FA Rule

[kingfc22]

This I could go with for sure. Then you have your marginal players signing for marginal money while there is risk involved in signing a better quality guy.

Yea I like this one a lot better.

Next year!

[Aston]

I'll add to the drumbeat of support for you, from what I've seen, I think you are a great commish and this comment just adds to your street cred. :)

Brad is the best!

[Rip Murdock]

7 contracts have been signed that violate our new rule. All 7 were contracts for exactly 5 mil/year. Are we going to let these contracts go? I know it's a small point, but a rule is a rule. Can I now sign a guy for 5 mil plus 1 dollar? How about 2 dollars? 50 dollars?

Brad's example in his post allows 5 mil deals so I guess that's the loophole that will allow the deals to stand. This is another example of why rules like this have to be discussed before they're enacted.

[Aston]

5 million / year is allowed. When Brad said 'less than,' he really meant 'less than or equal to', as the examples show...

Simple enough. Want to offer a 2 yr deal to an aging QB to be your backup? 2yrs/$8mil = good (AAV = 4). 2yrs/$12mil = no good (AAV = 6). 1yr/$5mil = good. 1yr/$7mil = no good. Simple math.

Of course, you can't offer 5 million and 1 dollar, or 2, or 50 dollars in the game. You can offer 5 million and $10,000, but that would be illegal per the rule.

(edit) yeah, just saw that you noticed too. This is probably worth an announcement to make sure everyone knows and are on the same page here.

[Guest]

This is probably worth an announcement to make sure everyone knows and are on the same page here.

... a month ago. :D


Just needlin' ya, Brad, you do a great job, and it's much appreciated.

[BradZ]

... a month ago. :D


Just needlin' ya, Brad, you do a great job, and it's much appreciated.

Needlin' = deserved.

We'll not have a repeat performance, guaranteed.

[BradZ]

Lesson learned for sure. No more last second unilateral rule implementations.

I do wish, however, that I had set the thresholds a bit lower (something in the 1 for $2mil|2 for $4mil probably would have been better).

When we last discussed this during the previous offseason I intended to revisit during this offseason. So, here we are. I personally like the ability to have 1 and 2 yr deals offered, but as you can see from the quoted portion, I'd like to see the $$ thresholds reduced. Discuss.

[Aston]

This I could go with for sure. Then you have your marginal players signing for marginal money while there is risk involved in signing a better quality guy.

I'm on board with the 2/4 million exception for 1-2 year contracts as well.

I was going to suggest minimum only but that seems like it would be difficult to enforce.

[mike17]

2 million per year max sounds closer to what you were trying accomplish here.

It lets you sign guys short term who aren't worth a 3 year deal, and it also is low enough that good players aren't going to accept the short term deal over a big 3-year contract

[Guest]

Just to clarify what we're talking about:

If someone is asking for greater than $2 mil a year (avg), then your offer has to be for 3 years or more.

Is this where we are at with the ruling because the way it was originally worded it had nothing to so with what players were asking for, which is how we ended up with those $5 mil 1yr contracts.

[BradZ]

This has nothing to do with the ask, correct.

This is a carve-out exclusion for allowing less than 3 year deals, 1 or 2 yr deals.

[BradZ]

Any more discussions/thoughts/concerns? At this point with FA coming up fast, the general direction appears to be still allowing 1 and 2 year deals for FA, but within the $2mil contract value per year guideline, meaning you can offer:

1 yr max $2mil
2 yr max $4mil

Anything 3 years or more is open/fair game.

[Aston]

speak now, or forever hold your peace!

[nouvelle_vague]

i hate regulation in FOF

[BradZ]

i hate regulation in FOF

Thankfully we don't have too much here, or at least it doesn't seem like we do.