+- First Class Mogul (https://www.firstclassmogul.com)
+-- Forum: General (https://www.firstclassmogul.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=1)
+--- Forum: League Suggestions (https://www.firstclassmogul.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=12)
+--- Thread: Boosting Free Agency (/showthread.php?tid=37801)
Pages:
1
2
RE: Boosting Free Agency - sxr007 - 07-01-2016
I agree Matty's idea has a big loophole and also is not a simple solution. Seems like a real easy way to screw over new owners who don't know the rules as well.
I think Mike's idea has some merit. I think arb. players are within a decent range. It is free agents I think we get away with signing to cheap.
RE: Boosting Free Agency - mattynokes - 07-01-2016
1. If the player is in FA, then anyone could bid on him.
2. The "loophole" is intended as way for teams to retain their players without any contest.
3. I'd be a fan of limiting what you can do in re-signings since you can manipulate the game and, honestly, what player is going to sit there through 8 different rebuttals? Though I feel teams should be able to get the years they want as Mogul is notoriously bad at determining the years to ask for. Two Clicks would be good. Make your offer, hear their rebuttal, and then come to an agreement.
Arbitration is fine as it is. The process isn't well enough executed in Mogul to have to accept whatever the player wants. Every player goes through an arbitration hearing in Mogul when the vast majority of them will meet in the middle in real life and never see an arbitration hearing. However, when they do go to arbitration, you aren't normally having as big of a gap as we see in Mogul. The player that asks for $10M and you get for $5M in Mogul is likely to ask for $5.5-6M in the real world.
4. I'm fine with having this idea bazooka'd and focusing on how players are signed and another idea that was brought up today - raising the revenue sharing to further lessen the budget gaps.
RE: Boosting Free Agency - Geaux Blue - 07-01-2016
Not being a mogul genius I have a question of equalizing cities.
Does that mean it will give less incentive to be good for a long period time to which your budget increases and doesn't hurt as much to be bad for a long period time so your budget won't drop as much as it would normally?
It should hurt a teams bottom line if they are poor for an extended period of time just as it should boost a teams cash flow if they are competitive for years on end.
This may all be a moot point and equalizing cities may not have an effect like the ones i'm talking about, i'm just curious.
RE: Boosting Free Agency - Atlbravesfan27 - 07-01-2016
I'm with a few others on this. Less is more. I like the effort and thoughtfulness put into this, but I'm just not a fan. At some point, rules get to be too much for a hobby...
RE: Boosting Free Agency - sxr007 - 07-01-2016
(07-01-2016, 07:26 PM)Atlbravesfan27 Wrote: I'm with a few others on this. Less is more. I like the effort and thoughtfulness put into this, but I'm just not a fan. At some point, rules get to be too much for a hobby...
I agree adding lots of rules can be to much. If it is a simple fix of not negotiating contracts in free agency then fine. Otherwise dont make rules for things that aren't really broke.
RE: Boosting Free Agency - AndyP - 07-01-2016
I think it's worth pointing out....nothing is really broken. Our finances as a league are as stable as they've ever been. FA crops are not always going to be awesome, they ebb and flow just like the real ones do. FA is a beast that I just don't think can be tackled easily and I definitely don't think a network of offer sheets is the way to do it. A bunch of rules about clicks and negotiations is obnoxious to me as well.
And let's also be clear - if we did tweak revenue sharing so there is more balance among the franchises (something I'm ok with), that will likely have an adverse effect on FA since lower revenue teams would then have less issue resigning their players.
RE: Boosting Free Agency - Chuck - 07-03-2016
Quote:if i wait until september through the playoffs sim, i run the risk of another team bidding that fallback thing you mentioned if i try to resign a player and i'd have to pay more to keep the player. but, why wouldn't a team just sign the player anywhere from July 1st-August 16th sim
I'm new to the league and haven't gone through an off-season yet but I agree with this. I'd think that by Aug. 16 I'd know who I want to keep and would go ahead and re-sign those players at that point.
I also agree that over-complicating this process isn't the way to go. I do this as a hobby. I have a family and have a more than full-time job. Depending on the time of year (especially when my real teams' seasons are going on) I barely have time to pay attention at all, much less start figuring 1.25x fallback salaries and comp possibilities.
All-in on making the league a better league and like that people are discussing ways to do that!
RE: Boosting Free Agency - hokeyrules - 07-03-2016
I would rather keep things the same and not continually change rules every few years, this is coming from someone who has not been the most active over the last two months and really for personal reasons do not want to have to spend a closer eye on my team without getting fucked over until things get less busy.
RE: Boosting Free Agency - mzylinski - 07-07-2016
I understand the purpose of this but feel it is unnecessary lets leave things be.