Discussion on Garunteed Contracts and associated items:

**GrendelKhan** · April 7th, 2005, 07:49 PM

Originally posted by Leonidas:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />I'd agree Leo, IF we had signed those intial players. It's not a "bail-out" since this "problem" will not be present next season

The draft players were effectively signed by the GM who picked them. Yes the balance of the players on our inital squads were not signed by the respective GMs but that is why we agreed to allow cuts of those players up until the first game started. This suggestion still seems like a bailout for people who didn't get that sorted properly initially.<hr /></blockquote>yes of course 2 days when FA market opened was PLENTY of time for teams to make ALL of the moves that had to happen when they had to add a player at a position BEFORE they were able to even cut a player in that position.

But I guess going under the assumption that EVERY team only had to add players they wanted while shuffling Cap and competeing for FAs makes perfect sense, sicne most teams were probably in that situation.

It's not like some teams like Kayne's lost put on his first two bids to grab a fa that would have allowed him to make a cut, It's not like a Team such as R'leyh had Extra guys on their roster the first night of FA that took up slots and took them up to 18 players until; the players were returned to Falcon's team. And then a player would have to be added before the final second night of FA market and cut period MAGICLY so that moves could be performed before the games started.

Not everyone "drafted" 4 players some drafted as few as 2 some drafted as many as 6 or 7, But everyone was supopsed to be "building their team from scratch".

It must be a bail out for something those players did wrong. And not an attempt to replicate what the following year's mechanics will be like at all.

-- I'm guessing your response will be - those that didn't do as you did, must have made mistakes, and can suffer.

**hornetjohn** · April 7th, 2005, 08:35 PM

Originally posted by GrendelKhan:

Because we are competeing for the Title this year, right? We aren't ignoring it, as the mechanics of the league take effect NEXT season.[/QUOTE]

Everyone operated this year under the same restraints and we all knew about it before the season started.

**hornetjohn** · April 7th, 2005, 08:45 PM

Originally posted by TuringComplete:
One thing I'd like to see in the league is an incentive to sign long-term contracts. In the regular game and especially with our guaranteed contracts, you gain the most flexibility by leaving all your players on 0-year deals until after the FA signing deadline and then resigning them to 1-year deals. Ideally this would be taken care of in the programming, such as having players insist upon longer term deals, but since that's not possible, I have thought of something that would give people an incentive to sign long term contracts.
UNRESTRICTED FREE AGENCY!!!

I think that your idea is interesting and worthwile. I also wish that their was some sort of way for players to demand longer contracts or bigger ones depending on outside influences. But I don't enjoy the idea of guys bidding on my players in the last year of his contract - I would rather stick with what we do have. I think that bidding will force good players who hit the market to get multi-year deals. But maybe Scott could code things eventually for guys to get multi-year deals. Or maybe we could have public bidding on FAs

**TuringComplete** · April 7th, 2005, 09:24 PM

My idea didn't have people bidding on your players during their contract's 0-year.

My idea had people salivating at the thought that those players were hitting the FA market at the season rollover and there was ABSOLUTELY NOTHING YOU COULD DO ABOUT IT!

**andyr13** · April 7th, 2005, 11:59 PM

My idea had people salivating at the thought that those players were hitting the FA market at the season rollover and there was ABSOLUTELY NOTHING YOU COULD DO ABOUT IT!

I don't really like that idea very much at all. I like the current setup with player contracts. Only thing I could see changing is allowing 1 year contracts to be cut as well.

**TuringComplete** · April 8th, 2005, 01:09 AM

Originally posted by andyr13:
<blockquote>quote:<hr />My idea had people salivating at the thought that those players were hitting the FA market at the season rollover and there was ABSOLUTELY NOTHING YOU COULD DO ABOUT IT!

I don't really like that idea very much at all. I like the current setup with player contracts. Only thing I could see changing is allowing 1 year contracts to be cut as well.<hr /></blockquote>If we do that, then the ONLY point to guaranteed contracts would be in signing free agents when there's competition for them. Other than that it would be "cut anyone you want."

**Leonidas** · April 8th, 2005, 01:29 AM

I'm guessing your response will be - those that didn't do as you did, must have made mistakes, and can suffer.

Well I wouldn't have put it quite that bluntly but basically yes. Not that what I did was right but it was a level playing field from the start. If, for whatever reasons, you regret previous choices then thats just part of the game. There are a lot of things I would have done differently in this league if we started afresh. It's all part of the learning curve.

My squad was at least 3 deep at each positon when I got it and the other squads I checked were also. If you (or Kayne(sorry to bring you into it Kayne), or anyone else) decided you would cut your squads down to a minimum straight away then that was your decision. It had consequences though. The rules were clear, hard cap, guaranteed contracts, minimum roster requirements. Nothing was instituted at the last minute. Personally I can't see "but my FA bid got beat meaning I couldn't cut someone" as an excuse. That's just part of the game.

And yes your situation with llfalcons players was unfortunate but the 4th round players were added to squads 2 days before Free Agency opened. I'm sorry if neither of you checked your squads in that time.

**Leonidas** · April 8th, 2005, 01:30 AM

If we do that, then the ONLY point to guaranteed contracts would be in signing free agents when there's competition for them. Other than that it would be "cut anyone you want."

You mean, it would just be like every other SimGal league?

**TuringComplete** · April 8th, 2005, 01:34 AM

Originally posted by Leonidas:
There are a lot of things I would have done differently in this league if we started afresh. It's all part of the learning curve.

Yeah, can we start over? I want to bid more for Coach Bear. I want to keep my draft picks, though.

**Phil D** · April 8th, 2005, 02:35 AM

I agree with Leo.
I chose to cut my squad to the minimum because I had a few very good young players and none of the rest were keepers. That is why I only had 9 players when the team reviews were done. Actually picked up two pretty good free agents.
I prefer to release 1 yr players but as was said by someone else in a post, the current rules forced me to look for other combinations of positions and tactics. I am sure glad I drafted multi-position players because it took a while to find the better combinations.
I don't think we should change the rules now.
If we are going to consider a change I think we need to vote on it after round 2 of playoffs after we have seen a full season.
The learning process is different because the rules are different and I think that was the new challenge we were looking for.
However, I think we have to be careful to not tweak too much or we could mess up a game that actually works relatively well. My experience with business software is that you get 90% of what is on your wish list for a system, you are doing pretty well. There are some things in simgalaxy that are not broke so we don't need to try to fix it, as us Texans say in our simple way.

Thread: Discussion on Garunteed Contracts and associated items:

Thread Tools

Display

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions