@adam2552 had you looked at the budget in the transactions area? http://nsfl.jcink.net/index.php?showtopic=4436
I was very careful in making sure we were under the cap with all things considered and we even made it under after there was a rule change in the amount DSFL absorbs AFTER we finalised Tanners contract which was a bit annoying.
You're right though, when Tanner was pulled up I forgot about the change in salaries that would make and failed to reflect that on this page. Just another problem with the whole DSFL system and introduction which was not fun for our team who just doesn't have the depth to be dropping down active players.
Since we were playing over the cap after calling Tanner up we can retroactively reduce contracts (with the consent of the player of course) to get under the cap, would that be fair to you? And @Ballerstorm?
I was very careful in making sure we were under the cap with all things considered and we even made it under after there was a rule change in the amount DSFL absorbs AFTER we finalised Tanners contract which was a bit annoying.
You're right though, when Tanner was pulled up I forgot about the change in salaries that would make and failed to reflect that on this page. Just another problem with the whole DSFL system and introduction which was not fun for our team who just doesn't have the depth to be dropping down active players.
Since we were playing over the cap after calling Tanner up we can retroactively reduce contracts (with the consent of the player of course) to get under the cap, would that be fair to you? And @Ballerstorm?
![[Image: TSKa9dQ.png]](https://i.imgur.com/TSKa9dQ.png)
------------
