Author Topic: Possible Rule Amendment - In season re-signings  (Read 11609 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Colby

  • MLFB Founder
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jan 2009
  • Posts: 28820
  • Bonus inPoints: 27
    • :PIT-NFL:
    • :Blank:
    • :PIT-NHL:
    • :PennState:
    • :UnitedStates:
    • View Profile
Re: Possible Rule Amendment - In season re-signings
« Reply #50 on: June 01, 2011, 11:50:51 AM »
I am bumping this based on recent PMs I have received about extensions.  There was no rule change made because of this thread.
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
Learn about :Commish: inPoints and the Invitationals.

Offline rcankosy

  • MVP
  • ****
  • Join Date: Oct 2009
  • Posts: 2501
  • Bonus inPoints: 0
    • :Blank:
    • :Blank:
    • :Blank:
    • :Blank:
    • View Profile
Re: Possible Rule Amendment - In season re-signings
« Reply #51 on: June 01, 2011, 12:48:17 PM »
I believe that there were a few prospect extensions processed this past off-season.  Justin Upton comes to mind.  Did any of them receive prospect discounts (60, 50, 40, 30%) AFTER their prospect contracts ran out?  I assumed that you could still receive the discount after the final year of the prospect contract, but now I am not sure after reading Dan's comments on the first page of this thread (see below).

- If a player is in his final year of prospect eligibility, then tough breaks, either take the hit this year, or you do not get to sign said player under a prospect extension.

funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

Dan Wood

  • Guest
Re: Possible Rule Amendment - In season re-signings
« Reply #52 on: June 01, 2011, 12:50:02 PM »
Upton did receive the 40% discount since he was in the final year of his prospect eligibility
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

Offline OUDAN

  • Legend
  • *****
  • Join Date: May 2011
  • Posts: 12262
  • Bonus inPoints: 0
    • :DAL:
    • :LAL:
    • :Blank:
    • :Oklahoma:
    • :NYY:
    • View Profile
Re: Possible Rule Amendment - In season re-signings
« Reply #53 on: June 01, 2011, 12:52:44 PM »
how would i know if someone is in the final year of their spec elligibility?
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
"People don't know what it means to be champions, Oklahoma invented it."
-Barry "The King" Switzer

"Clear eyes, full hearts, can't lose!
-Coach Taylor

I hated every moment of training but I said, "Don't quit, Suffer now and live the rest of your life as a Champion."
-Mohammed Ali

:win: 2014 FGM Champ
:win: 2015 Moneyball Champ
:win: 2015 Bush League Champ

Offline rcankosy

  • MVP
  • ****
  • Join Date: Oct 2009
  • Posts: 2501
  • Bonus inPoints: 0
    • :Blank:
    • :Blank:
    • :Blank:
    • :Blank:
    • View Profile
Re: Possible Rule Amendment - In season re-signings
« Reply #54 on: June 01, 2011, 01:04:00 PM »
So it sounds like we are saying that someone with a contract of $0.5m (P-2011) has to be re-signed PRIOR to the end of the season and the cap hit takes effect NOW in order to receive the 40% discount.  I'm not sure everybody interpreted the rule that way, because I did not.  Is that really how ALL of the prospects were treated in the off-season??? 
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

bravesfan4

  • Guest
Re: Possible Rule Amendment - In season re-signings
« Reply #55 on: June 01, 2011, 01:09:13 PM »
So it sounds like we are saying that someone with a contract of $0.5m (P-2011) has to be re-signed PRIOR to the end of the season and the cap hit takes effect NOW in order to receive the 40% discount.  I'm not sure everybody interpreted the rule that way, because I did not.  Is that really how ALL of the prospects were treated in the off-season??? 

No. I think we made a mistake. In order to receive the prospect extension discount the player must be resigned before the end of the year of the final year. So P-2011 must be resigned before we complete this season. If we do it after the season then the discount goes away. I do not know what year Cargo's eligibility ran out but he was signed after the season. If he was a P-2011 then a mistake was made.

However, with that being said, I think we should leave the rule as is but pay better attention to it.
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

Dan Wood

  • Guest
Re: Possible Rule Amendment - In season re-signings
« Reply #56 on: June 01, 2011, 01:16:22 PM »
Prospects should be treated the same as regular contracts, in that if they expire then you are out of luck. This is what the whole thread was started about. Since so many players were traded this off-season with expired contracts we decided to vote on if that should be allowed going forward since it seriously affected the free agent class.

