flotsamnjetsam wrote:MFL has been updated with the FA adds through John Abraham, and with the cuts/cap hits through Trevor Scott.
Lance Briggs is showing as a 5 year contract. My final bid was a 3 year contract.
I will take the last 2 years if there is no cap hit.
Fixed! If anyone else sees a mistake that I made when entering the contracts...please let me know.
Toltec wrote:Just so I know, no one was upset that fnj was going to pay Bradshaw $12M a year, but what I am doing is wrong? Are you honestly telling me that fnj was actually going to pay him $12 million in year 5 to a 30 year old back? Come on, you guys extend a guy for 5 years when he is at the end of his career with every intention of using the AFT before year 5.So you get to spread the contract over a few years and pay less than someone that was signing that 35 year old LB for 2 years. "ButToltec, it is in the rules."
Also, doesn't matter what the Brady contract "looks" like. Did the math for you, it is over %50 backloaded, as are 90% of nfl contracts.
So I am the guy damaging the integrity of the league as Waugh suggests? Really? How about this. Get rid of the AFT and maybe we will get a fair price for all players. No more of this 5 year nonsense on old guys.
If you guys think I am so detrimental to the league, vote me out. Because this entire issue is deflection and complete BS.
My contract was $12M for each year. I didn't have year 5 at over 50% of the entire cap for the entire 35 man roster. That was the major issue that caused a rule change in the middle of the FA auctions. And sorry, that Brady contract is nothing like yours...again, there's not a 300+% increase from the 2nd to last year to the last year. Myself and the other 10 owners will just have to agree to disagree with you. Like WaCoug said, let's just move on from this. You're not going to change anyone's mind by continuing to try and justify your actions.
Toltec wrote:Just so I know, no one was upset that fnj was going to pay Bradshaw $12M a year, but what I am doing is wrong? Are you honestly telling me that fnj was actually going to pay him $12 million in year 5 to a 30 year old back? Come on, you guys extend a guy for 5 years when he is at the end of his career with every intention of using the AFT before year 5.So you get to spread the contract over a few years and pay less than someone that was signing that 35 year old LB for 2 years. "ButToltec, it is in the rules."
Also, doesn't matter what the Brady contract "looks" like. Did the math for you, it is over %50 backloaded, as are 90% of nfl contracts.
So I am the guy damaging the integrity of the league as Waugh suggests? Really? How about this. Get rid of the AFT and maybe we will get a fair price for all players. No more of this 5 year nonsense on old guys.
If you guys think I am so detrimental to the league, vote me out. Because this entire issue is deflection and complete BS.
50% is legal. 60% is not. I dont understand what the problem is?
I honestly wouldnt mind simplifying this whole thing and just making it an even amount every year. Not worth the heartburn.
Toltec wrote:Just so I know, no one was upset that fnj was going to pay Bradshaw $12M a year, but what I am doing is wrong? Are you honestly telling me that fnj was actually going to pay him $12 million in year 5 to a 30 year old back? Come on, you guys extend a guy for 5 years when he is at the end of his career with every intention of using the AFT before year 5.So you get to spread the contract over a few years and pay less than someone that was signing that 35 year old LB for 2 years. "ButToltec, it is in the rules."
Also, doesn't matter what the Brady contract "looks" like. Did the math for you, it is over %50 backloaded, as are 90% of nfl contracts.
So I am the guy damaging the integrity of the league as Waugh suggests? Really? How about this. Get rid of the AFT and maybe we will get a fair price for all players. No more of this 5 year nonsense on old guys.
If you guys think I am so detrimental to the league, vote me out. Because this entire issue is deflection and complete BS.
50% is legal. 60% is not. I dont understand what the problem is?
I honestly wouldnt mind simplifying this whole thing and just making it an even amount every year. Not worth the heartburn.
My contract was $12M for each year. I didn't have year 5 at over 50% of the entire cap for the entire 35 man roster. That was the major issue that caused a rule change in the middle of the FA auctions. And sorry, that Brady contract is nothing like yours...again, there's not a 300+% increase from the 2nd to last year to the last year. Myself and the other 10 owners will just have to agree to disagree with you. Like WaCoug said, let's just move on from this. You're not going to change anyone's mind by continuing to try and justify your actions.
So you have no plans to aft Bradshaw before year 5? Sure hope you don't hurt the league when you aft your "realistic" contract.
I'm done. Hope the integrity of the league can be saved from my wanton display. Consider me done.
My contract was $12M for each year. I didn't have year 5 at over 50% of the entire cap for the entire 35 man roster. That was the major issue that caused a rule change in the middle of the FA auctions. And sorry, that Brady contract is nothing like yours...again, there's not a 300+% increase from the 2nd to last year to the last year. Myself and the other 10 owners will just have to agree to disagree with you. Like WaCoug said, let's just move on from this. You're not going to change anyone's mind by continuing to try and justify your actions.
So you have no plans to aft Bradshaw before year 5? Sure hope you don't hurt the league when you aft your "realistic" contract.
I'm done. Hope the integrity of the league can be saved from my wanton display. Consider me done.
When I originally posted that contract, I had no plans of using the AFT in year 5. You know why? Because I was fine with paying Bradhsaw $12M a year. If Bradshaw started sucking at the end of the contract or if he retired, then sure I'd use the AFT (if we still have one) on him. What I didn't do is try to win the auction by backloading his contract to the point where I would HAVE to use the AFT on him in year 5. What I didn't do is post a contract just to win the auction with the sole intent of using the AFT in year 5. I've never posted a contract with the thought in my head "I'll just use the AFT in the last year". I mean the auction on Bradshaw had to be restarted and we had to change the rules of the entire league because you were exploiting a loophole in our very complicated rules. The poll passed with no opposition. How can you not see the difference?
terpfan wrote:I do hope you stick around, for what it's worth.
Same here. I'm sure that you won't believe me, but I never even thought about "voting you out", like you mentioned in an earlier post. And I hope that you don't think this whole thing is worth quitting the league over. Most leagues have problems or issues that they talk about, then they solve the problem, and then they move on. That's what we did. We did our best to fix the problem to keep the integrity of the league, and now we should just all move on. Please don't be mad at the "integrity of the league" comments. You did not break any rules, but by exploiting the loophole that you found to try to win Bradshaw, some felt that went against the integrity of the league. We discussed and fixed the issue. You are a great owner who is very active in the league. I would hate to lose you as an owner over this. Please, let's just put this behind us and try to have fun moving forward. That's what this league (and all of our other leagues) is all about.
aaawall91 wrote:Would of waited, I thought to myself damn...Hunter lasted awhile wish he woulda fell more, but already had my guy in mind and just went
Not a problem at all. I just want to pause a bit to give Matt a chance to repick. I just put up a players taken thread, so that should prevent it from happening in the future. I PMed Ron and asked him to wait. If Matt doesn't repick within 24 hours of his pick, I'll let Ron know that it's OK to fire away.