Another FOF QB Controversy...

[Ben E Lou]

OK...time for another QB decision to be made. We're about to play in the 2024 Front Office Bowl, and therefore I must decide about contract extensions. The most important decision is the one about my QB. Randall Barker has been my starter for the last 8 seasons, and he's been very good, and has led us to 6 Front Office Bowl appearances during that time, with 3 titles, and we stand on the brink of possibly winning #4. He's hurt going into the Super Bowl, and his backup, who has never played much due to Barker's durability, will start for us. Here are the player cards for the two:

http://www.younglifenorthlake.com/fofc/barker.jpg
http://www.younglifenorthlake.com/fofc/barkerfront.jpg
http://www.younglifenorthlake.com/fofc/ulufalefront.jpg

Ulufale has only thrown 35 passes in his seven seasons on the bench with us, so I don't see the need to post his stats. Ulufale is under contract through 2026. He's set to cost approx $9M in cap room next year, and $10.2M in 2026.

To extend Barker's contract, it would look like this:

BONUS: $23,080,000
CURRENT: $3,190,000
2025: $13,250,000 ($20.94M cap cost)
2026: $16,530,000 ($24.22M cap cost)

The salary cap this year is $231.8M, so you can divide everything by 3 to get a rough approximate of dollar values in 2004 terms. Re-signing Barker would probably mean that I won't be able to afford to re-sign one of our two best receivers. (Both of their contracts run out this year, too.)

EDIT: Barker's ratings have remained pretty consistent throughout the time he's been a starter; he's performed above what I would have expected for eight consecutive seasons.

What do you do?

[Ben E Lou]

I'm curious what everyone is going to say here. The new draft class for IHOF was just released, so I'll peruse that sucker for a bit anyway before I make a move.

[spleen1015]

I would keep the younger Ulufale. He's better ratingswise and you get to keep your 2 WR. If he does well in the Front Office Bowl, definitely give him the starting job next season.

[Fonzie]

I'd tell Barker to go get his money elsewhere and see what the understudy can do.

[Havok]

Lukes lack of accuracy scares me... you could max out every other QB skill, but with low accuracy they'll never seem to be very dominate. At least in my experiance anyway.... so with that said, resign the old guy.

His skills arn't much to look at, but his stats and 120-25-1 record speak for themselves.

[Franklinnoble]

Trade Barker. Preferably, for draft picks. Ulufale may be a solution, but I'd draft a young prospect or two.

[Sharpieman]

I don't really know about Lukes...the lack of intelligence, number of formations and accuracy are troubling. However, Barker wants too much money, so I would say get rid of Barker, start Lukes but sign an insurance QB who has decent skills so if Lukes turns out to be below average you have someone to come in.

[Ben E Lou]

Trade Barker.I'm right before the Front Office Bowl.

[Franklinnoble]

I'm right before the Front Office Bowl.

Right... I assume you have a franchise tag to use?

I'd tag him and trade him at the beginning of next season.

[MikeVic]

I was in a situation similar to this last year... I had a QB who has given me four straight 100+ QB rating seasons, and was responsible for my 4 Bowl appearances and 2 wins. I also had a young QB comparable in talent, and making a lot less (QB (http://dynamic2.gamespy.com/%7Efof/forums/showthread.php?t=33208)). After a lot of thought, I franchised the older QB for one more season... and so far he's been doing awesome. I'm 5 or 6 games into the next season, and he just threw his first pick last game. He has 20TDs so far, and a 70% completion percentage.

Based on my experience, I'd say franchise. :)

[vtbub]

Franchise him and trade him before the season begins.

[Ben E Lou]

Right... I assume you have a franchise tag to use?

I'd tag him and trade him at the beginning of next season.Yeah...I'd thought about that, but the conservative side of me fears that if I do that, as opposed to putting the franchise tag on one of my wide receivers, I'll end up with a new QB, and two new receivers.

