Bogus 2nd and 3rd year money

[Ben E Lou]

Well, I don't have patience to tease out the exact number. It didn't take 90K/940/950/950, but it did take

B: 150K
1: 940K
2: 1.2M
3: 1.2M

It signed that one in Week 2 five straight times when it was the only offer, so I stopped there.

Point being, clearly you can get this guy (and probably anyone you want) for a really trivial amount of money that just doesn't affect the cap at all. So I say again to this part of this post:

Originally Posted by Sef0r

Just remove the 3 year deal rule because all things considered, that offer breaks that rule. He looses nothing in years 2 and 3.

This makes no sense whatsoever. I could have gotten the guy for three years for virtually no money, and by your logic, that would have been just fine. But since I got him for one year for virtually no money, that's bad. The two overwhelming things here, I say again.

1. NO ONE ELSE OFFERED HIM A DIME.
2. Given number one, this guy would have signed a much, much, much *cheaper* contract, in this very same stage before no one else had the chance to counter, if I had offered one.

A proper offer would mean he keeps the player for another 2 years costing his salary cap about 1 mil and 2 mil, which is pretty big given that the salary cap only goes up by 1 mil each year. It would make releasing that player a little more difficult a decision to make. Ben would probably rethink signing 4 QBs in the off-season knowing all 5 may still be on the roster taking up even more cap space in season 2.

This offer means he releases the player next season with a 10k penalty for that season and 10k for the season after.

A proper offer would mean he keeps the player for another 2 years costing his salary cap about 1 mil and 2 mil, which is pretty big given that the salary cap only goes up by 1 mil each year.

I'm sorry, but this is just laughable. I have roughly $20M in available cap space this year, And with *all* of my key guys from a championship team signed through next year (and by the way, I've added a 76/76 WR to that team who is *also* signed through next year), I would have around $50M in cap room next year if that guy was only signed for $1M or $2M or so. That little petty salary he would have made would be utterly meaningless.

It would make releasing that player a little more difficult a decision to make. Ben would probably rethink signing 4 QBs in the off-season knowing all 5 may still be on the roster taking up even more cap space in season 2.

Nope. Again, look at the numbers. Whether I lose $20K in bonus or $100K in bonus isn't anywhere in the ballpark of being important.





The lesson is this: never, ever, ever, ever let decent players go without *some* offer. Someone might just sign them in the very first stage for next to nothing.

[gstelmack]

Originally Posted by Sef0r

Just remove the 3 year deal rule because all things considered, that offer breaks that rule. He looses nothing in years 2 and 3.

A proper offer would mean he keeps the player for another 2 years costing his salary cap about 1 mil and 2 mil, which is pretty big given that the salary cap only goes up by 1 mil each year. It would make releasing that player a little more difficult a decision to make. Ben would probably rethink signing 4 QBs in the off-season knowing all 5 may still be on the roster taking up even more cap space in season 2.

This offer means he releases the player next season with a 10k penalty for that season and 10k for the season after.

I am in full and complete agreement here.

[QuikSand]

Aside from the specific issue at hand, I have a more global argument.

I joined this league because I was interested in doing something different. A set of rules basically laid out up front, and a faster simming schedule - these were the reasons I wanted to join.

As it turns out, I'm already a bit disappointed because the speed doesn't really feel much different. But at least we have the streamlined rules that we all signed up for, more or less.

If this league is simply going to devolve into the exact same thing as pretty much every other league, where every time one person tries something that another person hadn't thought of it turns into a new rule or even a big debate about a new rule... well, I'm just not interested in playing in that league.

The basic rules I want are: Here is what is illegal, past that, go for it. That league probably isn't for everyone, I understand that.



As for this case, my biggest annoyance is that I missed the boat on this important stage, as I likely would have been one of the teams keeping Ben honest in the free agent market. The fact that I missed the beginning of free agency altogether is a bad sign for my continuing interest as is. The fact that nobody else in the entire league bothered to even make a token offer to this solid player is another dark mark, to me. And now that the griping carries into page two of a thread about it... well, I might need to check my rules of baseball. Maybe I can still call that a foul tip.

