05-18-2012, 02:08 PM
There's multiple reasons this is an issue:
1) Agents AND GMs aren't being specific when negotiating NTC. GMs get excited to ink the deal and don't even care what the Agent intended when demanding a NTC. I know I've never ONCE negotiated a contract where this wasn't specifically addressed. As commish and a GM who's incredibly careful with my long-term deals how am I not supposed to be insulted when GMs who ink contracts with reckless abandon try to play the misunderstanding card when in reality it was a lack of effort?
2) Confusion about what the terms actually mean. As far as I'm concerned any term used to designate the NTC as different from a simple in-game whether it be "full", "agent-protected", or "specific teams only" means something will have to occur outside the game's parameters for the NTC to be circumvented. While I can see the other side it's irks me to no end that there's a consistent assumption the other way. If anything tie should go to the preventative rule (since ya know, we made them all for a reason) but that's another discussion...
3) As Stang pointed out, but not quite in the same light: GMs are accepting NTCs in every freaking deal they sign with an agent. If you guys didn't cater to every whim of the agent and used just a little more foresight when it comes to resignings we'd have one example of the agent being proven wrong. As it stands we're 20-some seasons in and there's not one open market example of a FA getting screwed by an agent asking for too much. Guess what? Until agents are proven wrong to blast the system is fucking asanine.
4) Has any of the people pissing all over each other even considered that the agent has been incredibly helpful in working around NTCs when he's contacted BEFORE hand? It's amazing what proper communication in lieu of assumptions and piss and vinegar can accomplish...
GOING FORWARD, UNLESS THE AGENT OR GM SPECIFIES THE NTC IS ONLY PROTECTED IN-GAME ASSUME THE AGENT GETS THE FINAL SAY IN WAIVING IT. IF YOU DO THIS THERE SHOULD BE NO WAY TO CLAIM IGNORANCE OR CONFUSION ABOUT THE ISSUE. IF YOU GIVE OUT A NTC ASSUME IT'S "AGENT PROTECTED" OR "FULL" AND MOST CERTAINLY NOT ABLE TO BE BOUGHT OUT. ONLY IN-GAME NTCs MAY BE BOUGHT OUT. THIS RULE IS RETROACTIVE, ALL NTCs THAT AREN'T SPELLED OUT CLEARLY ARE ASSUMED TO BE AGENT PROTECTED.
1) Agents AND GMs aren't being specific when negotiating NTC. GMs get excited to ink the deal and don't even care what the Agent intended when demanding a NTC. I know I've never ONCE negotiated a contract where this wasn't specifically addressed. As commish and a GM who's incredibly careful with my long-term deals how am I not supposed to be insulted when GMs who ink contracts with reckless abandon try to play the misunderstanding card when in reality it was a lack of effort?
2) Confusion about what the terms actually mean. As far as I'm concerned any term used to designate the NTC as different from a simple in-game whether it be "full", "agent-protected", or "specific teams only" means something will have to occur outside the game's parameters for the NTC to be circumvented. While I can see the other side it's irks me to no end that there's a consistent assumption the other way. If anything tie should go to the preventative rule (since ya know, we made them all for a reason) but that's another discussion...
3) As Stang pointed out, but not quite in the same light: GMs are accepting NTCs in every freaking deal they sign with an agent. If you guys didn't cater to every whim of the agent and used just a little more foresight when it comes to resignings we'd have one example of the agent being proven wrong. As it stands we're 20-some seasons in and there's not one open market example of a FA getting screwed by an agent asking for too much. Guess what? Until agents are proven wrong to blast the system is fucking asanine.
4) Has any of the people pissing all over each other even considered that the agent has been incredibly helpful in working around NTCs when he's contacted BEFORE hand? It's amazing what proper communication in lieu of assumptions and piss and vinegar can accomplish...
GOING FORWARD, UNLESS THE AGENT OR GM SPECIFIES THE NTC IS ONLY PROTECTED IN-GAME ASSUME THE AGENT GETS THE FINAL SAY IN WAIVING IT. IF YOU DO THIS THERE SHOULD BE NO WAY TO CLAIM IGNORANCE OR CONFUSION ABOUT THE ISSUE. IF YOU GIVE OUT A NTC ASSUME IT'S "AGENT PROTECTED" OR "FULL" AND MOST CERTAINLY NOT ABLE TO BE BOUGHT OUT. ONLY IN-GAME NTCs MAY BE BOUGHT OUT. THIS RULE IS RETROACTIVE, ALL NTCs THAT AREN'T SPELLED OUT CLEARLY ARE ASSUMED TO BE AGENT PROTECTED.
Houston Astros - 2012/2016/2023/2025 Champs!
Cumulative Record: 1894 - 1184 (.615%)
Cumulative Record: 1894 - 1184 (.615%)