DISCUSSION: Same owner Team A Drops Team B bidding (Jay Harrison)

[jackdaniels]

but changing this rule seems to force changes to several other rules.

The more i think about this the less it makes sense for game play.

The team dropping the overpriced player and resigning that same player isnt getting a gamebreaker of an advantage. Just a simple way to make a market correction to their team's budget.

But a general vote would help clear this up.

[PigsRule]

...
Like said by commishioner, it is discussed every year, so a problem definately exists. A very simple solution has been discussed and should be implemented for the good of the league. 

It's raised each yr - Yes.
Is it a problem? No. A problem is something that creates a truly unbalanced playing field.

This is more a "it bugs me" kinda deal.
Does 1 player dropped into FA and won by the same team after 29 other teams have a chance to bid really give that team an completely unfair advantage? No.

I not to change 3 rules to because of this loop hole that happens to be available to all teams.

(reference: Starting 2 goalies in a 30 team league - yes, completely unfair advantage for a group of teams. So we changed that rule.)

[SlackJack]

Yes this is indeed an "it bugs me" kind of deal, as expressed by the majority of GM's that have bothered to read and respond to this thread.

Is it a problem? No. Is it dumb? Yes.

That should be reason enough to want to make an improvement. This is a money league boys, let's have a higher standard.

[PigsRule]

Yes this is indeed an "it bugs me" kind of deal, as expressed by the majority of GM's that have bothered to read and respond to this thread.

Is it a problem? No. Is it dumb? Yes.

That should be reason enough to want to make an improvement. This is a money league boys, let's have a higher standard.

I will delegate the vote setup to Slackjack.
Let the voting be open for min. 7 days.
If a change is demanded by majority - we can implement next yr per our rule change process in FNHL.

Go for it SJ.

[SlackJack]

I will delegate the vote setup to Slackjack.
Let the voting be open for min. 7 days.
If a change is demanded by majority - we can implement next yr per our rule change process in FNHL.

Go for it SJ.

Will do. I'll write something up tonight and put it out there. However we all feel about it I appreciate the discussion and the shared opportunity.
 

[Burkes Boys]

PR maybe you should just say you don't want to have to manage another timer activated rule. Lol

[SlackJack]

I will delegate the vote setup to Slackjack.
Let the voting be open for min. 7 days.
If a change is demanded by majority - we can implement next yr per our rule change process in FNHL.

Go for it SJ.

Have posted a thread for a Rule Change Vote on the Loophole. Need a mod to set it as a poll. Thanks for listening. 

[ripper]

We don't want this in the league. Quick discussion...

If you own two teams we can't have you drop a guy and then go and pick him up with your other team?

Why not....because it allows you to essentially make one good team (cut your bad contracts and get discounts)  the weaker team picks up the cut players to create the discount.

[Jonathan]

We don't want this in the league. Quick discussion...

If you own two teams we can't have you drop a guy and then go and pick him up with your other team?

Why not....because it allows you to essentially make one good team (cut your bad contracts and get discounts)  the weaker team picks up the cut players to create the discount.

30 teams can bid on him. If you want him bid on him, this isn't a discussion.... it is called FA... first you complain when the team that drops him bids on him, and now you complain when a team that does not drop him bids on him. What washington does and what Edmonton does is in their best interest. Not your best interest. Sounds like you want to run every team in league. Go look at who was spent most on FA since season started.   It has been the Caps and we continue to spend to add the few points Harrison adds (12).

[ripper]

Johnny Collusion!!