[gstelmack]

I will bring up the other reason why I think this skirts the intent of the rule: the cap hit for you is all of $20k when you trade him away for a 1st round pick next season to someone desperate for a QB. And they can resign for a much more managable deal, even if it does involve a $30mil bonus spread over 3 or 4 years.

[QuikSand]

Originally Posted by gstelmack

I will bring up the other reason why I think this skirts the intent of the rule: the cap hit for you is all of $20k when you trade him away for a 1st round pick next season to someone desperate for a QB. And they can resign for a much more managable deal, even if it does involve a $30mil bonus spread over 3 or 4 years.

What exactly is wrong with the free market? Who is the aggrieved party by the fact that this guy took a contract that you now decide was too cheap? When you and I and everyone else saw him in free agency and didn't bother to offer him more than Ben did, we all cast our vote. We all said "I don't care, I don't want him." And NOW we want to go and change the rules because we were all too lazy or uninterested to make an offer to this guy?

Everyone was playing by the same rules. Any team could have put in a silly offer for 10K more an probably gotten the guy, or almost certainly left the bidding open. Nobody did.

I realize that the custom on the internet is to basically ignore the other guy's argument, but that's a really powerful one right there.

[gstelmack]

Originally Posted by QuikSand

As for this case, my biggest annoyance is that I missed the boat on this important stage, as I likely would have been one of the teams keeping Ben honest in the free agent market. The fact that I missed the beginning of free agency altogether is a bad sign for my continuing interest as is. The fact that nobody else in the entire league bothered to even make a token offer to this solid player is another dark mark, to me. And now that the griping carries into page two of a thread about it... well, I might need to check my rules of baseball. Maybe I can still call that a foul tip.

I think a mitigating factor here was the removal of FA1. Sure, some folks follow everything in detail enough to have exactly mapped out ever penny of every cap move they're about to make, but others prefer to do their renegs, see what's up, and then make their moves. In a couple of seasons when everyone has all of these cap rules figured out, sure he probably gets more offers, but right now there are enough teams in cap hell fighting to get under it that the pool of owners available to make such a move on that first stage is not the full pool of owners in the league, and thus a case like this is more likely to occur.

The whole point of this rule was to help make the cap more difficult to deal with, and it's pretty clear that Ben's offer was able to drastically cut the required bonus to sign this guy.

If we want a league like the one you are describing, Quik, we should be getting rid of the rules entirely, because too many of us try to go with the INTENT of the rules, not just lawyer the letter of the rules, because you only need to be in 2 or 3 leagues to quickly not be able to track every nuance of every league's ruleset. More rules just means those that have hours every day to devote to tracking and testing every implication of every little house rule gain an even greater advantage than under vanilla FOF2k7 where it's easy to keep your team once you build it. I long for those days right now...

[QuikSand]

Originally Posted by gstelmack

If we want a league like the one you are describing, Quik, we should be getting rid of the rules entirely, because too many of us try to go with the INTENT of the rules, not just lawyer the letter of the rules, because you only need to be in 2 or 3 leagues to quickly not be able to track every nuance of every league's ruleset. More rules just means those that have hours every day to devote to tracking and testing every implication of every little house rule gain an even greater advantage than under vanilla FOF2k7 where it's easy to keep your team once you build it. I long for those days right now...

Actually, I wouldn't mind playing in a league where it's simply "anything goes."

I happen to think that the 3yr rule, especially when it is essentially the only rule we need to follow in this league for free agency, is a good one, as it prevents the natural result of an all-out attack on the game's AI weaknesses -- the fat 1yr deal, which offends me more by being boring than by being unrealistic.

Regardless... my overall point is - this league has the simplest rules of any, and that was both a condition of our joining, and a reasonable expectation for the league going forward. Few and simple rules means we're closer to "anything goes" than other leagues, and if that's not what you want, that's okay. If you or others want to play by your own computer game conscience and follow rules that you are not really obliged to follow, that's okay by me, too. And if there are enough like-minded people to divert this league from (what I believe to be) its original intent and convert it into another iteration of basically the same stuff we see everywhere else, I'm actually okay with that, too, it just won't be with me participating.

Seriously, I get paid to participate in committee meetings and argue about statutes and legal intentions. I'm trying to avoid that being my hobby also.

[QuikSand]

Originally Posted by gstelmack

More rules just means those that have hours every day to devote to tracking and testing every implication of every little house rule gain an even greater advantage...

