NOTICE: This league is using the BLEEDING EDGE game engine. For more information, click here.

The new user interface is in preview!

Want to check it out? Click here! (If you don't like it, you can still switch back)

League Forums

Main - General MFN Discussion

Re: Collusion happening in CUST-21, CUST-35. CUST-9 and CUST-64 also at risk.

By jsid
4/10/2017 12:52 pm
oukjweather wrote:

I like the idea of a Trade veto system, however I think the threshold needs to be at least 2/3rds majority if not 3/4ths of human users to overturn a trade. Otherwise I would be concerned for people vetoing trades just because it did not benefit them, or benefits a competitor in a given conference or division.


The issue I see here is that many leagues may not have enough active owners to veto a trade even at 50% needed. The less active leagues are the ones hardest hit by collusion right now.
Last edited at 4/10/2017 12:53 pm

Re: Collusion happening in CUST-21, CUST-35. CUST-9 and CUST-64 also at risk.

By parsh
4/10/2017 12:56 pm
jsid wrote:
oukjweather wrote:

I like the idea of a Trade veto system, however I think the threshold needs to be at least 2/3rds majority if not 3/4ths of human users to overturn a trade. Otherwise I would be concerned for people vetoing trades just because it did not benefit them, or benefits a competitor in a given conference or division.


The issue I see here is that many leagues may not have enough active owners to veto a trade even at 50% needed. The less active leagues are the ones hardest hit by collusion right now.


Especially if half the league is the same owner.. lol

Re: Collusion happening in CUST-21, CUST-35. CUST-9 and CUST-64 also at risk.

By raymattison21
4/10/2017 9:10 pm
I still like it if the trade was sweetened by others offering more. I only really care about first round picks and would rather salaries dictate that. Still, trades should come with compensatory picks.

Re: Collusion happening in CUST-21, CUST-35. CUST-9 and CUST-64 also at risk.

By setherick
4/11/2017 7:38 am
raymattison21 wrote:
I still like it if the trade was sweetened by others offering more. I only really care about first round picks and would rather salaries dictate that. Still, trades should come with compensatory picks.


Why should a trade get a compensatory pick? The only time in the NFL that teams receive compensatory picks is when one of their unrestricted free agents goes to another team. It was a compromise when the salary cap and open free agency was put into place and teams were afraid of their players bolting to other teams for more money.

Re: Collusion happening in CUST-21, CUST-35. CUST-9 and CUST-64 also at risk.

By raymattison21
4/11/2017 7:44 am
setherick wrote:
raymattison21 wrote:
I still like it if the trade was sweetened by others offering more. I only really care about first round picks and would rather salaries dictate that. Still, trades should come with compensatory picks.


Why should a trade get a compensatory pick? The only time in the NFL that teams receive compensatory picks is when one of their unrestricted free agents goes to another team. It was a compromise when the salary cap and open free agency was put into place and teams were afraid of their players bolting to other teams for more money.


Yep, if i was a bit clearer you could Trade a guy for a pick and get another pick. Based off trade value points...if the team got a compensatory pick that was a 1.33.....imo the trade meter would have to adust....I will dump an older guy for a late first early second any time. That's boom city for me. I am just referencing how far the meter is actually off, if compensatory picks were added at some point.
Last edited at 4/11/2017 7:45 am

Re: Collusion happening in CUST-21, CUST-35. CUST-9 and CUST-64 also at risk.

By raymattison21
4/11/2017 7:52 am
raymattison21 wrote:
setherick wrote:
raymattison21 wrote:
I still like it if the trade was sweetened by others offering more. I only really care about first round picks and would rather salaries dictate that. Still, trades should come with compensatory picks.


Why should a trade get a compensatory pick? The only time in the NFL that teams receive compensatory picks is when one of their unrestricted free agents goes to another team. It was a compromise when the salary cap and open free agency was put into place and teams were afraid of their players bolting to other teams for more money.


Yep, if i was a bit clearer you could Trade a guy for a pick and get another pick. Based off trade value points...if the team got a compensatory pick that was a 1.33.....imo the trade meter would have to adust....I will dump an older guy for a late first early second any time. That's boom city for me. I am just referencing how far the meter is actually off, if compensatory picks were added at some point.



Yeah... maybe not. Thanks seth

Re: Collusion happening in CUST-21, CUST-35. CUST-9 and CUST-64 also at risk.

By raymattison21
4/11/2017 8:00 am
raymattison21 wrote:
raymattison21 wrote:
setherick wrote:
raymattison21 wrote:
I still like it if the trade was sweetened by others offering more. I only really care about first round picks and would rather salaries dictate that. Still, trades should come with compensatory picks.


Why should a trade get a compensatory pick? The only time in the NFL that teams receive compensatory picks is when one of their unrestricted free agents goes to another team. It was a compromise when the salary cap and open free agency was put into place and teams were afraid of their players bolting to other teams for more money.


