Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Preds
My point is that the rule sucks... we all pretty much agree it sucks, and year after year we keep failing to address it. I tried getting some momentum addressing it over the off-season in some IM discussions, but never got enough input to proceed with a proposal, which I now think we have one that can work.
When we added the 2 roster spots and the 500 cb's, the intent was to allow depth at the TE/K/D positions, and cap to accomodate them. Seeing as I wasn't using either the roster slot or the cap $'s towards a non-TE/K/D position. 250 cb's just seems a ridiculously harsh penalty when I wasn't abusing the intent of the rule with an additional skill position player, or with cap dollars used towards a skill position player. That is one thing that distinguishes this from some of the past offenses.
The rule needs to be changed... and I think the forumla to do so is finally there with the proposal that those 5 slots can not be used for any position other than TE/K/D, and that Teams with fewer than 5 players at those positions must have no more than 9700 cb's spent on players at the skill positions of QB/RB/WR, reserving a pool of 800 minimum for the TE/K/D positions. Alternatively, we could just hardcap the QB/RB/WR positions at 9700 max regardless of how many TE/K/D a team carries.
|
That's all well and good, and I agree a tweak to the rule needs to be made. However, I think it is appropriate to tweak the rule for the NEXT infraction, not for the one that just happened. I tried to find the previous infraction (I know it happened a couple of years ago), but I could only find the BDSC second infraction, where we let the penalties slide, but not the first. Assuming we assessed full roster penalities for the first infraction, then I think we do so again here. If Jake feels strongly about lessoning the penality, I can live with that, but I do not support changing the rule and applying it to a situation that has already happened.