The same should hold true with prospects. In season or pre season signings. For instance Colby Rasmus is P-2012 - if I signed him this year to a prospect contract I get the 50% discount. If I do it one day after this season ends, it should automatically go to the 40% that would be in effect for the entire 2012 season. If by the end of the 2012 season I have not offered him a prospect contract then I have to pay him the full market rate.
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

Offline Colby

  • MLFB Founder
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jan 2009
  • Posts: 28820
  • Bonus inPoints: 27
    • :PIT-NFL:
    • :Blank:
    • :PIT-NHL:
    • :PennState:
    • :UnitedStates:
    • View Profile
Re: Possible Rule Amendment - In season re-signings
« Reply #57 on: June 01, 2011, 02:05:03 PM »
Correct, but we did not make a ruling on trading expiring contracts...
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
Learn about :Commish: inPoints and the Invitationals.

Dan Wood

  • Guest
Re: Possible Rule Amendment - In season re-signings
« Reply #58 on: June 01, 2011, 02:08:24 PM »
This is true, but didn't we vote on something in this thread?
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

Offline Colby

  • MLFB Founder
  • Legend
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jan 2009
  • Posts: 28820
  • Bonus inPoints: 27
    • :PIT-NFL:
    • :Blank:
    • :PIT-NHL:
    • :PennState:
    • :UnitedStates:
    • View Profile
Re: Possible Rule Amendment - In season re-signings
« Reply #59 on: June 01, 2011, 02:23:46 PM »
This is true, but didn't we vote on something in this thread?

The voting stalled... We even discussed having a couple weeks window to trade said players.  I think we should treat it realistically and not allow extensions on expiring contracts.  We could give a 10% discount for those teams, but I feel all of this is too late.
funny
0
like
0
dislike
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
Learn about :Commish: inPoints and the Invitationals.

 

Forum Search


Quick Profile

 
 
