol...

We can prob do it early Saturday our time

[Guest Mr. Nobody]

Well then send me or someone else your top 3. That's the only time I'm free lol...

We can prob do it early Saturday our time

nah, don't worry about being too late for me, it's fine lol

want Ravens or Panthers; don't mind Texans or Green Bay; as a push I'll take Titans or Vikes

easy peasy lol

[Ozzsome]

I want to make a suggestion regarding a rule change, which also could help members decide which team they want to take

 

 

The rules say, if I read that correctly, that if you cut a player Total Savings=Base Salary

 

For example:

If the Ravens owner cuts Haloti Ngata, he would save his base salary which equals 8.5 stars

 

In my opinion it would be more realistic if we take 2014 Cap Hits site from Spotrac, in this case for the Ravens(which would look like this: http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/baltimore-ravens/cap-hit/ ) and take as the total savings, the cap figure(last column) - dead money (second to last) which would result, for Haloti Ngata, in 1 star, which is the amount the Ravens would save for him

Total Savings=Cap Figure-Dead Money

Another example, if the Ravens owner would cut Joe Flacco he would save -23 stars, because the dead money (38) outweighs the cap figure (15). Instead of the 6 stars the owner would save if we keep the Total Savings=Base Salary.

 

 

For trades I would use the same system with the (again the Ngata example) previous owner of Ngata saving 1 star and the new owner only spending 1.

 

 

If I didnt understand the rule right or read something wrong, I apologize for you guys reading all this and wasting your time just because I am kinda stupid lol

[JO_75]

I want to make a suggestion regarding a rule change, which also could help members decide which team they want to take

 

 

The rules say, if I read that correctly, that if you cut a player Total Savings=Base Salary

 

For example:

If the Ravens owner cuts Haloti Ngata, he would save his base salary which equals 8.5 stars

 

In my opinion it would be more realistic if we take 2014 Cap Hits site from Spotrac, in this case for the Ravens(which would look like this: http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/baltimore-ravens/cap-hit/ ) and take as the total savings, the cap figure(last column) - dead money (second to last) which would result, for Haloti Ngata, in 1 star, which is the amount the Ravens would save for him

Total Savings=Cap Figure-Dead Money

Another example, if the Ravens owner would cut Joe Flacco he would save -23 stars, because the dead money (38) outweighs the cap figure (15). Instead of the 6 stars the owner would save if we keep the Total Savings=Base Salary.

 

 

For trades I would use the same system with the (again the Ngata example) previous owner of Ngata saving 1 star and the new owner only spending 1.

 

 

If I didnt understand the rule right or read something wrong, I apologize for you guys reading all this and wasting your time just because I am kinda stupid lol

 

Wow....... I would agree with this 100%. I never understood why we haven't took dead money into account before but I think this is what we have been needing to prevent the wacky trades and cuts that we have seen in this game. It would def make you think twice about cutting a player or trading for a player taking all this into account. 

 

This would also be inline with what actually happens in the NFL.

[Ozzsome]

Wow....... I would agree with this 100%. I never understood why we haven't took dead money into account before but I think this is what we have been needing to prevent the wacky trades and cuts that we have seen in this game. It would def make you think twice about cutting a player or trading for a player taking all this into account. 

 

This would also be inline with what actually happens in the NFL.

I agree, some of those crazy trades wouldn't happen anymore

 

On the other side I just discovered, as we cannot restructure any contracts, that teams like the Cowboys or the Saints are almost impossible to manage because they are 26 and 15 million over the cap...  maybe some additional rule regarding those teams

[Guest Mr. Nobody]

I agree, some of those crazy trades wouldn't happen anymore

On the other side I just discovered, as we cannot restructure any contracts, that teams like the Cowboys or the Saints are almost impossible to manage because they are 26 and 15 million over the cap...  maybe some additional rule regarding those teams

 

you can always let graham go and also cut romo? lol...

[PaRAYdise]

Well cutting Romo Would put them 12 mil more over the Cap, thats the prob.

Even though taking dead money into account is probably the right idea.

It seems To be to complicated based on no restructures and roster/workout bonuses are also calculated in dead money calculations.

My Brother and I have discussed it but havent come up with a scheme that would work properly so far.

I would say The best option probably would be staying with the rules we currently have.

[Ozzsome]

you can always let graham go and also cut romo? lol...

Under my suggestion you cant because the dead money romo has outweighs his cap figure and you therefore wouldn't save any money

 

His Cap Figure is 21.5 while his dead money is 41.5 stars so cutting him would result in you paying extra 20 stars. if you take my suggestion into account

[T3hRaven]

Wow....... I would agree with this 100%. I never understood why we haven't took dead money into account before but I think this is what we have been needing to prevent the wacky trades and cuts that we have seen in this game. It would def make you think twice about cutting a player or trading for a player taking all this into account.

This would also be inline with what actually happens in the NFL.

Didn't we have people cheating the cap and having issues with math using the simplified version? You'd also have to account for post June 1 designation, that's how the Cowboys will get under the cap irl. I'm not against limiting the trades though, people do dumb stuff in this game.

I don't know who came up with the contract matching thing, but I'd really like to endorse that idea. Most teams will lock up their own guys if they can and the way FA works in this makes that difficult to do. Even if it's just a thing for one or two players, it'd still be nice to have. Just thinking back to last year, I probably would have been able to keep Vollmer and Talib, which is what I wanted to do and what the Pats actually did.

