New Sticky Note

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 - League News/General Discussion

Re: Rules Debate

By Androwski
3/12/2020 5:13 pm
Beercloud wrote:
Interesting.........

Are you proposing that the only position that can be re-signed would be the Head Coach?


If this is what your discussing, the way the game processes the FA turns could we see that a lot of teams without coaches at the end of early FA?

We could develop our own "Coaches Market" type deal where we could determine who gets what coaches before Early FA begins as one thought.


No. What I'm trying to say is that you shouldn't re-sign any of your coaches unless they're in their last year of their contract. If my QB coach has 3 yrs left, but I re-sign him for 2 yrs more, nobody can offer him a contract that offseason because the game doesn't allow it. If I do that with all my coaches, nobody can "steal" them even if a team would offer them a better gig.

Re: Rules Debate

By Smirt211
3/12/2020 5:25 pm
That sounds like a bad game of "sitting" DUCK HUNT! lol

Alright, my 80 rated pretties I can't offer ya'll a re-sign contract because you're all in Years 2-6....please shoot us dead and down to a litany of 65-66 rated free agent coaching replacements. (factoring in that currently employed coaches are out of the mix)

FA #1 = Defend the Turf orrrrrrr


The system needs to be changed to where someone can't come in like a thief in the night and go pluck pluck your OC is now mine. Not sure how but something which allows the defending team a legit shot to retain the coach!

Update: Here's how you do it and I wouldn't do it with free agent players. Now there's a work around with this unless there's a cut off a certain time before the sim because someone can bid on a coach 1 minute before it sims....

Basically, if someone bids on one of your coaches - a notification comes to your email and on the league page and you get the offer which needs to be beaten. .....May be too far but yeah something needs to be done to muck up the process of easily pilfering coaches.


nods




Last edited at 3/12/2020 5:32 pm

Re: Rules Debate

By Androwski
3/12/2020 5:39 pm
Smirt211 wrote:
That sounds like a bad game of "sitting" DUCK HUNT! lol

Alright, my 80 rated pretties I can't offer ya'll a re-sign contract because you're all in Years 2-6....please shoot us dead and down to a litany of 65-66 rated free agent coaching replacements. (factoring in that currently employed coaches are out of the mix)

FA #1 = Defend the Turf orrrrrrr


The system needs to be changed to where someone can't come in like a thief in the night and go pluck pluck your OC is now mine. Not sure how but something which allows the defending team a legit shot to retain the coach!

Nobody is going to pluck your OC... unless they offer him a HC gig which makes sense that he would leave your team. But the fact that I can't sign your Kicker Coach to be my HC because you re-signed him in the 1st FA sim is ridiculous imo.

Re: Rules Debate

By Smirt211
3/12/2020 5:44 pm
I disagree. It's protection.

In your design we'll call 80 on average coaches flip to a consistent 65-66 rated across the board scenario on OC/DC and positional coaches.

That f's everything up. Rookies get scared and don't develop properly if all coaches are poorly rated outside of the Head Coach. In all seriousness, coaches factor into rookie development to some degree (boom/bust rate movement) therefore you have to defend the turf and do what you can to put up something of a legit coaching staff. I basically do a once over at FA #1 and whatever it is....it is....cool.

But I'm definitely not going to lay back and allow my coaching team being a cast of 65s because I can't defend sh*t.

lol



Re: Rules Debate

By Androwski
3/12/2020 6:37 pm
Smirt211 wrote:
I disagree. It's protection.

In your design we'll call 80 on average coaches flip to a consistent 65-66 rated across the board scenario on OC/DC and positional coaches.

That's not true at all, maybe I'm not explaining well what I would do.

But I understand that you disagree with me, I just wanted to express how I struggled to find a HC this last offseason and maybe we could find a solution.

Re: Rules Debate

By jouameng
3/12/2020 7:13 pm
I can definitely see what you're saying. I wholeheartedly disagree with you based on one point. It absolutely does **** having teams resign all their coaches, blocking them from possibly being signed... even if it's a promotion from a Position Coach to a Head Coaching position. Why I have to disagree with you is because Head Coaches going into each offseason should be your number 1 priority in the coaches signing. If you want a coach, simply pay them more money than other teams are willing to bid. Houston had a coach, OC Gilbert Boggs who definitely wasn't at the end of his contract, in which they tried to resign for a total of 112M/6Y. Cleveland swooped in and was able to nab him to be their new Head Coach at the price tag of 180M/6Y. Basically with the example and the sole reason why I'm against your point is that if you want a Head Coach (Who should be your priority anyways when signing coaches) then you have to go after him. Not with a low ball deal, but with a massive contract. I noticed you offered coach Dan Compton a 28M/3Y deal. He's a great coach and I would've been shocked if you were able to nab him. Atlanta rightfully offered him 109M/6Y.

My mindset when looking for a Head Coach is to give him a huge deal... low enough that I'm still able to sign my coordinators to a deal that other teams would have a tough time matching, but high enough that I'm sure to get them. If there's any money left, that's when I throw the rest of my budget on maybe 1 position coach that really should be a coordinator, or spread it out for a couple of decent position coaches.

In the end, coaches matter for 2 things: Player development and a Head Coaches' playbook. I've yet to notice a huge difference in player development between different teams/coaching staffs. While they do play a role, it's not to a big enough degree that I feel like a rule restricting owners from offering coaches, with multiple years on their contracts left, an extension.

Re: Rules Debate

By Mcarovil
3/12/2020 7:47 pm
I don’t like reading essays.

If you need a HC/DC/OC. Sign them in FA1. Pay a lot. If you wait until FA2 then too bad.

No one is going to outbid you for HC to keep him as a position coach. Just not enough money to go around.

Re: Rules Debate

By Androwski
3/13/2020 4:42 am
You both made great points. Maybe I'm wrong, but I still feel like I should be able to have the chance to offer a contract to a coach if I'm offering him a position upgrade.

I'm alone on this one I guess lol

Re: Rules Debate

By Beercloud
3/13/2020 10:34 am
I agree with you Androwski. I would think most coaches would take promotions depending on their age i suppose.

But the signing loophole is there and I dont see that there's much we can do about it other than taking into our own hands. And it's prolly not worth the time considering the OC's and position coaches dont really have a big difference on the game. HC's and their playbooks.......well that's a thing i believe.

Re: Rules Debate

By CrazyRazor
3/13/2020 3:42 pm
I'm not at all in support of anything that affects the way we sign/retain/poach coaches. It is what it is.

I wanna know what the decision is on changing or clarifying the rule on 1st Rd draft picks. That is far more important because of what happened this season and needs to be addressed directly. Is anything going to be done?