[Franklinnoble]

Yeah...I'd thought about that, but the conservative side of me fears that if I do that, as opposed to putting the franchise tag on one of my wide receivers, I'll end up with a new QB, and two new receivers.

I don't remember exactly... is it already too late to re-sign players in the last year of their deals?

If that's the case, then, yeah... you have a dilemma. I'd like to see how good the WR's are...

[Ben E Lou]

I don't remember exactly... is it already too late to re-sign players in the last year of their deals?

If that's the case, then, yeah... you have a dilemma. I'd like to see how good the WR's are...No, it isn't too late. I can re-sign guys, theoretically. The problem is that both of 'em want enough bonus money that neither contract can be structured to fit under this year's cap. If I wasn't playing in the Front Office Bowl, I'd be able to cut players to free up the cap room this year.

Neither WR is great, but both are solid. One is a big cohesion helper--13-year veteran who has spent his entire career with us. The other just finished his fourth season. The vet also is the receiver leader, and has strong affinity with both the starting TE and the WR3. Oh yeah, WR3 had to have reconstructive knee surgery this year, and is a 10-year vet. Right now he's listed as Out for 43 weeks. He'll either retire, or miss all of 2025 anyway. The vet's situation is just screaming for the franchise tag, but I definitely see the argument for franchising Barker.

[Ryche]

Maybe not the best strategic way to approach this, but I'd look at it as though the situation was the real NFL. Would a real NFL team dump a guy who has had that kind of success to go with such an unproven quarterback? There would be rioting in the streets.

[Ben E Lou]

Maybe not the best strategic way to approach this, but I'd look at it as though the situation was the real NFL. Would a real NFL team dump a guy who has had that kind of success to go with such an unproven quarterback? There would be rioting in the streets.In terms of role-playing, that's a really good point. Extending the role-playing thought, though. If Ulufale has a big game in the Front Office Bowl, half the home town would be ready to replace Barker. Backup QB's tend to be the most over-rated-by-the-general-public players in the league. ;)

[Ryche]

I know the public is fickle, but look at the season Barker just had, probably his best ever, with an upcoming MVP award being a possibility. And he's idolized. The fans want him back.

[Franklinnoble]

Bah. Look at what happened to Trent Dilfer. Brad Johnson. Rich Gannon. Kurt Warner. Drew Bledsoe.

You wanna role-play, go right ahead. But there's plenty of real-world precedent for trading the old guy and giving the new guy a shot... the cap ramifications alone are enough.

[Ben E Lou]

Of course, another thing just hit me: Barker's ratings aren't that high. Will an AI team even take anything for a QB rated around 50 overall with a franchise salary? I don't trade with the AI very much, so I'm not sure whether or not the trade AI factors performance in.

[dubb93]

I had a very similar situation recently, but my 2 QB's appear to be a little better. I had a 6th year pro rated 90/90 and a rookie that slipped to 25 in the draft that was rated 53/90. The 90/90 was coming off an MVP award and I figured I would give them both a shot this year. During the year the 90/90 guy got hurt and the rookie filled in great, but after the year I ended up trading the rookie for help I needed elsewhere, a 71/81 WR and a 72/76 LB. I say trade the younger one for what you need. He doesn't look like the answer.

[Calis]

I'm a sucker for loyalty, with the kind of success Barker has had I would resign him in a heartbeat.

Those stats ain't too shabby either, I say go with the proven thing.

Tough call though.

[Ben E Lou]

Another issue just hit me: I don't trade with the AI much, so I don't know how much it takes into account performance vs. ratings. Will I get the dreaded, "no GM is willing to take on the salary of Randall Barker?" After all, he'll be a QB with overall ratings in the low 50's making a franchise salary.

At any rate, I'm going to go ahead and play the FRont Office Bowl now, without giving Barker the extension. He'll either get franchised, or let go.