..and let's not get carried away here. The incident case is one guy saying "well, I'll put in a one year offer with some backloaded money, and just in case nobody else bids, I might have a small chance to get a good player for nothing." This wasn't Ben executing a plan hatched through hours of testing, deep gameplanning or AI exploitation. It was Ben recognizing that most of us are some combination of lazy and ignorant. And that's rarely a poor place to put your money.

[gstelmack]

Originally Posted by QuikSand

..and let's not get carried away here. The incident case is one guy saying "well, I'll put in a one year offer with some backloaded money, and just in case nobody else bids, I might have a small chance to get a good player for nothing." This wasn't Ben executing a plan hatched through hours of testing, deep gameplanning or AI exploitation. It was Ben recognizing that most of us are some combination of lazy and ignorant. And that's rarely a poor place to put your money.

And you get to the heart of the matter: Ben couched a 1-year deal in a 3-year structure. What was the point of the 3-year rule again? Some of us feel an offer like Ben's is just as bad as the one-year monsters this was intended to eliminate.

My point has more to do with the fact that most casual gameplay has shown that guys want a lot more money for a 3-year deal than a 1-year deal, so tend to offer a lot more than a guy wants if we need to do a 3-year deal to have him even think about it (see the rate of rejections Ben got in the after-the-fact testing). I don't think very many people thought that a min-sal contract had a hope in hell of succeeding, especially at this early stage of FA before his demands come down, or even that the guy would take as little as $150K in bonus for a 3-year deal. Only those who have been over the contracts FOF players will and will not take with a fine-toothed comb would have even considered making an offer like Ben's.

And having the rule at all tends to push most folks into more "reasonable" contract offers and not trying to push the boundaries, especially when they are in more than one league trying to track multiple rulesets. Only those with lots of time on their hands track the details of all the rules in all their leagues and figure out how to push their boundaries, while most come up with a good set of defaults that works across all the rules they have to deal with. I think the number of folks that get caught up in violating these rules shows this, and those violations push people towards a more generic set of strategies that allows those who push the envelope an even greater edge.

Those are the points my comments on time and effort are going towards. Especially when the people who have that time to put in that effort are the ones pushing these rules in the first place.

[Sef0r]

Okay, forgetting that no one else offered the QB anything...what was the point in giving him $30 mil in season 2 and 3?

I still like this league because of this very fact, that people are in here talking about things.

I will take back what I said about removing the rule as quicksand has pointed out some valid reasons for keeping it, but gstelmack also has a point and thats what the other half of this argument is about.

I would like to see if Quckenbush (hell of a name too) signs that 7 year $227 mil deal you offered him. Sure there must be a real offer in there somewhere, but that offer averages out $32 mil a year.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by gstelmack

And you get to the heart of the matter: Ben couched a 1-year deal in a 3-year structure. What was the point of the 3-year rule again? Some of us feel an offer like Ben's is just as bad as the one-year monsters this was intended to eliminate.

My point has more to do with the fact that most casual gameplay has shown that guys want a lot more money for a 3-year deal than a 1-year deal, so tend to offer a lot more than a guy wants if we need to do a 3-year deal to have him even think about it (see the rate of rejections Ben got in the after-the-fact testing). I don't think very many people thought that a min-sal contract had a hope in hell of succeeding, especially at this early stage of FA before his demands come down, or even that the guy would take as little as $150K in bonus for a 3-year deal. Only those who have been over the contracts FOF players will and will not take with a fine-toothed comb would have even considered making an offer like Ben's.

And having the rule at all tends to push most folks into more "reasonable" contract offers and not trying to push the boundaries, especially when they are in more than one league trying to track multiple rulesets. Only those with lots of time on their hands track the details of all the rules in all their leagues and figure out how to push their boundaries, while most come up with a good set of defaults that works across all the rules they have to deal with. I think the number of folks that get caught up in violating these rules shows this, and those violations push people towards a more generic set of strategies that allows those who push the envelope an even greater edge.

Those are the points my comments on time and effort are going towards. Especially when the people who have that time to put in that effort are the ones pushing these rules in the first place.