[gabefergy]

I want to make a suggestion regarding a rule change, which also could help members decide which team they want to take

The rules say, if I read that correctly, that if you cut a player Total Savings=Base Salary

For example:

If the Ravens owner cuts Haloti Ngata, he would save his base salary which equals 8.5 stars

In my opinion it would be more realistic if we take 2014 Cap Hits site from Spotrac, in this case for the Ravens(which would look like this: http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/baltimore-ravens/cap-hit/ ) and take as the total savings, the cap figure(last column) - dead money (second to last) which would result, for Haloti Ngata, in 1 star, which is the amount the Ravens would save for him

Total Savings=Cap Figure-Dead Money

Another example, if the Ravens owner would cut Joe Flacco he would save -23 stars, because the dead money (38) outweighs the cap figure (15). Instead of the 6 stars the owner would save if we keep the Total Savings=Base Salary.

For trades I would use the same system with the (again the Ngata example) previous owner of Ngata saving 1 star and the new owner only spending 1.

If I didnt understand the rule right or read something wrong, I apologize for you guys reading all this and wasting your time just because I am kinda stupid lol

We will be doing this.

[JO_75]

We will be doing this.

 

We will? So has it been agreed upon by everyone?

[gabefergy]

We will? So has it been agreed upon by everyone?

Yeah I proposed it a while ago. Our commission voted and we agreed to go with it. If you read the rules posted I think it even mentions it, but SAM forgot to edit out the old.

 

edit: minor snafoo, we are still voting but it has been proposed to make this change

[Ozzsome]

We will be doing this.

the only problem - I was looking through teams salary cap - is that you propably can't get the Cowboys under the cap, because players like Romo have more dead money than cap figure which will result in them being even more over the cap and even if you manage to somehow get them under the cap you won't have much players left. As owners can't restructure contracts we may need some additional rule

[T3hRaven]

the only problem - I was looking through teams salary cap - is that you propably can't get the Cowboys under the cap, because players like Romo have more dead money than cap figure which will result in them being even more over the cap and even if you manage to somehow get them under the cap you won't have much players left. As owners can't restructure contracts we may need some additional rule

That's why they need post June 1 designation. Cutting Romo is a stupid move anyway. Free, Austin, and maybe even Ware are cap cut candidates.

[gabefergy]

the only problem - I was looking through teams salary cap - is that you propably can't get the Cowboys under the cap, because players like Romo have more dead money than cap figure which will result in them being even more over the cap and even if you manage to somehow get them under the cap you won't have much players left. As owners can't restructure contracts we may need some additional rule

That is an interesting point.. The Cowboys are really the only team in that kind of predicament though so maybe some kind of exception can be made for them. I think hey could still make it under the cap, but it would require cutting almost the entire team.

[gabefergy]

That's why they need post June 1 designation. Cutting Romo is a stupid move anyway. Free, Austin, and maybe even Ware are cap cut candidates.

I dont think a post June 1 designation is really an option because it would just complicate matters.

[stm85]

Didn't we have people cheating the cap and having issues with math using the simplified version? You'd also have to account for post June 1 designation, that's how the Cowboys will get under the cap irl. I'm not against limiting the trades though, people do dumb stuff in this game.

I don't know who came up with the contract matching thing, but I'd really like to endorse that idea. Most teams will lock up their own guys if they can and the way FA works in this makes that difficult to do. Even if it's just a thing for one or two players, it'd still be nice to have. Just thinking back to last year, I probably would have been able to keep Vollmer and Talib, which is what I wanted to do and what the Pats actually did.

 

Just for reference, my proposal for contract matching was that teams that had already used their franchise tag may match the contracts of up to 3 players who are signed away in UFA.

 

I also like the idea of using post June 1 cuts, but does spotrac have info that would tell us the difference between the figures between 6/1 cuts and regular cuts? If not, this site has a pretty cool cap calculator feature, although there are some errors as to who is still under contract.

[Ozzsome]

That's why they need post June 1 designation. Cutting Romo is a stupid move anyway. Free, Austin, and maybe even Ware are cap cut candidates.

Would be a stupid move yes, but I was just trying to make a point as Romo has the highest cap hit and the Cowboys are a whooping 26 stars over the cap

[Ozzsome]

That is an interesting point.. The Cowboys are really the only team in that kind of predicament though so maybe some kind of exception can be made for them. I think hey could still make it under the cap, but it would require cutting almost the entire team.

The Saints are 15 stars over the cap, maybe also candidates. but 15 could be manageable, IMO

[gabefergy]

Would be a stupid move yes, but I was just trying to make a point as Romo has the highest cap hit and the Cowboys are a whooping 26 stars over the cap

Maybe we can set it up so every team gets 1 cut that is just base salary ( like a June 1 designation) and then any other cuts trades will be calculated from Cap Hit - Dead Money.

[Ozzsome]

BTW, how much salary do we have at the beginning? 130stars to operate?

[Ozzsome]

Maybe we can set it up so every team gets 1 cut that is just base salary ( like a June 1 designation) and then any other cuts trades will be calculated from Cap Hit - Dead Money.

Sounds good, I would be in favor of it!