Thudd Kassel Contract Issue

[C9Van]

Man if only you guys cared this much about this pointless bollocks as you did the x2 media lol

Maybe whining/attacking HO until they quit was where I messed up :thinking:

[Opera_Phantom]

Man if only you guys cared this much about this pointless bollocks as you did the x2 media lol

Maybe whining/attacking HO until they quit was where I messed up :thinking:

Still salty you stole 2nd place from me in the last fantasy game last season. You'll pay for that.

[C9Van]

Still salty you stole 2nd place from me in the last fantasy game last season. You'll pay for that.

That I will 100% say sorry for. Cause I had no idea what I was doing and my activity in it literally was me noticing in the fantasy TPE payout post I got 2nd and said "Huh, Neat!" and that was my fantasy season lol

You deserved better pal.

[manicmav36]

real shit

Except that's not even remotely correct. The team was told in GM chat on 11/17, not weeks later. The GM at the time even responded to it.

[br0_0ker]

Could be to restructure the contract for more $ for the player, or to help team cap management.

Not sure that really matters in this case, tbh. My only problem with this ruling is that the rule, as written, was not broken. So there should be no action taken, just alter the wording and enforce it going forward, as has been the case with any other "loophole".

If a problem was identified immediately, and/or veto'd within reasonable time, there could be no complaint. As it stands, this could potentially affect cap management moving forward, due to existing rules on minimum salaries etc.

...as an aside, amended minimum salary rules (some form of enforced, graduated contract minimums over a contract length for example), might have mitigated that problem and potentially removed the need for this limited rookie contract extension rule, thinking about it.

Really, this is one of those things where something could probably just have been handled better. I don't necessarily think HO are *wrong* ... but I do feel like the fallout might not have been fully considered on this one. The Dylan specific parts are a different issue and I don't mean that... I mean the impact of the decision on parties concerned (cap management issues etc) and how the unilateral decision to amend a rule and enforce the amendment retroactively sets a questionable precedent.

It's done now so there's nothing to be done, but... there you have it. I know HO are doing what they think is best, but I'd urge a rethink here. Unfortunately, it doesn't look like we'll get an appeal.



Oh, I should probably also point out I (long ago) studied law, and specialised in statutory interpretation, so ... yeah. This is kinda my thing. I (weirdly) find it interesting as a purely observational exercise.

So I understand where you're coming from on this, since the strict interpretation of the written rules seems to be the main issue. But there is also the interpretation of the spirit of the rule, and maybe that's where my confusion is stemming from.

Based on this, his rookie contract, Thud was set to make $1M in each of S19 and S20. And based on this, his new contract, Thud is set to make... $1M in each of S19 and S20 (and S21). So the actual amounts is not the issue here.

This seems to be the issue they wanted to get in front of, namely other players exercising the same loophole.

Now, maybe I'm just not invested enough in the underworkings of the NSFL contract system, but it would seem that neither cap space for Philly nor Thud's total earning are at stake here. As I read it, this goes from a 3 year / $3M contract "extension" to a 2 year / $2M contract "extension" (and maybe that's where I'm wrong about this too, since the amounts are never explicitly stated in the OP). And based on the rulebook:

Code:

D. 2. Contract Minimums are determined by a player's total TPE as follows:
<200: $500,000
200 to 399: $1,000,000
400 to 599: $2,000,000
600 to 799: $3,000,000
800 to 999: $4,000,000
>1,000: $5,000,000

HO isn't changing anything of Thud's potential future contract.

Now, I could be completely misunderstanding things, and please correct me if I am wrong about anything in the above. For my last point, what is preventing Thud from simply signing a 1 year / $1M contract in S21? Hasn't Philly already been under the assumption that cost is allocated in S21, and thus should have that space readily available?

As an aside, it seems like there may have been some handshaking done in some way prior to Thudd going to FA anyways, based on this, since I still don't understand what the purpose of opting out of the original contract was if he was going to re-sign with Philly anyways, but I'll let my conspiracy theory subside for now in favor of someone enlightening me.


As to HO's side of it, the decision seems to have been:
1) Allow the loophole to exist, and allow an immaterial transaction exist while they closed the loophole for the sake of appearances
or
2) Close the loophole and amend the contract to show that the spirit of the rules is the ultimate arbiter of the decision-making process.

