SAC'd and Frenzy rules differences

[Philadelphia Freedom]

I would like to throw out the idea of incorporating contract re-negotiations and franchise players in the Frenzy (these are already part of the SAC'd).

Since so many of the owners in the Frenzy are also in the SAC'd it would seem to make sense to add these components.

I am guessing that they would not go into effect until after the 2009 (if everyone voted and agreed) but I figured I would throw it out there now for discussion.

[Royal Hawaiian Opihi]

I have no clue what that's all about. Quick summary, please.

[Philadelphia Freedom]

Sorry about that. Here is what I have though it might not be the most current version of the rules it should provide an overview:

Renegotiation
Players with more than one year remaining on their contract can have their contracts renegotiated by the team holding their rights. When a contract is renegotiated, the current year s salary get s a 10% or 300cb raise, whichever is greater, and the contract can be extended up to the standard maximum of five years.

A player with less than one year remaining on his contract can only have his contract renegotiated if he is traded to another team. Once traded, the contract can be renegotiated with a raise of 5% or 150cb to the current year salary, whichever is greater. The contract can be extended up to the standard maximum of five years.

Franchising
Once a players contract ends, they becomes a free agent, however, teams are allowed to designate up to 1 player as a Franchise Player. Once a team designates a Franchise Player, that player is considered part of their active roster and the tendered salary counts against the teams cap. The Franchised player will receive a salary of the average of the top 10 players at the franchised player s position from the previous year, or a 20% salary increase, whichever is greater.

[Royal Hawaiian Opihi]

So a guy can basically stay with a team forever, then (if you get the renegotiation prior to their final year of contract)? Hmmm... how has that affected the flow of FAs? I'm guessing not as much movement as in the Frenzy?

[Flaxwless]

I personally would just leave Frenzy the way it is. It adds a different strategy/element compared to SAC'D when building team rosters.

Also many of us have made trades, moves, and contract decisions based on the current system. Allowing renegs and franchise is a drastic change to team building strategy.

[Burt the Butcher]

With SAC'd only being around 3 years now, no time to gauge how long a player stays with one team.....eventually they don't remain a good bargain though....

I would like to see it for trades only myself. At least then you can add value to the trading market.

Franchise is basically a waste of time for the premier positions. Very rarely do a WR or RB get franchised in SAC'd. In fact, I think this was the first year it happened with Brian Westbrook. With salaries as high as they are, it makes much more sense to RFA them.

[Philadelphia Freedom]

The franchise tags work best for DE's in SAC'd but I am not sure there is really a comparable postion (salary wise) in the Frenzy. I think it adds a different element of strategy particularily with trades. Renegotiations seem to mostly impact rookies or players who outperform their contracts and are a good value to resign with the salary increase. Not usually going to work with guys that are paid in the top 20 at their positions. I do agree with Franks point about changing the way things work and it needing to be a year down the line but I definately think it makes sense in some form.

[Royal Hawaiian Opihi]

I'm sure I could be convinced otherwise... but right now one of the things I like about this league is the turnover of players. Without the luxury of being able to renegotiate, it puts a premium on "scouting" and foresight... forcing owners to project far enough ahead to add extra contract years. Think you've got a steal? Sign him to a longterm deal (hey, that rhymes!). I can see how in a league where renegotiation was in play, it would be smart to give anyone who has longterm potential a max 2 year deal... and if he plays well, renegotiate him up to a longer deal. I dunno... I kind of like things the way they are here in the Frenzy.

But like I said, I can be pursuaded...

[Flaxwless]

Originally Posted by Royal Hawaiian Opihi

I'm sure I could be convinced otherwise... but right now one of the things I like about this league is the turnover of players. Without the luxury of being able to renegotiate, it puts a premium on "scouting" and foresight... forcing owners to project far enough ahead to add extra contract years. Think you've got a steal? Sign him to a longterm deal (hey, that rhymes!). I can see how in a league where renegotiation was in play, it would be smart to give anyone who has longterm potential a max 2 year deal... and if he plays well, renegotiate him up to a longer deal. I dunno... I kind of like things the way they are here in the Frenzy.

But like I said, I can be pursuaded...

That's why I'd rather not have it. I like the turnover from year to year in Frenzy compared to the long term, build through the draft style of SACD.

Like you said Jim... people you like get 2 years and everyone else gets 1 year. What it essentially amounts to is a semi-dynasty league IMO. Not that it's good or bad but it's just different and I think works well with the larger rosters in SACD.

Frenzy is a lot of turnover year to year and that works well with the limited roster space we have.

Again for me it's more a preference to have two different styles of league play.

Maybe like Matt suggested maybe we only can limit renegs to only traded players and eliminate the 2 year reneg for your own players. I'd be in favor of that. I think the 2 year deal would lock up some many players and greatly change the strategy of team building where as only adding the 1 year reneg for trades would allow teams to have a extra trading chip for FA pick ups or expiring studs when they have more than 3 prospective RFAs.

[Burt the Butcher]

Originally Posted by Flaxwless

Maybe like Matt suggested maybe we only can limit renegs to only traded players

Yah!! Nice suggestion Matt!!

[Philadelphia Freedom]

Originally Posted by Burt the Butcher

Yah!! Nice suggestion Matt!!

You looking for credit? If so (and even if not) I am pretty sure Burt initially covered the limiting renegs to only traded players.

[Burt the Butcher]

Originally Posted by Philadelphia Freedom

You looking for credit? If so (and even if not) I am pretty sure Burt initially covered the limiting renegs to only traded players.

Just being sarcastic as always.....

[Royal Hawaiian Opihi]

I could live with allowing it for traded players.

[Flaxwless]

Sorry Matt.... I didn't know you came up with that thought originally. Burt talks so damn much I just block him out.

[Philadelphia Freedom]

Frank- it was Burt who originally mentioned limiting it to traded players. I think that is worth exploring so maybe we can put it on the ballot.

[Burt the Butcher]

Originally Posted by Flaxwless

Sorry Matt.... I didn't know you came up with that thought originally. Burt talks so damn much I just block him out.

Heh

And Frank talks so much, he can't even follow along with his own conversations.....