Since we're having such an outrage, I'll just let you guys decide. Should we allow teams to cut players bid at $300K, $500K, or no cuts at all. If a rule is changed then players who were bidded at $500K or below will have an "amnesty rule" applied to them because of the potential rule change. If there is no rule change, then nothing changes. I am tired of people complaining and whining... so majority wins in this vote. I am keeping it public so I can ensure it is actual GMs voting.
There I helped you out. 300K is the first bid, so basically first come, first serve and it protects your rights to cut a training camp body.
I voted no as there would be no more drama surrounding Schisno outbidding, winning the bid then cutting the player he has no interest for.
No means "no cuts". I can't "take away" votes I think... or "change" them within the message board's voting system. But if anyone wants to change their vote... I can just mark it down in the OP.
GIK, I thought I was the whiniest GM. So wtf are you guys talking about here? Cutting Fa's you signed?
After reading the fa thread I would change my vote to 300k you can cut. This way it still stops the meaningless bids but puts some type of control on it. Poll won't let me change my vote tho. But I'm really down for anything, in the end this is still just a fun league.
You absolutely should be able to cut some guys you sign, at the very least guys who sign for the minimum (if you can't cut them, you definitely shouldn't be able to retract bids). But I see no reason why we shouldn't be able to cut players up to 400k or 500k. I wanted all the guys I bid on, but I might not have bid on them if I didn't think I could cut them later on if someone I deemed more valuable came along (such as a draft pick). I recall being able to cut players we signed up to a certain salary last year too.
When the poll closes is when the decision is made... pretty much will be majority rules. Right now it looks like the rules will stay as is but the poll is still open for another 12 hours so plenty could change by then.
I think cutting players up to 500k is fine. Maybe a compromise for those who want to be able to cut any FA at any salary would be to make them keep a certain % of that salary on their books as a type of penalty. You could even have it increase exponentially so as to make it more costly to cut higher priced FAs.
I want everyone to know that I'm auctioning my bid ... GM League style. So, if you want me to vote for your side, let's make a deal. Spoiler It includes Tony Pashos. You know it's a small price to pay. Spoiler And a third rounder. That's worth it? Right? Show the commish who's boss!!
Alright results look like they are pretty set. Issue probably should have been brought up before FA started but at least GIK gave an option.
