Considering we have that rule prohibiting signing players and trading them within 8 weeks during the regular season for the sake of realism, maybe we need to take it further.
Just like we see in fantasy football, I propose we flag certain players as ‘trade protected’ during the regular season if they are mega studs. ie perhaps top 10 by position per Rich’s salary system or obvious starter. This means if they meet that criteria they can’t be traded. For example, the trade I did with James would not have been allowed. Same with my trade for Dak with Dean. Dean might not have been able to do his fire sale even.
The only stud player we’ve seen get traded in the NFL mideeason recently was Christian McCaffrey. So that single trade could nullify this whole idea, but maybe there was some fluke exemption that allowed that trade. And we’d have the same fluke exemption for realism i.e. a team must be clearly out of playoff contention to be allowed to trade away a ‘trade protected’ stud player.
Yeah, I’m being somewhat sarcastic but not really.
New ‘no trade’ rule for realism
- Steve-LA Chargers
- Posts: 1185
- Joined: Tue Jun 11, 2019 10:43 pm
New ‘no trade’ rule for realism
Los Angeles Chargers
2041 Super Bowl XLIV Champions
Former commish of the XFBS, XFL, and CCFL
2041 Super Bowl XLIV Champions
Former commish of the XFBS, XFL, and CCFL
-
- Posts: 753
- Joined: Mon Jun 17, 2019 5:52 pm
Re: New ‘no trade’ rule for realism
I disagree with this. I think this is killing fun for the sake of realism. That being said I think a top 10 HB and QB have been traded the last 2 season in the NFL. Also Multiple top WRs have been traded. I think there is no realism and just a basic fun kill.
- Jerry-Redskins
- Posts: 1358
- Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2019 3:02 pm
- Location: Sumter SC
Re: New ‘no trade’ rule for realism
Real issue is the undervaluing of high rated Vets. The Vet may not help a team if they will rebuild a bit, but the team wanting them needs/desires the player. Make them pay. Why help the enemy for nothing. A few points or middle to late pick will not help a rebuild. Might as well let them retire IMHO. Trades also are consummated too quick. I've been guilty as well, but I'm pretty sure multiple players would get a better price with some patience. Post hit the forum and email and before the hour/day is over a trade is done. Doubtful it is the best price.....
2013, 2036 PNFL Champion
- Dean-Atlanta
- Posts: 1447
- Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2019 3:46 pm
- Location: Lynnwood, WA
Re: New ‘no trade’ rule for realism
It wasn't really a fire sale, but a limited trade off of a few aging veterans. When I declared it a "fire sale" late in the process to humor those who called it that, and generate some interest in trades, I think only 2 trades happened.
The "fire sale" didn' weaken my offense or strengthen the defense. it did neither, but it picked up a few draft picks. That's all. More future upside than present downside.
I agree with James. Too much fanatical devotion to "realism" is more detrimental than it is beneficial to the league.
The "fire sale" didn' weaken my offense or strengthen the defense. it did neither, but it picked up a few draft picks. That's all. More future upside than present downside.
I agree with James. Too much fanatical devotion to "realism" is more detrimental than it is beneficial to the league.
Dean
The Atlanta Falcons
"We may win big or lose big, but we don't dodge anybody and we don't makes excuses when we lose."
- Jerry Glanville
The Atlanta Falcons
"We may win big or lose big, but we don't dodge anybody and we don't makes excuses when we lose."
- Jerry Glanville
- Steve-LA Chargers
- Posts: 1185
- Joined: Tue Jun 11, 2019 10:43 pm
Re: New ‘no trade’ rule for realism
The sentiment seems quite ‘against’ so far. If so, no one can arguably question my latest moves in the name of realism.
Los Angeles Chargers
2041 Super Bowl XLIV Champions
Former commish of the XFBS, XFL, and CCFL
2041 Super Bowl XLIV Champions
Former commish of the XFBS, XFL, and CCFL
-
- Posts: 1703
- Joined: Tue Jun 11, 2019 12:16 pm
- Location: Gilbert, Arizona
- Contact:
Re: New ‘no trade’ rule for realism
There is a difference between a realistic structure and realism within that structure.
For 46 seasons we have tried to put in place a realistic framework while also being flexible to change.
But, what takes place inside that structure can be completely unrealistic and make other coaches headspin.
Teams wheeling and dealing vets left and right, teams acquiring 20 draft picks, and anything else in between.
That is how this league survives imo. Coaches are free to be innovative or foolish within a structure.
If it was too restrictive inside the structure, coaches would quit.
If the structure was too liberal, coaches would have quit a long time ago.
There has to be a balance.
And as long as we have 18 coaches here, I have to assume the formula works.
For 46 seasons we have tried to put in place a realistic framework while also being flexible to change.
But, what takes place inside that structure can be completely unrealistic and make other coaches headspin.
Teams wheeling and dealing vets left and right, teams acquiring 20 draft picks, and anything else in between.
That is how this league survives imo. Coaches are free to be innovative or foolish within a structure.
If it was too restrictive inside the structure, coaches would quit.
If the structure was too liberal, coaches would have quit a long time ago.
There has to be a balance.
And as long as we have 18 coaches here, I have to assume the formula works.
-
- Posts: 753
- Joined: Mon Jun 17, 2019 5:52 pm
Re: New ‘no trade’ rule for realism
Rich-League Officer wrote:There is a difference between a realistic structure and realism within that structure.
For 46 seasons we have tried to put in place a realistic framework while also being flexible to change.
But, what takes place inside that structure can be completely unrealistic and make other coaches headspin.
Teams wheeling and dealing vets left and right, teams acquiring 20 draft picks, and anything else in between.
That is how this league survives imo. Coaches are free to be innovative or foolish within a structure.
If it was too restrictive inside the structure, coaches would quit.
If the structure was too liberal, coaches would have quit a long time ago.
There has to be a balance.
And as long as we have 18 coaches here, I have to assume the formula works.
20 draft picks seems like a small number or you just talking first 3 rounds
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 114 guests