|
|
Post by Macho Man on Apr 13, 2018 16:49:38 GMT
Are you suggesting that I am unable to make a statement? I'm confused.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Rock on Apr 13, 2018 16:59:42 GMT
I'm saying your statement is you are deciding to take away future picks without allowing the league to agree on this. One way or another. I do not believe this is the role of commish and think we should table it for now, discuss more later and come up with solutions the league can vote on. Not just have you rule one way or another on something that impacts us all and obviously has enough people interested in resolving. If we all agree to remove future picks from bidding process, easy enough. There may be other suggestions as well. I really don't care how other leagues handle it
For the record, you can make all the statements you want and so can I. I'm just asking you to keep an open mind and leave it to the league to decide
|
|
|
|
Post by Macho Man on Apr 13, 2018 17:06:32 GMT
You jump to false conclusions and should read more carefully. I simply stated:
Good, it seems like everyone is onboard with the idea that future picks will no longer be used in the RFAA.
Not:
Good, it is settled. From now on future picks will no longer be used in the RFAA.
You whine a lot...
|
|
|
|
Post by Steamboat on Apr 13, 2018 17:15:16 GMT
We, Dragon Steamboat, are not okay with the proposal to remove future picks from the bidding process. As we stated previously, your manipulation fears are overblown and the future pick with additional compensation is an added benefit to the tagging player. We should look to add inclusion and transacting, not limit ourselves out of fear for a pretty minor strategic move with natural deterrents in place. We wish to move for a vote on our original rule modification proposal. If we lose, so be it. But, this is getting ridiculous. There are three options, (1) do nothing; (2) allow for all current and future picks to be traded so long as current picks are used first; and (3) eliminate the use of future picks.
Further, we wish to move for a vote on a conflicts provision to be added to section X.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Rock on Apr 13, 2018 17:18:41 GMT
You jump to false conclusions and should read more carefully. I simply stated: Good, it seems like everyone is onboard with the idea that future picks will no longer be used in the RFAA. Not: Good, it is settled. From now on future picks will no longer be used in the RFAA. You whine a lot... Haha. You pout a lot and sometimes act like a dictator if we are being completely honest and not holding back lmao |
|
|
|
Post by Macho Man on Apr 13, 2018 17:19:37 GMT
The time to present a rule change has elapsed. You may present you proposal when it's proper to do so.
|
|
|
|
Post by Steamboat on Apr 13, 2018 17:20:43 GMT
You're about as bad as Goodell. I'll make sure to make my proposal next year. Thanks.
|
|
|
|
Post by Hulkamania on Apr 13, 2018 17:27:27 GMT
Lololololol this is must see tv
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 13, 2018 17:56:09 GMT
Just my two cents since everyone is coming out!
This whole thing could go on and on based on the points being made. The rules have been set, everyone abids by them. There is often these areas of gray that people want to elaborate on, and it's just opinions and suggestions until approved in a rule change. I agree, the fact that teams can offer a 2019 pick is somewhat bs and is not entirely fair and should have a minor tweak of some sort (maybe bump up the 20% compensation considerably on future picks). Just eliminate the future pick , award more compensation or leave as is. The current system is really not that bad in my opinion---no contingency bids or multiple bids involving the same pick. Owners have to work around that limitation. This format has been used in other leagues for many years and hasn't really been an issue. Being a commish is not easy when you starting adding a ton of variants that require manual attention, and for that alone I would suggest minor changes to what we already have.
|
|
|
|
Post by Macho Man on Apr 13, 2018 18:13:29 GMT
You're about as bad as Goodell. I'll make sure to make my proposal next year. Thanks. Now keeping to the rules is being “as bad as Goodell?” The rules clearly state rule change proposals are to be brought in March and it’s not as though any change would be implemented this year anyways. You’ve now accused me of changing rules for my benefit and now being as bad as Goodell, whatever that means. Just saying. |
|
Beefcake
Fan Favorite
Sleeper Hold
Posts: 133
|
Post by Beefcake on Apr 13, 2018 18:22:13 GMT
Hulk gave you a thumbs up!
|
|
|
|
Post by Hulkamania on Apr 13, 2018 18:24:24 GMT
Im just here so I don't get fined!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 13, 2018 19:04:03 GMT
Are owners who deal a 2019 through RFA required to pay league dues for 2019 before making the bid?
|
|
Beefcake
Fan Favorite
Sleeper Hold
Posts: 133
|
Post by Beefcake on Apr 13, 2018 19:18:21 GMT
Before? Doubt it. If the bid is successful, then I would assume they pay then.
|
|
|
|
Post by Macho Man on Apr 13, 2018 19:22:26 GMT
Ya, only if successful.
|
|