Greg, I test stuff hardcore at times. You know that. But I can assure you that zero testing went into this, and very little thought. I learned a long time ago from other MP leagues that guys will accept wayyyy under asking price if no one else offers. (As I said from the start, I was under the impression that they'd accept *anything* if it's the only offer.) To be perfectly honest, I hadn't thought about the house rules at all until I sat down to do my export--an export which I spent no more than 10 minutes on. The first thing I did was make offers to the big-time guys who I felt could be big helps. Then when it came to how to approach the second-tier guys, the very first idea that came to me--we're talking in the first 10 seconds of thinking about how to do this--was that if I wanted a player for just one year, I should just offer a solid bonus and first year contract, and then cut him after the first year. That is not something that takes any sort of testing FOF to figure out. That's completely obvious.

But this particular offer had absolutely nothing to do with wanting the guy. This was just another little thing that I and others have done in multiple leagues--again one that doesn't require any testing whatsoever--just a good ol' bluff. The guy was a starting QB. I *thought* at least one or two people would be going hard and heavy after him. All I wanted to do was keep him from signing quickly, and drive up the price. No testing or thinking required there--just a simple and straightforward attempt to get someone to overspend. No, there wasn't some cleverly thought-out master plan here, or some well-tested strategy. To be clear, I don't even remember making this particular offer. I'm sure I spent no more than 3 seconds deciding on it, just like I spent no more than 3 seconds deciding on a number of other offers of the same type.

Originally Posted by Sef0r

Okay, forgetting that no one else offered the QB anything...what was the point in giving him $30 mil in season 2 and 3?

See immediately above.

I would like to see if Quckenbush (hell of a name too) signs that 7 year $227 mil deal you offered him. Sure there must be a real offer in there somewhere, but that offer averages out $32 mil a year.

See further above. The deal I offered might be a way to drive up the price. It might be a way to get him on my team for one year at a cheap price. Or it might be something in between.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by gstelmack

I don't think very many people thought that a min-sal contract had a hope in hell of succeeding, especially at this early stage of FA before his demands come down, or even that the guy would take as little as $150K in bonus for a 3-year deal. Only those who have been over the contracts FOF players will and will not take with a fine-toothed comb would have even considered making an offer like Ben's.

I do feel the need to address this more directly. There was no fine-toothed comb needed. I know I never tested this. The 45 minutes or so that I put in last night is probably the most I've *ever* tested anything contract-related in FOF. That's just not something that I've ever found fun or interesting, so I don't do it. I don't really remember where or when I learned this. My best guess is that I knew it because someone somewhere said something publicly or semi-publicly about how this works, and I read about it and remembered it. (Keep in mind that for the most part this is pretty useless information, since people usually are actually bidding on the decent players, so it's easy to see how many people may have read about it and just didn't think it was worth bothering to remember.)

Before a few minutes ago, when I looked back, I would have said that I thought I learned about this in the ECFL, but looking at some info from there, it's pretty clear that I already knew it when we started there, and put it to very good use. Just look at my partial roster there:

Front Office Football Central - View Single Post - ECFL Jacksonville Jaguars: An FOF MP Dynasty.

Looks like I got a bunch of FAs for the veteran minimum, including all of the following starter-quality guys:

RB 48/48
Three TEs in the 50-65 future range
WR 52/52
C 62/62
DE 57/61 (and only in his fifth year)

So obviously I was buildling my team there with this mechanism fully in mind. I really don't know what else to say about that. It's just how FOF works. I didn't realize that this wasn't a well-known fact. I *know* that Quik has mentioned on this board that the fact that guys will accept three-year minsal offers is a contributing factor to there being too much cap room. I guess people either overlooked it, or forgot about it.

[Ben E Lou]

Double dola:

I do think that Greg probably hit on the #1 reason this guy ended up on my team, by the way. Because I wasn't interested in signing him, I probably didn't even notice what the guy was asking. But there's a pretty good chance that people who might have been interested in signing him mistakenly thought they had to pay him close to what he was asking, or that someone else would pay him that much, so they just didn't bother to lowball him. I've said it before, and I'll say it again: one goal of this league is for people (myself included) to try new things out and learn more about how FOF works. At least this little incident has hammered home the fact that FOF free agency is truly a free market situation.

