Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Liquid Swords
Who's Jack?
I'm only talking about Frank's roster. In order to meet roster minimums (13 IOP, 8 IDP), Frank needs 7 more IOPs and 3 more IDPs. At 100 cb minimum bids, he would exceed his cap space by 160 cbs. I just don't think it's fair that you don't have to worry about roster minimums so it's actually advantageous to do what Frank did and hoard 4 upper-tier RBs until the last minute. This is one of the big reasons why player prices are so high. There needs to be some kind of regulation to keep teams in check.
Had I known this I would have definitely taken an approach like so many others and bid up many of these players like they have been; however, I was making sure that in no way would I exceed my cap space factoring in roster minimums. Too bad it took me this long to realize it as I feel I am now seriously disadvantaged in this league right now.
|
Jack = Subzero = Keepers. If Jack wins the current bids he's high on, he'll be exceeding the cap by 245 with just 19 players. He'll have to make cuts or trades within 24 hours to get under.
As for it being advantagous, in what way? He still has to abide by the cap. By hoarding RB's, Frank missed out on bidding on players for nearly 2 weeks. Always being under the cap is enough of a deterrent. We have the entire off-season to build our roster, nowhere in the rules does it specify you must reserve cap space, nor should it IMO.
The regulation to keep teams in check is the cap. That you and Jake assumed you had to have space to meet the minimums is nobodies fault but your own. We've never forced teams to meet the minimums in the off-season in the Frenzy. Why would SAC'D be any different? By tieing up cap dollars, Frank inhibited his ability to acquire other players, that's penalty enough.