Point Betting and Trading

[Jerry-Redskins]

Wondering others thoughts on earning points for betting and the trading:

I understand by giving points it encourages participation, but it is not completely skilled based and is a 15% increase in points for allocation for some this offseason. I do not feel that the life blood should be based on luck and definitely not the % of the cap it does. As the cap is tightened, it is becoming more of a factor. Not sure an extra 4 year contract for some teams is right.

Points betting only started with the addition of actual $$ cap. The $$ cap was ended and we are back to the long term points system which served us well. It was designed to be an easy soft cap to allow transactions. My opinion is that it is not even a soft cap if you can trade your cap. By moving players and picks for cap, we are leaving those dollars in the economy to keep circulating rather than have them pulled out for actual player acquisition transactions. This in turn moves some players between two teams rather than the open market and potential higher points removed.

Just traying to get a sense of others. This is not to expand the conversation to 10 other change ideas. Just focus on theses issues to see if there is ant consensus they are really an issue.

[Steve-Buffalo Bills]

What would we replace points with in the betting if we stopped gifting points? I have no idea.

Trading points has been helpful for those who prefer to trade away their draft picks or retiring players to accumulate points for restructures and FA acquisitions to keep a well-built team in place or build a contender in one season. I would be against doing away with it, but if it is a concern we can consider limiting it. For example maybe only teams with 10 points or less are allowed to receive points through a trade. Similarly, only teams with more than 10 points can send points. Maybe controlling it this way makes it more balanced? I would definitely be in favor of saying that if your team exceeds the offseason allocation, you cannot receive points through a trade. Meaning any team with more than 51 points should not be allowed to make trades that give them more points.

[Steve-Buffalo Bills]

But yes, I'm saying there is a massive points accumulation problem. Considering I am one of the teams with the least points, I am at a major disadvantage and this has forced me to change my approach to GMing going forward.

[Jerry-Redskins]

I believe that the point trading is one of the reasons there is an accumulation of points. Yes, we had a couple of teams dump, but every point traded is one not taken out of the league to sign a FA that is also not in FA because of the trade. I'm not saying point trading is a major piece, but it absolutely a piece of less FA's even if a small one. It just circumvents the cap I think.

[Steve-Buffalo Bills]

It’s going to be difficult to convince a majority of coaches to end points trading, but I think we might be able to convince them to agree on a limit.

Let’s say we use the offseason point allocation as the magic number. This season it would be 51 points. If you are 51 or above in points, you can only trade away points for picks or players. Simple as that. If you are below 51 points there is no limitation on trading points. You could send or receive points as part of a trade. This would at least prevent teams from over accumulating points via trades when they already have a lot. Just worth considering as a first step solution if we continue to see this problem. Small changes before big changes seem to be the way lately.

[Brian-Broncos]

it is not completely skilled based and is a 15% increase in points for allocation for some this offseason.

It's only about a 15% increase because I had no points.

I actually tried very hard because I had such few points and that earned me a whopping 1 more point than the average. And I see your point about the amount of points becoming too significant. It is fun though. Maybe a half-point per win? Three-quarters?

[Dean-Atlanta]

Trading points generally does not leave them in circulation. When I traded points to the Giants, he used them to sign players. They got spent and were gone.

[Jerry-Redskins]

The very aspect of trading points leaves them in the league to be used for other transactions. The original team received some sort of player and player contract time with points, which in turn were available for additional transactions with a second team.

[Barney - Vikings]

Wouldn’t it be nice if we just used a salary cap?

[Donovon-Steelers]

Wouldn’t it be nice if we just used a salary cap?

Seems like it would simplify things - what was the reason you guys moved away from it anyways? Seems like this would have to be a Charlie/Rich decision because high payroll teams wouldn't want a cap, and low teams would - there wouldn't likely be a consensus.

Here are the PNFL payrolls:

2025
383,740,000 - NYJ
376,365,000 - Hou
374,000,000 - LVR
359,900,000 - Chi
328,825,000 - Wash
300,050,000 - NE
296,790,000 - Den
294,125,000 - GB
289,895,000 - Min
288,300,000 - Jax
263,830,000 - Pit
263,070,000 - Ind
261,745,000 - SF
258,835,000 - Buf
222,325,000 - Sea
210,605,000 - Phi
208,550,000 - Atl
50,500,000 - NYG

2026
420,650,000 - NYJ
396,900,000 - LVR
384,950,000 - Chi
375,550,000 - Hou
365,600,000 - Wash
345,750,000 - Den
340,650,000 - NE
340,650,000 - GB
335,650,000 - Min
318,250,000 - Jax
313,800,000 - Ind
313,600,000 - Buf
307,600,000 - Pit
306,350,000 - SF
269,350,000 - Sea
259,050,000 - Phi
250,900,000 - Atl
59,900,000 - NYG