[Franklinnoble]

Another issue just hit me: I don't trade with the AI much, so I don't know how much it takes into account performance vs. ratings. Will I get the dreaded, "no GM is willing to take on the salary of Randall Barker?" After all, he'll be a QB with overall ratings in the low 50's making a franchise salary.

At any rate, I'm going to go ahead and play the FRont Office Bowl now, without giving Barker the extension. He'll either get franchised, or let go.

Can you give your WR's an extension?

[Franklinnoble]

dola... nevermind... missed your earlier post on the subject...

[Ben E Lou]

We lost the Front Office Bowl, but Ulufale did well:

Passing Att Comp Yards Yd/Att Long TD Int Sckd
6 Ulufale 32 20 281 8.7 62 0 0 2

[MikeVic]

We lost the Front Office Bowl, but Ulufale did well:

Passing Att Comp Yards Yd/Att Long TD Int Sckd
6 Ulufale 32 20 281 8.7 62 0 0 2


Bah. No TDs!

[Ryche]

Bah. Look at what happened to Trent Dilfer. Brad Johnson. Rich Gannon. Kurt Warner. Drew Bledsoe.

You wanna role-play, go right ahead. But there's plenty of real-world precedent for trading the old guy and giving the new guy a shot... the cap ramifications alone are enough.

Dilfer - Was simply holding the reins, riding a great defense, no one mistook him for a perennial MVP candidate.
Johnson - Skills were deteriorating fast as was the team.
Gannon - Lost his job because of injuries.
Warner - Ditto.
Bledsoe - Brady led the team most of Bledsoe's last season in New England and Bledsoe has been extremely erratic.

This would be more like the Packers dumping Brett Farve next year to go with J.T. O'Sullivan.

[randal7]

Another issue just hit me: I don't trade with the AI much, so I don't know how much it takes into account performance vs. ratings. Will I get the dreaded, "no GM is willing to take on the salary of Randall Barker?" After all, he'll be a QB with overall ratings in the low 50's making a franchise salary.

At any rate, I'm going to go ahead and play the FRont Office Bowl now, without giving Barker the extension. He'll either get franchised, or let go.
I think the AI looks only at ratings. I just traded a 40/44 MLB coming off of 2 100+ tackle seasons and a DRotY (due to the suckage of the rest of the D) and had to throw in a 7th round pick to get a 24/45 RT.

[MizzouRah]

I think the AI looks only at ratings. I just traded a 40/44 MLB coming off of 2 100+ tackle seasons and a DRotY (due to the suckage of the rest of the D) and had to throw in a 7th round pick to get a 24/45 RT.

That's a great point and something OOTP just started doing in this version. Hopefully there's more to it than just ratings in FOF... although I find myself looking at ratings more than stats most of the time.


Todd

[Ben E Lou]

I decided to franchise my veteran flanker, and let Barker become a free agent.

[Ben E Lou]

Update: FWIW, no AI team signed Barker during regular or late free agency. He wanted a big cnotract, one that was commensurate with his performance the last few years, but not his ratings. I'm taking this as pretty strong evidence that AI teams evaluate a player's worth based heavily on his ratings, as opposed to his performance. He ended up signing a one-year deal with Baltimore at the end of late free agency.

[Ben E Lou]

We won the Front Office Bowl in 2026 with Ulufale at the helm. Barker had a pretty solid performance as a backup for the Ravens, getting 2 starts with an 87.1 passer rating overall. Ulufale's rating for us was 88.0--and he was a lot cheaper than Barker would have been.

[Fonzie]

I'd tell Barker to go get his money elsewhere and see what the understudy can do.

We won the Front Office Bowl in 2026 with Ulufale at the helm. Barker had a pretty solid performance as a backup for the Ravens, getting 2 starts with an 87.1 passer rating overall. Ulufale's rating for us was 88.0--and he was a lot cheaper than Barker would have been.

I rule.

:)

[spleen1015]

I rule.

:)

You can be my queen as I called Ulufale first!