Renegotiations and Trades

[Ksyrup]

I'm loving this version of FOF, but if I had to come up with my least favorite changes/"improvements" to the game, I would have to list the lack of true renegotiations and trades as the biggest disappointments. I have yet to be able to actually renegotiate away from what one of my players initially asks for. There is no tweaking of the offer, and even when I attempt to completely restructure the deal (like trying to turn a 1-year offer into a 4 year mega offer), it rarely succeeds. On one hand, I guess I can treat it like a house rule - I have to accept the player's offer or do not renegotiate - but it seems like it is built into the game this way. What are you guys experiencing?

Also, the lack of trading has taken away one of my favorite areas of the game. I have yet to make a single trade in 5+ years of my career (outside of a draft deal in the first year). Rarely can I find a team even interested in talking about serviceable end of contract vets, even to pick up a 7th rounder. And when they do express interest, I haven't found an offer that is worth it. I don't know if this is a function of the AI having tighter reins on salary cap management or what, but it is unfortunate. I get offers every now and then, but they are usually for guys I can't let go. I don't want to stockpile draft picks like we used to be able to, but pawning off the odd vet here and there for a late-round pick should still happen.

The only trade I can recall making was the one that landed me an absolute stud overall #1 QB. And if I recall, I ended up trading my 1(19), 2007, and 2008 1st rounders and 2007 and 2008 2nd rounders to move up to get him. And although it was worth it, I felt like Mike Ditka at the time. Other than that, no luck. You guys?

[Narcizo]

I've not had much difficulty with renegotiations away from what they're asking for, although I suspect that it's been tightened up to cut down on exploity offers that were used in FOF2004. It's still possible to increase bonus and cut base salary a lot, it's still possible to switch bonus for year 1 salary - just not to the same extent it was before.

I've got to say that the trade offers are currently a waste of time. The offers are, by and large, ludicrous (viewed from my scout's eyes anyway). The only ones I've been tempted by are offers for back-up quarterbacks. I've had an offer of a first round pick for a very good reserve I had. That's about it. Unless I have a good reserve quarterback on my roster I'll be ignoring trade offers in future.

[Ksyrup]

I've not had much difficulty with renegotiations away from what they're asking for, although I suspect that it's been tightened up to cut down on exploity offers that were used in FOF2004. It's still possible to increase bonus and cut base salary a lot, it's still possible to switch bonus for year 1 salary - just not to the same extent it was before.

I'll have to play around with it some more. It sounds like the backloaded contract offers are entirely gone, which is fine. But I've tried to decrease bonus and make it up throughout the contract (and sometimes even give more), and never get a bite. If I just have to trade bonus solely for 1st year salary, then it's not all that much worth trying to renegotiate.

[wishbone]

FOF2007 just does not value vets like FOF2004. We all got used to trading a 9th year guy to teams for draft picks, in the old version there would be interest in a 70/70 10th year WR. But now the AI wants no part of that.

[Ksyrup]

I'm fine with that, except it leaves me with pretty much no option but to cut the guy. And then someone signs him right away. Now, I guess you can infer the AI knows I'm being held hostage by the cap, but I don't think the AI is that smart. I'm about to have to cut Roy Williams in his 9th year, at 87/87, making a base salary of $14M. Before free agency, plenty of teams had the room and the need for him. And he'll likely sign a crazy money deal as soon as I cut him, too. We'll see.

[Front Office Midget]

I must say that the trading seems to me a bit TOO difficult, but it's not a huge deal.

I'm fine with renegotiation. Going back to FOF2, I've never allowed myself to offer a player anything other than what he was asking for or more. Occasionally now I take exception if a player only wants a one-year-deal, and I offer him several years. It seems to work for me.

[Passacaglia]

I haven't played yet much, but in one of the few seasons I played, Houston offered me their first round pick for Shaun Rogers. right off the bat. I was all over that.

[Narcizo]

If I just have to trade bonus solely for 1st year salary, then it's not all that much worth trying to renegotiate.

It's a method you can use if you have a lot of free cap space in the current year. It, basically, makes you less of a hostage to keeping the player and opens up future cap room. If I have lots of cap room left at the end of any given year then I know I've done something wrong.

The thing with players asking for only one year cotracts is very annoying - but they will usually take an offer for two years if you up their basic salary request (add the bonus to the year one salary, apply that to the second year and lower the bonus somewhat). If you're in a MP league it's best to test these things out in SP as you get multiple bites at the cherry in SP.

[JeffW]

The thing with players asking for only one year cotracts is very annoying - but they will usually take an offer for two years if you up their basic salary request .

I totally agree, it's one thing if they increase their multi-year demands relative to 2k4, it's another to have to puzzle out their increased demands from scratch.

[Vinatieri for Prez]

I have no problem at all with an AI GM wanting no part of a 9th year safety (no matter how good) with a current salary of $14 million. Most human GMs would want no part of that either. So, I think it's a good thing. Especially, when they get him for free in free agency after you cut him. I like this a lot. Although trades have increased in recent years in the NFL, they are still few and far between and usually involve QBs. I am all for this kind of realism.

I also have no problem with players not wanting less guaranteed bonus money over increases in yearly salary. Again, this is way more reaslistic than what we have seen in the past.

My guess is that if you don't play Wall Street difficulty level, you will have a much easier time of doing these things.

[molson]

I used to have a house rule about not trading any players that weren't projected as starters on my team (or that were under a certain current scouted value). It was way to easy to get random draft picks for guys I didn't want anymore - that sort of thing never happens in real life (look at the caliber of players who are released every year during training camp - plenty of guys are cut for purely salary cap reason).

[Ksyrup]

I have no problem at all with an AI GM wanting no part of a 9th year safety (no matter how good) with a current salary of $14 million. Most human GMs would want no part of that either. So, I think it's a good thing. Especially, when they get him for free in free agency after you cut him. I like this a lot. Although trades have increased in recent years in the NFL, they are still few and far between and usually involve QBs. I am all for this kind of realism.

I also have no problem with players not wanting less guaranteed bonus money over increases in yearly salary. Again, this is way more reaslistic than what we have seen in the past.

My guess is that if you don't play Wall Street difficulty level, you will have a much easier time of doing these things.

I was talking about the WR, but same argument, I know. What I don't like about it is that he got the same type of deal he would have needed for me to resign him. FWIW, I ended up keeping him for his final year and letting him go to FA, where he was snapped up and paid more than he asked me for. I think a contending team with a huge amount of cap space (and those exist in this game) looking for a difference maker would surely take a chance on a 1 year, $14M top 3 WR and might even extend him (similar to the FA offer he received the next year) once they got him.

As far as the bonus money issue, my problem with that is that even when I increase the bonus and decrease the yearly salaries, they still don't want it. I end up wasting 15 minutes when apparently the only real choice I have is to accept the original offer. The only real renegotiations I've been able to have are with the guys wanting only a 1-year deal. I can usually get them to agree to a 2 or 3-year deal (if they are worth it). Guys wanting multi-year deals right off the bat...no luck.

Incidentally, I had a very bad experience with the franchise designation. I guess I've learned my lesson and will only use it on mid-level but productive guys I'd like to keep or on certain low-profile positions (FB or P, for example), because I franchised my stud QB (the only way to keep Williams on the team his last year) with the idea of getting through that one year and then paying him what he wanted. I got the "due to past injustices" message the next year and was screwed, so I franchised him again and had to trade him. My 97/97 QB, 3-time SB winner...gone. Williams...gone. At least I got two high 1st rounders (1(5) and 1(12) in this year's draft), a 2nd, and a 6th for him. Looks like I'll be starting from scratch.