![[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: POLL: Rookie Contracts/Trade Protections (/showthread.php?tid=4477)
POLL: Rookie Contracts/Trade Protections - Yurt6 - 09-11-2017
My logic behind each of them:
Default Scalable Rookie Contracts: As of right now there have been numerous hold outs and other schemes for rookies to pretty much go exactly where they want. Not only is this extremely unrealistic, but also a detriment to the less desirable teams in the league. I think that having a default scalable (by round drafted in) contract for rookies would easily and immediately fix this problem. I think a 2 year + player option deal would be sufficient.
Team Trade Protections: This would pretty much just be a way for teams to not be screwed by players who don't like where they get traded to. If that player decides to retire/recreate or just go inactive, I feel there should be a window that if this happens within that window the team on the short end will get either all players/picks back, or get draft pick compensation.
POLL: Rookie Contracts/Trade Protections - Bzerkap - 09-11-2017
if there were to be default scalable rookie contracts then it should only apply for the first three rounds. Activity gets a little dicey after that, and you don't want to sign a guy to $1M if it's jsut a 50TPE inactive
POLL: Rookie Contracts/Trade Protections - timeconsumer - 09-11-2017
If you want protections for trades, negotiate them into your trade deals. If that player doesn't sign an extension for next season or doesn't earn 7 TPE+ per week for his first season you get back a 4th round draft pick or whatever.
POLL: Rookie Contracts/Trade Protections - ErMurazor - 09-11-2017
Holdouts should be less of an issue with the DSFL because players aren't going to get attached to teams.
POLL: Rookie Contracts/Trade Protections - Admin - 09-11-2017
If people are worried about hold outs then they need to take a step back and realize why these holdouts have happened. The reason is because waiver players would be signed off the NSFL waiver wire and then the player would spend almost a full season in a locker room, playing for a team, getting to know the players, making friends, etc. So then the draft comes along and they want to stay there.
This will not happen anymore, thanks to the DSFL. Now that we have the DSFL, there will not be any NSFL waiver players spending time with an NSFL team and then re-entering the draft. Every player will start their career in the DSFL and after their first DSFL season they will enter the NSFL draft without ever having been in an NSFL locker room before.
POLL: Rookie Contracts/Trade Protections - Yurt6 - 09-11-2017
(09-11-2017, 11:40 AM)Ballerstorm Wrote:If people are worried about hold outs then they need to take a step back and realize why these holdouts have happened. The reason is because waiver players would be signed off the NSFL waiver wire and then the player would spend almost a full season in a locker room, playing for a team, getting to know the players, making friends, etc. So then the draft comes along and they want to stay there.
This will not happen anymore, thanks to the DSFL. Now that we have the DSFL, there will not be any NSFL waiver players spending time with an NSFL team and then re-entering the draft. Every player will start their career in the DSFL and after their first DSFL season they will enter the NSFL draft without ever having been in an NSFL locker room before.
I feel like its a little naive to think that just because there's no more waiver pickups there aren't going to be people who say they won't play for the Legion, or only want to play in one or two places. I guess we have to see though after this season
POLL: Rookie Contracts/Trade Protections - Yurt6 - 09-11-2017
(09-11-2017, 11:30 AM)Bzerkap Wrote:if there were to be default scalable rookie contracts then it should only apply for the first three rounds. Activity gets a little dicey after that, and you don't want to sign a guy to $1M if it's jsut a 50TPE inactive
I agree with that
POLL: Rookie Contracts/Trade Protections - Yurt6 - 09-11-2017
(09-11-2017, 11:38 AM)timeconsumer Wrote:If you want protections for trades, negotiate them into your trade deals. If that player doesn't sign an extension for next season or doesn't earn 7 TPE+ per week for his first season you get back a 4th round draft pick or whatever.
Why shouldn't that just be the default though? This would also serve as a protection for rookie GMs who don't know all the ins and outs yet.
POLL: Rookie Contracts/Trade Protections - timeconsumer - 09-11-2017
(09-11-2017, 12:55 PM)Yurt6 Wrote:Why shouldn't that just be the default though? This would also serve as a protection for rookie GMs who don't know all the ins and outs yet.
Because I believe in having the maximum amount of choice. They should be negotiated upon by the two parties involved. If both parties don't feel the need to have it in there, or decide to intentionally exclude it so the team buying the higher risk can get it at cheaper cost....how is that a problem?
And rookie GMs who don't know the ins and outs will just have to learn the hard way, like they do everything else. There's no protection built in for making a stupid draft pick, and there shouldn't be. Being a GM means being responsible for your actions.
POLL: Rookie Contracts/Trade Protections - iamslm22 - 09-11-2017
(09-11-2017, 12:02 PM)timeconsumer Wrote:Because I believe in having the maximum amount of choice. They should be negotiated upon by the two parties involved. If both parties don't feel the need to have it in there, or decide to intentionally exclude it so the team buying the higher risk can get it at cheaper cost....how is that a problem?
And rookie GMs who don't know the ins and outs will just have to learn the hard way, like they do everything else. There's no protection built in for making a stupid draft pick, and there shouldn't be. Being a GM means being responsible for your actions.
Completely agree. Why would we protect a bad GM??