|
|
Post by Rams GM (Frank) on Apr 17, 2016 11:07:58 GMT -5
Legacy NFL GM's,
As you all know, the salary cap hit in the league will increase from 25%, up to 30% in August. Remember the original plan was to increase it slowly over the course of time, instead of hitting GM's with a giant cap hit for players that may have been signed under old existing cap hit rules. I believe another 5% would be appropriator in 2017, and we will push to do that. The question that we need to answer however, is what is the end game for the cap hit percentage. Most people would agree that the 25% cap hit is too low, and that's why we are moving it up. Most leagues that I am currently in run a cap hit between 30-35%. What is our goal here? I have heard some people suggest as high as 50%.
Personally, I believe a hit number in the 40% range would be interesting. But I would like to hear other members thoughts.
Thoughts?
|
|
|
|
Post by Colts GM (Darryl) on Apr 17, 2016 14:14:53 GMT -5
Personally, I am under the impression that many GM's take the view that the easier it is, the better.
However, I am further under the impression that convenience can be a major down-fall, especially when there is no recourse to the reckless signing of players to high, long-term contracts, yet highly probable they will retire before their contract expires.
Unfortunately, because retirement carries no risk, the cap hit could be 100% while having zero effect.
I know I am delving two concepts into one, so for purposes of this particular discussion, there must be restrictions that work toward prohibiting such contract offers...either a GM believes in the player enough to offer him the amount and term signed or they don't.
While a 1 year offer perhaps would not be enough to win the player (who is probably in the last year of play), offering contracts of 4 years should carry the cost.
I think a 40% limit would work until such time as we could revisit.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rams GM (Frank) on Apr 17, 2016 14:22:43 GMT -5
Personally, I am under the impression that many GM's take the view that the easier it is, the better. However, I am further under the impression that convenience can be a major down-fall, especially when there is no recourse to the reckless signing of players to high, long-term contracts, yet highly probable they will retire before their contract expires. Unfortunately, because retirement carries no risk, the cap hit could be 100% while having zero effect. I know I am delving two concepts into one, so for purposes of this particular discussion, there must be restrictions that work toward prohibiting such contract offers...either a GM believes in the player enough to offer him the amount and term signed or they don't. While a 1 year offer perhaps would not be enough to win the player (who is probably in the last year of play), offering contracts of 4 years should carry the cost. I think a 40% limit would work until such time as we could revisit. The zero cap hit for retired players is on the agenda as well, and I will bring it up in another post. But, you are absolutely right, there has to be some accountability for GM's offering long term contracts, they must not be left off the hook after guaranteeing a player so much money. And this rule must change sooner rather than later. |
|
|
|
Post by Rams GM (Frank) on Apr 17, 2016 21:51:34 GMT -5
Well, considering what the discussion has been in the other thread concerning cap hits for retired players, the 40% mark appears to be the primary directive for the league cap hit. The question that I would like to ask is this, do we continue on a 5% increase per year until we hit 40% mark, or do we go straight from 30 to 40 in 2017?
|
|
|
|
Post by BuccaneersGM (Greg) on Apr 18, 2016 9:12:19 GMT -5
I think we should get the waiver cap hit to 35% and leave it at that level. The problem is free retirement drop. I play in leagues that have waiver cap hits from 25% to 50%, but no other leagues other than Legacy & Destiny, allow a free drop for retirement. It definitely changes the free agent bidding strategy.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rams GM (Frank) on Apr 18, 2016 9:21:42 GMT -5
I think we should get the waiver cap hit to 35% and leave it at that level. The problem is free retirement drop. I play in leagues that have waiver cap hits from 25% to 50%, but no other leagues other than Legacy & Destiny, allow a free drop for retirement. It definitely changes the free agent bidding strategy. Greg, I totally agree with you, and we are discussing removing the free drop in another thread. To make a long story short, we are changing that rule and retired players will not be free drops anymore. |
|
|
|
Post by Colts GM (Darryl) on Apr 18, 2016 10:06:08 GMT -5
I am in favor of a gradual increase in the waiver penalty (however, in stating such I am not opposed to an immediate 40%).
My reasoning is simple. Sometimes becoming acclimated to a revised rule could present a fairly difficult [initial] adjustment period for the GM. By providing time to adjust through gradual change, the GM can begin to weigh and make those tough decisions (who to keep or trade, who to sign, amount of contract offers, etc.) slowly before reaching maximum penalty levels.
For instance; I am personally considering waiving 4 players while the waiver penalty is at it's lowest point. Two of those players, however, could have a relatively nice future ahead of them, so I may want to hold on to them another year to gauge performance. Another year means a higher rate at a risk I may perhaps be willing to take. This ideal could carry out...
On the other hand, when signing players, the GM also gets use to the idea of curbing his/her poor spending habits, knowing the cap hit rate is rising, they can slowly (but surely) begin to feel the consequences of actions.
Hoping this makes some sort of sense...a little pain atm.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rams GM (Frank) on Oct 24, 2016 13:16:17 GMT -5
Ive also been thinking about this rule as well, and I am starting to reside with the idea of raising the cap hit to 35%, and keeping it there as a league standard for future seasons. We raised it back in August from 25% up to 30%, and while we have discussed the possibility of raising it to as high as 40%, the debate here has remained with the ideas of getting it up to the levels of between 35-40%. This is another rule I dont want to over think as well, and I think agreeing with a 35% cap hit penalty is a good rate, and I would like to implement this new rule on Aug 15th 2017. If the league feels anytime in the future that we need to to raise it more, or drop it, we can reopen discussion at future dates. But, the idea was already in place for a while that would would raise the cap hit incrementally, with the first gradual increase in Aug of this year, and we did that. Now I would like a more permanent rule in place, and I believe the 35% cap hit rule would be good for this league.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cardinals GM (Gremlin) on Oct 24, 2016 22:17:23 GMT -5
im all for the 35% bump and give it a year or 2. Let the owners behavior patterns catch up to the point that people are trading bad contracts for compensation. It might not happen at 35%, and if it doesnt than we should talk about 40%. If people start trading bad contracts for compensation at that point than I think we found our threshold.
|
|
