Revamping the Offseason

[KnuckleBalls]

The player tell you how much $ they want and for how long. Your role is to guess how many other GMs want who you want and what they are willing to pay. It's called knowing the "fair market value" of who you are after. I'm sure that most of us don't need their hands held when figuring this out.

[CrimsonCane]

The player's desired amount is absurdly low to the amount they sign for in OOTP. Another reason why the free agent system's blind offer is flawed. Some players sign for twice as much. Also, the limitations on salary caused by the simulation make the need to be more upfront about free agent signings.

I would have no problem with the current system of free agency if I could bank my surplus cap room for next season. Additionally, the way the system works is that you have to make your offers simultaneously. Suppose you want a MR but you're concerned you will get outbid for the top one. You can't give out offers to the #1 AND #2 MR free agents with the knowledge that only 1 will actually sign if the combined offers exceeds your cap room. That, to me, just makes the free agency process VERY favorable for teams that have single needs they'd like to address and not teams that have built up sizeable cap room to make multiple offseason moves.

[Party]

+1 CC
--------------------
Love the idea of banking cap space.

[KnuckleBalls]

I don't want to gloss over the fact that if you take free agency away from the program, you eliminate the "Desire for a winning team" rating from every player. By doing this, you make it favorable to cut costs, tank for a season or two and offer huge contracts that other teams can't match to vets to supplement your young players that you attained through firesales and top draft picks.

[CrimsonCane]

Banking cap space is desirable because spending below the cap is just pointless right now, but the free agency issues can create a whole host of problems where you might be locked out from using some of your extra cap space. PLus, it's not like the real world where you get some tangible benefit from that money saved (more profits, if you're the owner).
--------------------
I agree with Knuckles' point because I think Desire for a Winning Team should factor in. That's why I propose simply allowing people to bank cap space if they have surplus from one season. It allows people to feel a little better if they missed out on their desired free agents because they can go after more free agents (or sign extensions for players) in the next off season.

I feel like it's an in-game solution to problem that doesn't require third party arbiters or some outside-OOTP thread to determine free agent signings.

[KnuckleBalls]

Maybe a banking system would work on say, a 4 to 1 ratio. Meaning, if you end the season with 55M (20M under the cap), you would get an extra 5M for next season, pushing you up to the 80M cap.

[CrimsonCane]

Why have it be a ratio? It's like each team gets a budget of $75 million per season, some people value that money differently (short term vs. long term) based on the team their building. An 80% devaluation per year doesn't seem to make any reasonable sense.

[KnuckleBalls]

To prevent a team from having a 200M payroll.

[Bobbob1313]

I don't like the idea of banking all of it. There should be a limit.

[CrimsonCane]

To prevent a team from having a 200M payroll.

You can make it that they have to spend it entirely during the following season. So it would work something like this:

Payroll Y2 = 75,000,000 + (75,000,000 - Payroll Y1)

If Payroll Y1>$75,000,000 then Payroll Y2 = $75,000,000

Basically, it's like saying "You get $150 million to spend every two season, distribute it how you'd like."

[Bobbob1313]

Hmm. Maybe.

I know there are some owners who already have a problem with the $5 million plus some teams can add, so I don't think this would go over well.

[CrimsonCane]

I think this is different because a team is getting a benefit (more payroll) one season because they've undergone a detriment (below $75 million) during a prior season. Moreover, it's not a transfer from one team to another, which is also where I think some of the criticism came from. Also, the person/people were most upset because they considered themselves to be financially prudent. Here, financial prudence is rewarded.

[THE_REAL_MIBS]

In the real world, agents would be telling you what other teams are offering. That is why this blind offer nonsense is ridiculous, especially when it occurs over the course of sims (not real time). For example, I had a player who said, "Hey, this team is giving me more, what'ya got to offer?" But, in that same sim, he signed with the team. I would've upped my offer. In the real world, that doesn't happen.

This also happened to me which really cooled me off in trying to sign any other free agents. I had the highest bid the player for two sims and a message from the player that he was probably coming to San Diego and, in the next sim, I got a message from him that he had another offer and then he signed without my being able to do anything about it.

[KnuckleBalls]

I know some of you guys aren't happy, but you're talking about changing an important aspect of the game. Players are not only cash grabbing robots. Also, the way the league is set up now, there is parity. I think if you make drastic financial changes the league will suffer. Those are just my opinions. I admit that I might be a sceptic, but that's me.

[CrimsonCane]

If you HAVE to spend the money in the following season, you avoid a lot of the problems you're discussing. A team can't sign tons of free agents to big-time contracts even if they get to bank the previous year's surplus because they go back down to $75 million the next season and most free agents want multi-year contracts.

Also, I don't see how parity is effected when everyone is able to do it. It's not like payroll is being dictated by revenues and market size or anything.