I would only vote yes to this if we were including some sort of 25-50% of dead money owing on cuts/trades applying.

Otherwise with no dead money it's easy enough to keep who you want....and we wouldn't have as many free agents with such.

 

Should have made these decisions before team selection. JMO

Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk

 

Yea, I dont know what to vote until I know who MY team is.

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk

 

I don't see a problem with this rule. Anyone who doesn't like it obviously doesn't have to use it, and anyone who does want to use it knows they'll be doing so at a cost.

 

I voted no just because it would be mostly used on starting QBs and the Peyton Mannings and Tom Brady's shouldn't be able to go from 20mil to 10mil.

 

But at the same time, no one should have to pay $17 million for Mike Wallace just b/c of the way the contract was structured. Or perhaps $22.0M for Suh, $18.0M for Mario Williams & Julius Peppers, $16M for Ngata & DeMarcus Ware, $13M for Lamarr Woodley, $10M for Josh Morgan, $18M for Fitzgerald. I think it stinks for the GMs of these teams to be faced with making some of these guys cap casualties just b/c the salary is too high and/or because they're already sitting in a bad cap situation.

We could put some more parameters on it. How about omitting QB from the list or changing it so that people can only reduce a player whose 2014 year outweighs the average of their overall contract like Wallace's does? Or make All Pro players exempt from the list. Or make this option applicable to any GM whose team is within $5 million of the cap or something like that.

 

Exactly.

 

I personally don't like it. If implemented I hope you take my next idea into consideration.

In real life a player restructuring is a crapshoot. Some do some don't.

I'd prefer if we were able to choose three players we would like to restructure. Those three can then be put in a randomizer and the one chosen can be restructured. The other two can not be, and are just there to add a bit of chance.

 

If passed I just think there should be some type if restriction. Whether it's not allowed on QBs or some other idea that were mentioned by others

 

Me and Stitches voting No

 

I think a simple solution is QBs can only be restructured at 75% if you want to use it on a QB. That would accurately reflect the demand on QBs.

 

Hope this doesn't go through. It's easy enough to shed cash as is. Will just lead to more bloated FA contracts.

 

Yeah, I'm not a fan of this one. I would imagine everyone will take advantage of this option and the loss of one bid isn't punishment enough.

 

I like the rule only if it applies to non QBs.

Also if a player restructures in real life, we get the "credit" here correct??

 

I recall that being a touchy subject last year. Paul's call but he might just go with the figures as is when the spreadsheet goes up.

 

Not debating, just remember it being in play before. Wich is ridiculous imo

 

I really dislike this rule. I think one of the more interesting parts of this is working around salary limitations as well.

 

I felt since you sorta liked my ideas I should help support them. :D

 

What I don't like about this rule is the inability to now trade the player which reduces some of the action of the league b/c in the past, many of the high dollar players were often either traded to create cap room to GMs who could afford it or were cut altogether, which increases league activity via the trade & FA market. Giving GMs all these reasons to keep players on their own team could be viewed as boring.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but with these two rules being passed, that's the potential for 64 players either not being traded or hitting the FA market, right? I might as well just sit back, kick my feet up, and keep my Super Bowl Seattle roster fully in tact if that's the case. LOL.

 

So how much of Cro's 14M salary can I restructure?

 

Ahh. Wasn't aware of that. Should'a made it clear in your opening post, Pauly. :p On second thought, let's pretend you didn't just mention that part. Just between you and I, eh? :wink-nudge:

 

no u

 

Alright so because we can restructure 1 contract does that mean if a player restructures in real life it wont apply?

 

Well take your time Paul on those rosters. Don't want to tire yourself out.