Suggestion

[Justin-Chicago]

Starting with the 2043 league year the number of RFA tags should be increased to 2 per team per year.

With the league cutting back on points allotment each year and increased prevalence of player cuts staying retired, increasing the RFA tags allows teams greater flexibility to keep an extra one of their fringe players of choice. These are typically role players who wouldn’t be worth re-signing to a base contract. They also aren’t guys with near max ratings, which further encourages greater player variation while enabling teams to develop and maintain a little bit more of their own flavor.

[Matt-Jacksonville]

I like it, but maybe for a slightly different reason. It would allow a team to develop players beyond the practice squad a bit. Since we have expanded the ratings, players could develop for about six years before having a team made to decide between cutting or signing long term. It could be a natural progression where we start with the ten on the practice squad and then narrow down to 1-2 that might show some promise to extend a bit further.

[Tim-Colts]

I like the idea, but not sure how much 1 extra player will help... If he is a QB on Chicago, that might help a lot since they were dropping like flies this past season.

[Jerry-Redskins]

The RFA is a tag that cost 0 points and biddable on my other teams. It is not extra roster slots.

[James-Eagles]

I am ok with it the idea.


A different idea to help encourage the development of practice squad players.

If a player is on your practice squad from end of week 15 to the end of week 16 and will be a free agent at the end of the saeson. He is treated as if he has a restricted free agent tag without having to tag him. We need a way to encourage people to develop the players. It might lead teams to cut older player to save on points.

It is a player who could have been bid already. The player most likely would sign back with the team at league minimum if the team wanted them in the Real NFL.

[Jerry-Redskins]

Extra RFA like Justin is saying is no issue to me. Most RFA's have minimal value and if they do you end up paying anyway as they get bid on.

The real question is why the doggone league is reducing points more when they got spent like crazy last year to reduce the total amount in the league and only a few crazies like, I don't know..........................Detroit have too many.

[James-Eagles]

Detroit have too many.

Lies and slander. Detroit has too few points. Other coaches make Detroit pay too much for Free Agents so Detroit need more. Give all your points to Detroit.

[Dean-Atlanta]

I would vote for this idea, it would give GMs an option of signing another younger player without spending points. But at the risk that these tagged players can be bid on.

[Rich-League Officer]

To answer Jerry's question, as I do year after year
There was a time when this league voted to create a more robust free agency which it never was and still is not.
The primary reason is, no team has any trouble keeping all their players.
The reason is, there are too many points available to all of you.
Sure James is obscene but when do we ever see a team lose a "star" quality player because he's out of points.
The answer is never. Each of you gets to trim the bottom 15% of your roster, keep the rest.
And with additional points you smartly utilize the system for re-signing players to long term contracts.
And, even though you received 65 points in 2038 and now in 2042 you'll get 55, nobody has yet to be impacted.
One day you will be impacted but you'll email James and offer him something for 10 points and life is great again.
I thought from that vote years ago, that you wanted to be challenged a little but not all at once.
Part of the fun is trying to work the system.

[Jerry-Redskins]