Yep, if i was a bit clearer you could Trade a guy for a pick and get another pick. Based off trade value points...if the team got a compensatory pick that was a 1.33.....imo the trade meter would have to adust....I will dump an older guy for a late first early second any time. That's boom city for me. I am just referencing how far the meter is actually off, if compensatory picks were added at some point.



Yeah... maybe not. Thanks seth



Well, it must be an old rule or something . .....I swear I was on to something


"Derrick Alexander (Cleveland, Round 1, Pick No. 29 overall, 1994)" that happened in real life. Why ....? But I know i am old to remember that.
Last edited at 4/11/2017 8:00 am

Re: Collusion happening in CUST-21, CUST-35. CUST-9 and CUST-64 also at risk.

By raymattison21
4/11/2017 8:24 am
"3a-pick awarded as part of NFL's ruling in the Wilber Marshall trade"

Here's another....

Re: Collusion happening in CUST-21, CUST-35. CUST-9 and CUST-64 also at risk.

By raymattison21
4/11/2017 8:51 am
raymattison21 wrote:
raymattison21 wrote:
raymattison21 wrote:
setherick wrote:
raymattison21 wrote:
I still like it if the trade was sweetened by others offering more. I only really care about first round picks and would rather salaries dictate that. Still, trades should come with compensatory picks.


Why should a trade get a compensatory pick? The only time in the NFL that teams receive compensatory picks is when one of their unrestricted free agents goes to another team. It was a compromise when the salary cap and open free agency was put into place and teams were afraid of their players bolting to other teams for more money.


Yep, if i was a bit clearer you could Trade a guy for a pick and get another pick. Based off trade value points...if the team got a compensatory pick that was a 1.33.....imo the trade meter would have to adust....I will dump an older guy for a late first early second any time. That's boom city for me. I am just referencing how far the meter is actually off, if compensatory picks were added at some point.



Yeah... maybe not. Thanks seth



Well, it must be an old rule or something . .....I swear I was on to something


"Derrick Alexander (Cleveland, Round 1, Pick No. 29 overall, 1994)" that happened in real life. Why ....? But I know i am old to remember that.



"received from NFL as compensation for loss of free gent Reggie White Browns
Browns

Traded 1994 second round pick (#40-David Palmer), Browns best 1995 second round pick (#58-Barrett Brooks) to Eagles for 1994 first round pick (#29-Derrick Alexander) on ????-??"

So the Eagles got a 1.29 for letting reggie walk....then trades were made.

Reggie was a fortune teller" White left little doubt that quarterback Brett Favre, 23, is on the threshold of greatness. Eventually, White said, Favre will be better than Philadelphia's Randall Cunningham"

White was the 3rd highest paid player in the league after that FA. I don't think teams would let a player of that caliber go in this day and age of football.

Re: Collusion happening in CUST-21, CUST-35. CUST-9 and CUST-64 also at risk.

By raymattison21
4/11/2017 3:45 pm
Here we go again. The pats traded Jamie Collins for a 96th pick. A compensatory pick, I don't think that would fit our meter. Much more simpler and clear with a recent example.

Also, forcing a team to hold a cap minimum would stifle these 1st round and second rounders being moved so easily . That's the key here is that you can eat those bonuses, but still have monster cap room left to play with. All while having young talent coming in. Very revolving door like .


Dumping a potential star like Collins right before he resigns is the way to do it. Get a shot one year earlier is the only benefit, but the pats lose. And it's a win win for the browns. They either tag him or lose a third.

The compensatory picks is a formula that now only allows for late third rounders, but with all the money thrown at real players , and not here allows for little wiggle room for anything more creative than stocking up on early picks. ( The best defenders come out of the first round here. That is the biggest problem )

Put a minimum cap in and stuff will get better. We might actually want compensatory picks cause there might be a benefit to letting guys walk. Also you only get those picks if you have less FAs coming in than going out.

Here you can dump talent for early picks (keeping cap low) then scour FA for replacements. IRL the team that recieved the player would lose some compensatory picks if they hit FA hard. It doesn't directly effect trading, but it opens the financial door for these high pick trades and closes the door on the FA market.

There is no incentives here to do it any other way. With safe high picks and no cap minimum one will continue to reap financial benefits until the contracts of top tier players finally reach a tipping point. ( one I have yet to see in mfn one )

It is all intertwined , but a cap minimum would help with both FA pools and financial limits reached by colluding or preying on the newbs. Compensatory picks would then be needed.

In 75 Danielson ex team would have received a decent compensatory pick( as long they didn't pick up FAs that played alot the prior season) and ares would be out a third. Not a big loss here, but that because volatility is static and drafting is too safe due to the current code.

All this is in reference to the trade meter values being off, but they were only created to stop bad trades. When in reality there is no bad trades here only problems of the salaries of the elite and how much cap room there is.