0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
I just have to throw in my 2 cents and say that the 10% is a huge penalty and will push away owners, granted not the best owners if they are never on. Also a good point was made about it affecting future owners which shouldnt happen either. I like the draft pick idea the most but we could also take a smaller penalty, like 2%. Thats still a good penalty but doesnt cripple the team. I do really think that the draft picks is the way to go.
My proposal:a) Losing up to 5 picks after warning (starting from round 9)b) If still no action, week's score forfeited (I put this second because it could affect multiple teams)
Does your proposal suggest that the 10th round pick always stays? I don't like the idea of the week's score being forfeitted as it is unfair to the competition of the teams that benefit. It is a good idea, but I'm not a fan of the results. Freddy's 2% cap hit is a good idea. Ultimately though, if someone has a warning, and receives a penalty every 72 hours, for 5-6 straight penalties, then that is 2-3 weeks of not responding to the violations meaning one of the following.1) GM is inactive for at least two weeks without prior notice. This is against our activity policy and opens the possibility of forcing the GM to resign.2) GM is blatantly ignoring violations and wants to get around the rules. There should be no place for this either.I think the first five rounds should be protected, so draft picks 6-10 and then 2% cap penalties should suffice for a full season. If we were strict with this in the past then the most we would have seen was 4-5 penalties in a year.