no content
AdBlocker active?
It seems you are using software to block advertisements. You could help us if you could switch it off when visiting redzoneaction.org.
The reason is very simple: Advertisements help us running the site, to offer you the game in a good quality for free. So if you like the game, please support us by purchasing a Supporter Account or disabling the AdBlocker on this site.
Thank you very much!
| Main / Suggestions / Rookie contract Search Forum | |
| Navigation: |< < 1 3 > >| | |
| Rating: | |
| Poster | Message |
|
ocram10000
|
posted: 2020-08-04 18:29:34 (ID: 100151336) Report Abuse |
|
Meitheisman wrote:
Tullo Ostilio wrote:
 all the think lowering salaries are welcomePlease noooooooooooooooooooooooo. It's already too easy and fast now to build a team full of stars compared to RZA like 20 seasons ago, if it gets any easier to build a team we might as well all play RZC and start with monster teams from day 1. I don't think the proposal changes the balance of the teams, but it changes the way teams are built, it would also give the roster more stability, freeing up money for the markets, for the benefit of all. It would also not be a quick change because 4 players per season do not substantially change a roster. Also because it is always the manager's ability to make a difference in the choice of players who are rookies or not. I also proposed 4 contracts, but 3 can also be evaluated. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
ocram10000
|
posted: 2020-08-11 16:02:56 (ID: 100151541) Report Abuse |
|
@pete
so you do it or not? Thanks Marco |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2020-08-11 17:41:05 (ID: 100151551) Report Abuse | |
|
I did not made my opinion yet.
|
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
ocram10000
|
posted: 2020-08-11 19:57:28 (ID: 100151566) Report Abuse |
|
pete wrote:
I did not made my opinion yet. Ok, then wait. Thank for all Marco |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
Tullo Ostilio
|
posted: 2020-08-11 20:08:51 (ID: 100151569) Report Abuse |
|
pete wrote:
I did not made my opinion yet. Do it Pete,it's a sort of franchise contract,only avalable for players coming from Academy |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
pderekdactyl
|
posted: 2020-08-11 20:46:20 (ID: 100151571) Report Abuse |
|
I personally am not convinced that this change would energize the transfer market. I think it has the potential to actually hinder it. This option would provide a better alternative to use for most managers instead of going to the market. If I can use guys out the YA for much much cheaper than vets and marginally worse, I'm going to use those extra cheap guys who are slightly worse. And, I'm not going to be selling many good young guys. I realize that I can do something similar now as well, but this change makes the difference larger and the trade off more drastic.
This reminds me a lot of how MLB free agency became depressed after the collective bargain agreement made draft picks and players with less tenure cheaper. The players association (incorrectly in hindsight) thought there'd be more money to go around in free agency, when in actuality they created a cheaper alternative. The stars still got their money but the mid to low level free agents were forced out or got much less money than initially asked for. There might have been more money, but it tanked demand. I'm not that experienced with RZA economic markets specifically, so take my comments with that caveat. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2020-08-11 20:54:44 (ID: 100151574) Report Abuse | |
|
I think it would help the veterans to get signed off of TM specifically. If you can have a bunch of rookies on cheap contracts you can splash more on the high end FAs you couldn't otherwise.
I'd expand this to the drafted rookies as well though. That would make draft picks much more valuable. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
pderekdactyl
|
posted: 2020-08-11 21:04:04 (ID: 100151575) Report Abuse |
|
I don't believe that is a given, though. People could just increase the skills of existing players a bit more and retain them instead of selling the player(s) that got too expensive.
And, people might not want those veterans on the TM for 75k per u p d a t e if they have a 24 year old for 10k and is only marginally worse. What's suggested might increase TM activity, but I am not certain we should just assume that without questioning. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
Meitheisman
|
posted: 2020-08-12 08:08:18 (ID: 100151591) Report Abuse |
|
And if the goal is to increase TM activity we should discuss different possible ways of getting there. From my experience when training got faster and the Premium Youth Academy was introduced it made building your own team easier (kinda similar to this proposed change) and the result was less activity on the TM becasue more managers started to build their own teams instead of using the TM. I think a change in the same direction would have similar results, if we want to increase TM activity we should make it harder to build your own team without the TM, not easier.
|
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2020-08-12 09:21:34 (ID: 100151594) Report Abuse | |
|
Just like in the NFL where players are having to accept 1 year 4M prove it deals where they are actually worth say 8M, maybe we should see veteran TM players accept a lot lower wages for a 1 year prove it deal, so if they should be getting for eg. 200k they will accept 100k for only 1 year and then once brought if you want to give them another new contact it's back to normal expectations of 200k? This would give the seller the TM money for the player, and the buyer gets the quality player for the initial lower wage...?
Just an idea that would help the highly trained players get moved on, even if it's just for another year  |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| reply Mark this thread unread | |
| Navigation: |< < 1 3 > >| | |
| Main / Suggestions / Rookie contract | |
