|
|
Post by Rog on Sept 10, 2019 16:49:25 GMT
The results! I was hoping for more, but for the votes i've conducted here, 14 is actually not bad. But here are the results: 1 Year Max Proposal Yes - 85% - 12 votes No - 15% - 2 votes 4/5 Year Max Length Proposal Yes - 64% - 9 votes No - 36% - 5 votes Changing The Lottery Odds Proposal Yes - 71% - 10 votes No - 29% - 4 votes Should We Do This Yes - 85% - 12 votes No - 15% .- 2 votes I'd likely like to set the percentage at 75% for enacting rules moving forward, making the 1 year max contract being the only one to move forward and be enacted. Though, that percentage would be something for A. Silver to decide overall. |
|
|
|
Post by ucfinfan86 on Sept 10, 2019 16:52:50 GMT
75% seems like a fair percent.
A shame that only half of the league voted and yet some teams that cry they need cash can't take 30 seconds to vote and earn some.
|
|
|
|
Post by A. Silver on Sept 11, 2019 18:12:21 GMT
The results! I was hoping for more, but for the votes i've conducted here, 14 is actually not bad. But here are the results: 1 Year Max Proposal Yes - 85% - 12 votes No - 15% - 2 votes 4/5 Year Max Length Proposal Yes - 64% - 9 votes No - 36% - 5 votes Changing The Lottery Odds Proposal Yes - 71% - 10 votes No - 29% - 4 votes Should We Do This Yes - 85% - 12 votes No - 15% .- 2 votes I'd likely like to set the percentage at 75% for enacting rules moving forward, making the 1 year max contract being the only one to move forward and be enacted. Though, that percentage would be something for A. Silver to decide overall. Sounds good to me, looks like we didn't get this done in time for FA this year, but FA next year should have a new set of rules. |
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Sept 11, 2019 18:26:33 GMT
The results! I was hoping for more, but for the votes i've conducted here, 14 is actually not bad. But here are the results: 1 Year Max Proposal Yes - 85% - 12 votes No - 15% - 2 votes 4/5 Year Max Length Proposal Yes - 64% - 9 votes No - 36% - 5 votes Changing The Lottery Odds Proposal Yes - 71% - 10 votes No - 29% - 4 votes Should We Do This Yes - 85% - 12 votes No - 15% .- 2 votes I'd likely like to set the percentage at 75% for enacting rules moving forward, making the 1 year max contract being the only one to move forward and be enacted. Though, that percentage would be something for A. Silver to decide overall. Sounds good to me, looks like we didn't get this done in time for FA this year, but FA next year should have a new set of rules. So we're doing the 1 year FA max? Didn't expect to actually get rule changes since this was a mock but that's awesome. |
|
|
|
Post by A. Silver on Sept 11, 2019 18:46:02 GMT
Sounds good to me, looks like we didn't get this done in time for FA this year, but FA next year should have a new set of rules. So we're doing the 1 year FA max? Didn't expect to actually get rule changes since this was a mock but that's awesome. No, the 1 year FA max is not in effect for this year. |
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Sept 11, 2019 19:03:46 GMT
So we're doing the 1 year FA max? Didn't expect to actually get rule changes since this was a mock but that's awesome. No, the 1 year FA max is not in effect for this year. No you said for next year, I knew what you meant haha. |
|
|
|
Post by A. Silver on Sept 11, 2019 19:40:03 GMT
No, the 1 year FA max is not in effect for this year. No you said for next year, I knew what you meant haha. Well I wouldn't say anything is official but it seems like enough people want change in this area to be able to hammer something out by next offseason. |
|
|
|
Post by naterade on Sept 11, 2019 19:44:21 GMT
Ya I think since half the league is rebuilding and just does the 1 year deals to hold players hostage so THEY can benefit via trades is slowly breaking FA.. thats the one rule I would enjoy seeing changed, because it is temping to tank and sign trade assets to later deal for picks, but its just kinda lame
|
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Sept 27, 2019 0:25:31 GMT
Last post
|
|
|
|
Post by ucfinfan86 on Oct 21, 2019 11:27:22 GMT
The results! I was hoping for more, but for the votes i've conducted here, 14 is actually not bad. But here are the results: 1 Year Max Proposal Yes - 85% - 12 votes No - 15% - 2 votes 4/5 Year Max Length Proposal Yes - 64% - 9 votes No - 36% - 5 votes Changing The Lottery Odds Proposal Yes - 71% - 10 votes No - 29% - 4 votes Should We Do This Yes - 85% - 12 votes No - 15% .- 2 votes I'd likely like to set the percentage at 75% for enacting rules moving forward, making the 1 year max contract being the only one to move forward and be enacted. Though, that percentage would be something for A. Silver to decide overall. Sounds good to me, looks like we didn't get this done in time for FA this year, but FA next year should have a new set of rules.
A. Silver are we doing the max 1year contract this FA? |
|
|
|
Post by A. Silver on Oct 21, 2019 15:41:35 GMT
Sounds good to me, looks like we didn't get this done in time for FA this year, but FA next year should have a new set of rules. A. Silver are we doing the max 1year contract this FA? We are not changing any rules for this FA - there was no activity whatsoever from the rules committee this year and as such no rules will be changed or introduced. |
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Oct 21, 2019 20:23:38 GMT
A. Silver are we doing the max 1year contract this FA? We are not changing any rules for this FA - there was no activity whatsoever from the rules committee this year and as such no rules will be changed or introduced. Yeah I had issue finding a 3rd western GM, I'll have a PM sent tonight to get things rolling for the next iteration of it, and be able to roll with it moving forward. Just had 3 stupid busy weekends back to back to back(Wedding bullshit, helping someone move, and doing my entire carpet) so sent out PMs asking sparingly, can get it going tonight though. But the 1 year contract max was based on last year and thought it was going to be adopted despite it being a mock committee, is that not still in the works? |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 21, 2019 20:42:07 GMT
Guess ill do it if your desperate
|
|
|
|
Post by A. Silver on Oct 21, 2019 21:05:57 GMT
We are not changing any rules for this FA - there was no activity whatsoever from the rules committee this year and as such no rules will be changed or introduced. Yeah I had issue finding a 3rd western GM, I'll have a PM sent tonight to get things rolling for the next iteration of it, and be able to roll with it moving forward. Just had 3 stupid busy weekends back to back to back(Wedding bullshit, helping someone move, and doing my entire carpet) so sent out PMs asking sparingly, can get it going tonight though. But the 1 year contract max was based on last year and thought it was going to be adopted despite it being a mock committee, is that not still in the works? This was my last post about it: No you said for next year, I knew what you meant haha. Well I wouldn't say anything is official but it seems like enough people want change in this area to be able to hammer something out by next offseason. Nothing was hammered out. |
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Oct 21, 2019 22:17:54 GMT
Yeah I had issue finding a 3rd western GM, I'll have a PM sent tonight to get things rolling for the next iteration of it, and be able to roll with it moving forward. Just had 3 stupid busy weekends back to back to back(Wedding bullshit, helping someone move, and doing my entire carpet) so sent out PMs asking sparingly, can get it going tonight though. But the 1 year contract max was based on last year and thought it was going to be adopted despite it being a mock committee, is that not still in the works? This was my last post about it: Well I wouldn't say anything is official but it seems like enough people want change in this area to be able to hammer something out by next offseason. Nothing was hammered out. I guess that doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me since the rule as voted on is pretty specific and says exactly what it needs to? What more is there to hammer out? |
|
*
