That's my problem. I wanted to do a few player for draft picks, but with the cap hit, it totally screws it up.Originally Posted by L.A. Playa
That's my problem. I wanted to do a few player for draft picks, but with the cap hit, it totally screws it up.
i think it is self evident...
1. if you screw up your cap then you shouldn't be able to get out of it by trading your team away...real NFL teams cannot do that.
2. what would prevent you from signing players to long-term contracts and then trading them to another team in order to make sure that the second owner could get them before free agency??
make sense?
For all the education and practice each of us undergoes, the achievment of mastery is ultimately the outcome of a personal quest for understanding.
your cap is screwed up because you screwed it up.That's my problem. I wanted to do a few player for draft picks, but with the cap hit, it totally screws it up.
that made sense Eb thanks
yeah it makes sense...but I think that it shouldn't be the same penalty as a cut. If you trade a player, you should still get a cap hit, but because they are going to be taking on your whole contract, why should you pay half too? That means that player is costing two teams even more money than it cost the one team. I do think that trades should be allowed and the teams shouldn't be punished for wanting to better their teams by making trades and bringing more talent to their team.
You were sooo against this in all the threads where I mentioned it and now that Eb said what he said, you back down?
no his reasoning for it makes sense
oh and for the record, my cap isn't that bad. I have over $6 million left right now and will probably use some of that to fix my long term contracts. I didn't realize all those rules when i made these contracts. Yeah it's my fault, but you don't have to get like that with me.
so you support it?
im neutral, I dont have cap problems so doesnt affect me one way or another
so u will still make trades if u want to?
many of the rules exist simply to prevent circumventing the cap and collusion between owners.
I will do what I want when I want !!!
I do like this rule, and there is a need for it - however, I would like it if the cap hit taken by the previous team should reduce the cap hit for the new team.
Maybe it's my need to have the cap be 'zero sum'.
"'Clean up your room.', 'Stand up straight.', 'Pick up your feet.', 'Take it like a man.', 'Be nice to your sister.', 'Don't mix beer and wine, ever.'. Oh yeah, 'Don't drive on the railroad track.'"
"Eh, Phil. That's one I happen to agree with."
Meh, I just won't be trading, that's all.
I have a young player, who's base is 500k, and signed to a 5 year deal. I cannot afford the cap hit I will take by trading him, so I won't.
No big deal, I'm not in favour of the rule, but it's been a rule since day 1, and it's my fault for not knowing.
That's what I'm thinking. If the original owner is going to be paying 1/2 of the contract...the new owner shouldn't pay the full contract. Maybe 3/4 of it or 1/2.I do like this rule, and there is a need for it - however, I would like it if the cap hit taken by the previous team should reduce the cap hit for the new team.
Maybe it's my need to have the cap be 'zero sum'.
When you trade or cut a player in the NFL the team doesn't have half of a cap hit of the total contract. Only the bonus money gets put on the cap.
When a team signs a player to a 4yr-20 million dollar contract they may have 20% of it as a bonus which would be about 4 million dollars. If they cut that player they would only have to pay 4 million dollars and not 10 million dollars.
If we're gonna be exactly like the NFL(which is fine. I like the realism) then the cap hits should be around the same.
The salaries of the players are about as much as the real NFL players yet the cap is only 90 million and you have to pay out half of a contract to get rid of a player.
When you cut a player it shouldn't be half of the contract. It's not like that in the NFL. Around 20% of what's left on the contract should be fair.
If you owe somebody 20 million dollars 20% would be around 4 million. That's about what the cap hit would be in the NFL if you dumped a player with a contract like that.
I take it that's what we're striving for is to have realism and be exactly like the NFL. Half of their contracts doesn't go towards the cap when they get rid of a player.
actually...in the NFL i believe the deion rule prevents teams from giving out more than 50% of the value of the contract as a signing bonus. Thus, very few, if any, actually have half of the contract as a signing bonus. however, there are reporting bonuses, option bonuses and multiple signing bonuses that do push the value of the bonus structure over 50% (for examples see most 1st round draft choices including Mike Williams, JP Losman to name a couple). let me ask clump if there is a relative number as to what is bonus and what is base salary. If there is and it is reasonable maybe we will change to that number. Having said that, if that number exists, it would not surprise me if it is about 30-50%.
There is a big difference between 30% and 50%. If you owed a player 10 million that would make a difference of 2 million dollars.
I agree with you. I understand that it's not Eb's fault that certain teams don't have a good cap future. But why should they be punished that bad for it. We do have the ability to buy out future years of contracts and i like that, but I'm with you on the cut/trade cap hit. If we are trying to cut/trade a player because they lostvalue or whatever, 50% of the cap hit sounds like a little much imo.
Posting Permissions