ASKING PRICE: $25M bonus, total deal=$67.65M
WILLING TO SIGN FOR, IF NO ONE ELSE OFFERS: $150K bonus, total deal=$3.49M (and will probably sign for even less that)

[TheMeat]

I understand what you mean, Greg, about it being frustrating that people who test and spend hours going into the nuances of the game get an advantage over people who don't. But I believe this to be esssential to the enjoyment of any game. If we wanted a game where there was no advantage to investing time or strategy we would all sit around flipping coins. I think that a casual player can do very well in FoF MP, and if they're intelligent (as most of the people here obviously are) they can be competitive without pouring over testing results and game mechanics. But the people who do want the spend the hours should get a little advantage for it, or it wouldn't drive interest in doing that. The game would be mundane if there was no advantage to extra effort. So people like me and Ben who do enjoy putting in the hours may get some advantage but I don't think that it is at all a dominating advantage (and for me being a FoF novice it is merely a way to try and make up ground on the big dogs). From a practical standpoint it is surely not worth hours of time to garner a few extra wins over the years, putting in double the time to get a small advantage. But it drives competition and some people really enjoy it.

I won't add to what's already been said about everything else as I summed up my thoughts at the end of the last page, and they have been restated and expanded on nicely here by Ben and QS, but I will say that this make me chuckle a little:

"It was Ben recognizing that most of us are some combination of lazy and ignorant. And that's rarely a poor place to put your money." - QS

[Sef0r]

Well Ben, QS and everyone else who is okay with this...I don't know why I am going on and on about this when it doesn't affect me so much.

Fact of the matter is, I don't use FA as much. I am a Packers, Patriot homer...build the team through the draft.

I have a long term plan for this team, try and survive this upcoming season and look forward to the extra money and extra draft picks next season.

All in all, this is not so much an issue, at least it wont be after this season as I am sure most teams will be under the cap by 2023.

[gstelmack]

Originally Posted by TheMeat

I understand what you mean, Greg, about it being frustrating that people who test and spend hours going into the nuances of the game get an advantage over people who don't.

I have ZERO problem with this. What I have an issue with are house rules being put in place in leagues and then people gaming those house rules in ways that clearly violate the intent but not the letter of the rule. I'm getting fed up with having house rules at all in leagues because I believe they are generating conflict between those who are trying to follow the spirit of those rules and those who follow the letter of those rules, and the only people who are benefitting from an improved experience are the ones following the letter of the rules and gaming them. Those of us trying to follow the spirit would be having a lot more fun if none of these rules were in place.

I have ZERO problem with Ben's contract if we hadn't had the 3-year offer rule presented to us and explained to us as an attempt to help put cap pressure on folks. It's not that I have an issue with contracts like this being made, I just have an issue with them in the context of the house rules being put in place in these leagues.

I'm getting fed up with some gamey contracts being okay and other gamey contracts not being okay. Either gamey contracts are okay or they aren't, so I wish folks would get consistent on this.

[gstelmack]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

ASKING PRICE: $25M bonus, total deal=$67.65M
WILLING TO SIGN FOR, IF NO ONE ELSE OFFERS: $150K bonus, total deal=$3.49M (and will probably sign for even less that)

And yet he actually took far less than that from you, basically a 1-year / $970K deal...

[Suicane75]

I mean, I asked into this league because it's essentialy a single player multi player what with the speed and what not, and the rules are the rules, dont really enhance or hinder my enjoyment. But it's pretty clear that Bens contract offer is a way to cirfumvent the 3 year rule. But yeah, whatever, i don't much care. Could of posted this, could not of, whatever.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by gstelmack

I have ZERO problem with this. What I have an issue with are house rules being put in place in leagues and then people gaming those house rules in ways that clearly violate the intent but not the letter of the rule. I'm getting fed up with having house rules at all in leagues because I believe they are generating conflict between those who are trying to follow the spirit of those rules and those who follow the letter of those rules, and the only people who are benefitting from an improved experience are the ones following the letter of the rules and gaming them. Those of us trying to follow the spirit would be having a lot more fun if none of these rules were in place.

I have ZERO problem with Ben's contract if we hadn't had the 3-year offer rule presented to us and explained to us as an attempt to help put cap pressure on folks. It's not that I have an issue with contracts like this being made, I just have an issue with them in the context of the house rules being put in place in these leagues.