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

* Chat Room

Refresh History
  • Daddy: @jwalkerjr88 aint never done more but use my account. Im paying for 32 teams and only watching the Rams.
    Yesterday at 05:20:53 PM
  • Daddy: I want my money back. I just looked it up. I want 31/32 refund. Well my Dad & Son benefited so 29/32 refund.
    Yesterday at 05:21:56 PM
  • indiansnation: How much it cost?
    Yesterday at 05:22:50 PM
  • Daddy: A lot. I think about $300 per season.
    Yesterday at 05:24:18 PM
  • Daddy: Added to the cable bill of like $200. That nobody ever used.
    Yesterday at 05:25:01 PM
  • Daddy: So i had DirecTV for 12 months to use Sunday ticket for 3 months and paid like 3 installments of roughly $100 added to my $200m bill.
    Yesterday at 05:26:18 PM
  • Daddy: For that i got two TVs that could watch any game any time any where. Problem is they getting played at the same times. You cant watch every game. Why you charging me for every game?
    Yesterday at 05:27:40 PM
  • Daddy: If thats the case i should have access to 32 different monitors. Right?
    Yesterday at 05:30:19 PM
  • Daddy: Or maybe 16. I would take 16. But two. Give me my bread back Mafia!
    Yesterday at 05:31:38 PM
  • Daddy: Making me watch  Bo Nix + Zach Wilson + Jared Stidham = you should be paying me
    Yesterday at 05:33:56 PM
  • Daddy: Me and coach Payton [link]
    Yesterday at 05:34:53 PM
  • Jwalkerjr88: Thats cap by the way. I pay for my own way to watch my team
    Yesterday at 05:41:55 PM
  • Jwalkerjr88: I dont have your account or login
    Yesterday at 05:42:07 PM
  • Jwalkerjr88: I used yours for 1-2 seasons.
    Yesterday at 05:43:32 PM
  • Jwalkerjr88: I used my mothers for a decade before that
    Yesterday at 05:43:46 PM
  • Jwalkerjr88: But ive used my way for the past few years. Ill be paying attention like i said
    Yesterday at 05:44:27 PM
  • Daddy: She deserves a refund too
    Yesterday at 05:46:27 PM
  • Daddy: The point was DirecTV never got in your pockets and it was a rip-off but they had a monopoly on the product. Im not loving all the streaming games but DTV will be paying $$$.
    Yesterday at 05:48:22 PM
  • Jwalkerjr88: The new iteration with Youtube TV isnt the greatest either but an improvement on Directtv version
    Yesterday at 05:48:37 PM
  • Daddy: And your grandfather used it every year besides those two :rofl:
    Yesterday at 05:49:26 PM
  • Daddy: I kept DirecTV and always willing to share. But thats my point.
    Yesterday at 05:49:47 PM
  • Daddy: If i had 3 monitors rather than two or four rather than two, either me or moms save money. Lots of it.
    Yesterday at 05:50:26 PM
  • Jwalkerjr88: Yea your point is just wrong is all. Theyve gotten into my pockets directly and indirectly
    Yesterday at 05:51:03 PM
  • Daddy: Oh, i was unaware. DTV must have got us all.
    Yesterday at 05:51:55 PM
  • Daddy: I know you dont endorse them. Never did. I paid for lots of crap i never used. Just for NFL Sunday Ticket.
    Yesterday at 05:52:45 PM
  • Jwalkerjr88: I dont and didnt endorse cable period. The irony is streaming is becoming cable now.
    Yesterday at 05:55:39 PM
  • Jwalkerjr88: I paid for directtv version 1-2 years when i had my apartment. Not as much as the 35+ crowd but they did
    Yesterday at 05:56:34 PM
  • Daddy: Still never watched a game on YouTube. I miss the days of CBS = AFC >> FOX/NBC = NFC >> ABC = MNF
    Yesterday at 05:56:42 PM
  • Jwalkerjr88: There was no reason to have directtv outside of sunday ticket. My apartment couldnt get it so i paid ONLY for sunday ticket
    Yesterday at 05:57:04 PM
  • Daddy: I was ok with TNF & SNF.
    Yesterday at 05:57:43 PM
  • Daddy: Its all over the place now. So ive stuck with what i know. The Ticket. I can't miss a Rams game. Not gonna do it.
    Yesterday at 05:58:45 PM
  • Jwalkerjr88: Now they stream some games only on amazon and peacock. I need a streaming lawsuit
    Yesterday at 06:01:20 PM
  • indiansnation: Dont forget disney + soon u will stream games pn their
    Yesterday at 09:43:09 PM
  • indiansnation: Disney trying yo buy nfl network and using espn as part of the trade off nfl will own a certain % of espn. First deal eas 70m for nfl network but nfl turned that down real quick
    Yesterday at 09:46:43 PM
  • indiansnation: Anyone want to talk trade nfl live,mlb live,fgm,armchair
    Yesterday at 10:00:02 PM
  • indiansnation: And any other league that im in that i didnt post yet
    Yesterday at 10:00:35 PM
  • Daddy: They keep throwing insane money at the NFL to televise games and owners share those shiny pennies just enough with the players.
    Yesterday at 10:39:25 PM
  • ldsjayhawk: I'm available.  Not sure if we match up anywhere other than NHL Live, but let me know if there's something you're interested in @Brian
    Yesterday at 10:45:39 PM
  • ldsjayhawk: The other leagues for me are FGM, MLB Live and DNHL in case any-one else is looking to do a deal
    Yesterday at 10:49:01 PM
  • Daddy: Healthy mix. Couple baseball, couple hockey, different scoring options.
    Yesterday at 11:08:15 PM
  • Daddy: You probably kick ass in all of them although NHL LIVE hasnt officially started.
    Yesterday at 11:08:42 PM
  • Daddy: I respect your gaming options
    Yesterday at 11:09:54 PM
  • Daddy: I would for sure be an FGM or Armchair owner if i were here for baseball. Powerhouse too. Why not? Great leagues with better LMs.
    Yesterday at 11:16:38 PM
  • Daddy: DNHL must be 15 years old. Gotta be doing something right. Most leagues dont make it past 5. Very few make it 10.
    Yesterday at 11:20:45 PM
  • Daddy: I think Rob been running that league longer than ive been on profsl. Legendary LM.
    Yesterday at 11:22:42 PM
  • indiansnation: Jmntl82 pm important messave about armchair
    Yesterday at 11:45:05 PM
  • jmntl82: indiansnation-replied
    Yesterday at 11:48:26 PM
  • ldsjayhawk: thanks @daddy.  I hold my own
    Today at 12:05:43 AM
  • Braves155: Will be around today for deal talks - ANY sport
    Today at 10:12:32 AM
  • Daddy: You tellem @Braves!
    Today at 11:47:14 AM