It seems to me they opted for option 2, and it is only the fact the decision is being applied late (again, to an immaterial effect to both Philly's cap and Thudd's contract earnings/potential) that people have an issue with, which was addressed in the beginning of the post:

HO apologizes for the long wait. We discussed this extensively in both HO and GM chat, and had a vote on this on November 17th, but did not realize that we had not made that ruling public until recently.

I don't think decisions should be reversed simply due to lack of announcement (maybe I am wrong here about official procedure or whatever). To reiterate and end, it seems to me the decision has a negligible affect on Philly's cap, Thudd's earnings, and his future contract minimum. The only thing this is doing is saying you can't use a loophole to do something the spirit of the rules doesn't allow.

On a completely separate topic, I'm not even sure what the purpose of Rule D. 14. even is...

[Libertines]

I know I'm just a new guy here, but this seems like an small issue blown way out of proportion, I strongly suggest cutting out the finger pointing, blaming, and witch hunting, and shifting to a constructive conversation on how to avoid similar situations going forward. At the end of the day, yes this is just a sim game, but a lot of people put a lot of time and effort into making this a rewarding experience.

I don't believe there was any ill-intent in the structure of the contract, and I don't believe the HO had any ill-will against anyone, they were just doing their best to implement the rules in the way they understood to be the intent of said rules.

So lets all move on, use this as a learning experience and allow this to be a positive learning experience on what is still a relatively young league.

[br0_0ker]

It has been explained to me that this could affect Philly's S21 cap situation, as Thudd would be over the 399 TPE barrier for the $1M threshold.

[TeyonSchavari]

On a completely separate topic, I'm not even sure what the purpose of Rule D. 14. even is...

The purpose is so a team can't extend a player at a rookie minimum contract for longer than 3 years. The point is to have a rookie minimum last for 3 seasons max, and so teams don't skirt around this and help their cap situation by extending a player after one season right before they are above the 399 TPE threshold, this rule exists. Because after two seasons, if a player is active, it is all but guaranteed that they will be at least into the next minimum salary tier.

For reference, after one season I was at 358 TPE, and most rookies were still below 399, so if I would have extended my minimum deal past year 3 the rule would prevent me from doing that. After season 2 I was extended, but I had to take at least 2M instead of 1M as I got over 500 TPE without even being a max earner for my class.

What is preventing Thudd from signing another deal in S21 or even S20 for 1M is that if he remained active he would definitely be over the TPE threshold and have to take at least 2M for his next contract. So, what Philly would lose out on here is about 1 or 2M in cap space with Thudd taking a higher contract.

Also not here to argue about anything, just explaining the rule.

Edit: I see as I was typing this, it was already explained to you lol. Sorry. Going to leave this up in case anybody else is confused.

[br0_0ker]

The purpose is so a team can't extend a player at a rookie minimum contract for longer than 3 years. The point is to have a rookie minimum last for 3 seasons max, and so teams don't skirt around this and help their cap situation by extending a player after one season right before they are above the 399 TPE threshold, this rule exists. Because after two seasons, if a player is active, it is all but guaranteed that they will be at least into the next minimum salary tier.

For reference, after one season I was at 358 TPE, and most rookies were still below 399, so if I would have extended my minimum deal past year 3 the rule would prevent me from doing that. After season 2 I was extended, but I had to take at least 2M instead of 1M as I got over 500 TPE without even being a max earner for my class.

What is preventing Thudd from signing another deal in S21 or even S20 for 1M is that if he remained active he would definitely be over the TPE threshold and have to take at least 2M for his next contract. So, what Philly would lose out on here is about 1 or 2M in cap space with Thudd taking a higher contract.

Also not here to argue about anything, just explaining the rule.

Edit: I see as I was typing this, it was already explained to you lol. Sorry. Going to leave this up in case anybody else is confused.

Yup, this was what was explained to me elsewhere. And also why I think it's strange to opt out of your rookie contract to sign a new one for the same amounts, just adding a 4th total year, in the words used in the contract thread, "5 minutes later". Again, seems like some handshaking was going on prior to those decisions being made/public.

[DeathOnReddit]

Tough position for HO here. I don't know all of the details, but from what I know when Thudd originally signed his rookie contract he was with a different team. He was then traded to Philly, where he declined his option, and signed a 3 year deal? Correct me if I'm wrong.

It's a pretty interesting situation and I don't think it's a very easily solved case. However, if I was HO I think I would have voted as they did.