I'm getting fed up with some gamey contracts being okay and other gamey contracts not being okay. Either gamey contracts are okay or they aren't, so I wish folks would get consistent on this.

Be careful what you wish for. With no house rules whatsoever, you'd see FAAAAAR more insane stuff. You can't force people to play toward the "spirit" of the rules like you do. No matter how many or how few rules there are, I'm going to look at them and try to figure out strategies that work within them that most other people wouldn't think of. And I'm not the only one who thinks that way. I'm firmly in the camp of "if I don't do it, someone else will, and they'll gain the advantage." For example, I don't find one-year deals offensive, or care much about unrealism. I find them, as Quik said, just plain boring. Same with sign and trades. But in leagues where they are legal, I will aggressively pursue one-year deals and sign-and-trades and all manner of stuff I find uninteresting because, uninteresting or not, if allowed, they're a big advantage, and I will not sit back and watch other people pursue effective and perfectly legal strategies while I sit on the sidelines and fall behind.

But if we're talking intent, then let's talk intent. My *intent* with this guy was not to get around having to have the guy on my team for three years. I offered him (and quite a few others...just look at the rejected contracts from Atlanta so far) next to nothing in real money so he would *not* sign with me. That's the one place where Quik was wrong. I grossly overestimated the rest of the league here. Shame on me for thinking someone would offer the 10th-highest rated QB in the league a contract. He signed with me because the rest of the league totally and completely whiffed. There's no getting around that fact. If I'd thought for a single moment that I could keep him off of the rest of your rosters for one or two or three years at low cost to me, don't you think I would have made an offer that I thought he had a chance of actually signing?????

[wade moore]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

Double dola:

I do think that Greg probably hit on the #1 reason this guy ended up on my team, by the way. Because I wasn't interested in signing him, I probably didn't even notice what the guy was asking. But there's a pretty good chance that people who might have been interested in signing him mistakenly thought they had to pay him close to what he was asking, or that someone else would pay him that much, so they just didn't bother to lowball him. I've said it before, and I'll say it again: one goal of this league is for people (myself included) to try new things out and learn more about how FOF works. At least this little incident has hammered home the fact that FOF free agency is truly a free market situation.

ASKING PRICE: $25M bonus, total deal=$67.65M
WILLING TO SIGN FOR, IF NO ONE ELSE OFFERS: $150K bonus, total deal=$3.49M (and will probably sign for even less that)

For what it's worth...

After a few days of stewing about this I basically come to the same conclusion. I was upset because I REALLY wanted Herndon back on my team, but I looked at his demands and said, "well, shit, guess not". As much as ben thought this was more common knowledge, I think a small subset of folks knew about this behavior in the game.

Now I know and can act accordingly.

[QuikSand]

Originally Posted by gstelmack

And yet he actually took far less than that from you, basically a 1-year / $970K deal...

I totally understand that you don't like what this offer "basically" was.

I probably disagree with you that "intent" was fully clear from the 3yr offer rule.

In a more conventional league, I might even agree that we'd need an anti-backloading rule or something else to attend to this sort of thing, in the name of realism, or whatever.

In this particular league, I just don't want to add new layers of rules. That's the core of my argument. I joined this league to keep it simple and move along quickly.

In my view, the solution (for this league) to this sort of potentially unsettling contract being accepted is for the rest of the league to wake up and make offers to players who have some value, period.

[gstelmack]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

Be careful what you wish for. With no house rules whatsoever, you'd see FAAAAAR more insane stuff.

At least the league would be consistent, which is my point. We keep trying to create rules to get rid of the insane stuff, and people just come up with new insane stuff to try (or retry the old insane stuff, as this kind of heavily-loaded backended contract was what STARTED the whole "house rules in MP" thing back during Chubbygate, and yes it bugs me that people are fine with it now). I'd rather have the insane stuff going on than try to tip-toe around making sure my stuff is legal while others figure out what the legal insane stuff is.

And yes, since I'm the only one arguing strongly over this, maybe it's time for me to just step aside and get rid of the frustrations entirely and focus on utility writing and maybe single player and let those having fun with these setups have their fun.

[Suicane75]

If nothing else, the game sure is fun for running tests.