+- 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: Waivers (/showthread.php?tid=4827)
Pages:
1
2
Waivers - mike - 02-22-2011
Get rid of the useless revocable waivers. If a team wants to get interest on a player then that's what the chat box is for or the trade block thread. Having revocable waivers pretty much makes the waiver thread pointless when every single time they just pull them back if we don't meet their trade demand.
What we should do is just have revocable waivers. If you place a guy on waivers hes gone if someone claims him, and if no one claims him then he gets released.
RE: Waivers - danpac47 - 02-22-2011
I agree.
RE: Waivers - mattynokes - 02-22-2011
REV waivers are fine. And just because a player is waived, even if IRR, doesn't mean the team would release the player. A better way would be to make waivers IRR unless noted that the player is REV. REV waivers serve a purpose. Maybe you feel teams are bluffing for trade interest, maybe you only want to move one of two players, but not both, or possibly want to make sure a division rival does not get the player for free. And then there's the obvious August waiver trading.
The purposes are there. From reading current the rules all players are assumed REV and that shouldn't be the case. If you want them REV they should be labeled as such or they're assumed to be IRR. It's a team's right to be able to pull a player back, but I definitely do agree that potential claiming teams should know whether the player is REV or IRR.
RE: Waivers - mike - 02-22-2011
But your missing the point. IRR is pointless as if you want to advertise the player then make a trade block.
RE: Waivers - danpac47 - 02-22-2011
Yeah, and if you don't want to give a player to your division rival for free, then don't trade with them.
It's this revocable shit that makes me not wanna waste my time on waiver threads.
RE: Waivers - 'PR' - 02-22-2011
Quote:Yeah, and if you don't want to give a player to your division rival for free, then don't trade with them.
Do you know how much I have laughed since reading that statement? What you basically just said is if we don't want our DIVISION RIVALS to gain a valuable player that is on OUR team then don't even attempt to trade that player. I don't think anyone wants to do much business with their division rivals, and I think it is a team's right to prevent any trade that they could (within their power to do so) which involves their division rival gaining an incredible talent or incredible value.
RE: Waivers - hokeyrules - 02-22-2011
I just release players never waivers.
RE: Waivers - mattynokes - 02-22-2011
I'm not missing the point. You guys are missing the point of REV waivers. You're crabbing about someone pulling a guy back when that's the point of REV waivers. There's a simple solution. Make waivers IRR unless noted that they're REV. Then if it's your policy to not want to be hanging in lingo, don't deal with REV waived players.
RE: Waivers - danpac47 - 02-22-2011
(02-22-2011, 05:25 PM)Mstrpr626 Wrote:Quote:Yeah, and if you don't want to give a player to your division rival for free, then don't trade with them.
Do you know how much I have laughed since reading that statement? What you basically just said is if we don't want our DIVISION RIVALS to gain a valuable player that is on OUR team then don't even attempt to trade that player. I don't think anyone wants to do much business with their division rivals, and I think it is a team's right to prevent any trade that they could (within their power to do so) which involves their division rival gaining an incredible talent or incredible value.
what's your point?
RE: Waivers - 'PR' - 02-22-2011
My point is that the point you made is garbage.