|
|
Post by Rams GM (Frank) on Apr 24, 2015 10:05:30 GMT -5
Another problem that I noticed, and got a couple complaints from a couple GM's for in free agency was the lack of hesitancy to sign any and all players to a max 4 year contract. Obviously, if your trying to win a player in the midst of the free agency frenzy, using the current point system, the 4 year contract really gives you an advantage in that regard. I think part of the problem here is that the 25% standard cap hit is probably not punitive enough to discourage GM's from going all in on a 32 year old running back who we all know is not going to play out his entire 4 year contract. But, that GM figures what the hell and goes all in because he's trying to win now and will deal with the consequences later, and maybe the consequences are not all that big a deal anyways. We see this also in a lot of bad contracts that are traded as well, as many GM's are willing to take a bad contract very easily, because there seems to be very little fear that that cap hit will be punitive in the long term. While raising the cap hit is one solution, I would recommend another, and that is restrictions on contract years based on age.
Again, this is another example from another league that I am in:
Age Restrictions (EXCLUDING QBs and Ks)
18-32 – 4 year deal
33 – 3 year deal
34 – 2 year deal
35+ - 1 year deal
This seems to mirror more what we see in the NFL, because we don't see veterans being signed to max deal contracts because their age is an issue. NFL teams are on the hook for serious money, and the length of contracts is taken more into regard by management.
Just wanted to throw this idea out there...
|
|
|
|
Post by Chargers GM (Andrew) on Apr 24, 2015 11:29:21 GMT -5
I like
|
|
|
|
Post by Colts GM (Darryl) on Apr 24, 2015 12:30:55 GMT -5
This idea seems to dovetail the thoughts of waivers for aged retired players.
In it's individual capacity, aside from waivers, it may not be a bad idea, but it does present issues.
The ability for a GM to bid 4 years on a player can be seen as an attempt to level the bidding field. As an example as to the impediments of limiting the years eligible to bid;
a certain team may believe they are only one player away from seriously competing for the title, but limited to $3 Mil in available cap. The player in question is limited to a 2-year contract. Another team, with the same belief - or perhaps even with hopes of preventing that team from acquiring serious competition status, with much more cap would place a bid at 2 yrs @ $3.1 Mil - leaving the former team without recourse.
While the overall concept may work in theory, I believe the quest for a title is much more important. In closing, I believe waivers will be the adequate way to approach this issue. The question then presented to the GM in seeking a title would be..."Is it worth the future cap hit to sign this player to a 3-year contract, in exchange for title now?
|
|
|
|
Post by Lions GM on Apr 24, 2015 14:19:53 GMT -5
I think the cap hit in general should be higher than 25% for any player waived.I don't like how teams can trade for a player and then waive them the second they get them. a higher cap hit will make owners think twice on bidding huge amounts on players that if they don't work out they would just waive.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rams GM (Frank) on Jun 25, 2015 8:22:18 GMT -5
Gentlemen, Im all in favor of a higher cap as long as we do it incrementally. We will put the age based contract issue to the side for now, and address this problem through the cap hit. At the very least, we need to raise the cap penalty up to 30% to start. The question is do we wait until next year?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 6, 2015 16:02:34 GMT -5
I don't think age should matter on how many years we sign a player. Just my opinion
|
|
|
|
Post by Rams GM (Frank) on Jul 25, 2015 3:00:19 GMT -5
I would be in favor of raising the cap hit, instead of going with a age based contract system. I would propose raising the cap hit in small increments.
My proposal would be to raise the cap hit from 25%, up to 30% in the immediate. If GM's feel it needs to be higher, we can revisit this issue the preceding off-season.
Thoughts?
|
|
|
|
Post by Rams GM (Frank) on Aug 1, 2015 7:42:41 GMT -5
We will be raising the cap penalty from 25% up to 30% starting in January 2016.
Thank you for everybody's thought!
|
|
