![[DEV] ISFL Forums](http://dev.sim-football.com/forums/images/emerald/logo.png "[DEV] ISFL Forums"){kind=logo}
+- [DEV] ISFL Forums (http://dev.sim-football.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Community (http://dev.sim-football.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=5)
+--- Forum: Discussion (http://dev.sim-football.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=33)
+---- Forum: Suggestion Box (http://dev.sim-football.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=34)
+----- Forum: Archived Suggestions (http://dev.sim-football.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=349)
+----- Thread: Including a Players Association (/showthread.php?tid=2673)
Including a Players Association - tlk742 - 07-27-2017
(07-27-2017, 03:05 PM)Bzerkap Wrote:RP would be the strongest argumentTo a degree, but RP only works if it's believable. For example, I don't think there are many players here that don't take semi-team friendly deals to help the team as a whole, this is not the NFL we don't starve if we don't get paid in the NSFL, thus the need for a union to bargain for wages and benefits on our behalf kinda falls by the wayside.
Including a Players Association - manicmav36 - 07-27-2017
Yeah, you lost me at the part where I had to pay to join...sounds an awful lot like a protection racket. It's not like players aren't getting fair wages already.
Including a Players Association - Jogn - 07-27-2017
There are a really limited number of things that a players union can do. We don't need a union to bring up when the players are mad - there will be at least two threads about any issue, from expansion teams trading before the expansion draft to media payout. All of those threads have been taken pretty seriously by the commissioners. The compensation question is an interesting one, but I'd have to hear from people who want to run for union leadership what they'd like to do about it before joining a union, especially if you want any of my contract money for the pleasure.
In general, this idea could do with a little bit of slowing down and gathering thoughts. An example of why I would be leery to join this union is the leadership race announcement - a post on page 6, without an edit on the first page (the first page still lists Destroyer as the Union CEO) at noon EST/9 am PST on a Thursday asking people to post in this thread before anyone gets off work if they want to be one of three people who are allowed to negotiate on behalf of the union is not the way to ensure that people are engaged in the decision making process.
Including a Players Association - Bzerkap - 07-27-2017
(07-27-2017, 02:09 PM)tlk742 Wrote:To a degree, but RP only works if it's believable. For example, I don't think there are many players here that don't take semi-team friendly deals to help the team as a whole, this is not the NFL we don't starve if we don't get paid in the NSFL, thus the need for a union to bargain for wages and benefits on our behalf kinda falls by the wayside.Yea you're probably right there
Including a Players Association - kckolbe - 07-27-2017
(07-27-2017, 01:09 PM)tlk742 Wrote:To a degree, but RP only works if it's believable. For example, I don't think there are many players here that don't take semi-team friendly deals to help the team as a whole, this is not the NFL we don't starve if we don't get paid in the NSFL, thus the need for a union to bargain for wages and benefits on our behalf kinda falls by the wayside.
I've been arguing the opposite, that a union may be needed to PREVENT such team-friendly deals by raising the minimum. Three years from now there will be T1 players getting paid MORE than T3-T4 ones. That's a huge problem, and it will become obvious when one or two teams are winning the Ultimus every year. Basically, if teams like Baltimore, Philly, San Jose and Las Vegas want to become competitive, cap space has to matter, which won't happen until talent becomes expensive.
Including a Players Association - manicmav36 - 07-27-2017
(07-27-2017, 03:28 PM)kckolbe Wrote:I've been arguing the opposite, that a union may be needed to PREVENT such team-friendly deals by raising the minimum. Three years from now there will be T1 players getting paid MORE than T3-T4 ones. That's a huge problem, and it will become obvious when one or two teams are winning the Ultimus every year. Basically, if teams like Baltimore, Philly, San Jose and Las Vegas want to become competitive, cap space has to matter, which won't happen until talent becomes expensive.
What benefit do owners have to low-ball players? They don't get any money if they spend less.
Besides, what leverage as players do we have? I'm not going to strike in an imaginary league so I can get paid more imaginary money. If I'm not getting paid enough to where it's hurting the amount of fun I'm having, I'll just stop playing.
Including a Players Association - kckolbe - 07-27-2017
(07-27-2017, 01:39 PM)manicmav36 Wrote:What benefit do owners have to low-ball players? They don't get any money if they spend less.
Besides, what leverage as players do we have? I'm not going to strike in an imaginary league so I can get paid more imaginary money. If I'm not getting paid enough to where it's hurting the amount of fun I'm having, I'll just stop playing.
I'm not talking about the owners pocketing money, I am talking about one team having a ton of top tier talent all at vet minimums making it impossible for other teams to compete.
Including a Players Association - timeconsumer - 07-27-2017
(07-27-2017, 04:49 PM)kckolbe Wrote:I'm not talking about the owners pocketing money, I am talking about one team having a ton of top tier talent all at vet minimums making it impossible for other teams to compete.
If a team can build a culture that is so strong it makes top tier vets want to stick around for cheap, why is that a problem?
Including a Players Association - manicmav36 - 07-27-2017
(07-27-2017, 03:49 PM)kckolbe Wrote:I'm not talking about the owners pocketing money, I am talking about one team having a ton of top tier talent all at vet minimums making it impossible for other teams to compete.
Fair enough, valid point. How do you suggest we stop that, and is that really something we need a players association for? Specifically one we need to pay money into to belong to, regardless of what that amount is.
Including a Players Association - kckolbe - 07-27-2017
(07-27-2017, 01:53 PM)manicmav36 Wrote:Fair enough, valid point. How do you suggest we stop that, and is that really something we need a players association for? Specifically one we need to pay money into to belong to, regardless of what that amount is.
I don't think we need a PA for it, but it came to mind because there were rumors that Brady was pressured by the PA to get paid more even though he was under contract, and ended up getting an extra 1m a year.
As for solutions, I think that the minimum for each tier after 1 needs to be raised. A T2 player brings SO MUCH MORE to the field than a T1, yet only needs to be paid an extra 500k. What's worse is that a T2 can sign a 4 year deal at 1m a year with no required increases.
So, off the cuff, I have two proposals
1) Increase the minimum pay raise between each tier to 2 million at T2 and +1 million each tier after that.
2) Require a minimum of +500k for for each year after the first. This second proposal would not have to apply to rookie contracts, as they are still likely to go inactive.