IR to DS?

[Royal Hawaiian Opihi]

Mike (and other "rules gurus" of the Frenzy League)...

Last year I had two first-year players on my IR: Luke Staley and Antoine Womack. Both of them went straight onto my IR squad upon acquisition. I understand that all IR spots must be cleared at the end of the season... but can I now put one (or both) on my DS? I've never had them officially "active." I checked the rules, and there's nothing that speaks to this issue.

I await your wisdom...

[Nittany Dodgers]

Per the IR section of the rules, you get 50% of the players contract value, and 1 addition contract year to use to replace the player on IR. You can place a player on IR from either the active or DS, but the additional cap space goes to either the active, or DS, from where ever the player was previous to IR. I would say that since you signed them stright to the IR, where ever the additional cap space was assigned is where the players should have been considered to be placed. IE, if the cap space and extra contract year was given to the active squad, then the players should be returned to the active squad. That is my interpretation of the rules.

That said, I cannot tell from the 2002 Roster application where the additional years and cap space went. Maybe Mike can enlighten us there.

[Preds]

Originally posted by Nittany Dodgers
Per the IR section of the rules, you get 50% of the players contract value, and 1 addition contract year to use to replace the player on IR. You can place a player on IR from either the active or DS, but the additional cap space goes to either the active, or DS, from where ever the player was previous to IR. I would say that since you signed them stright to the IR, where ever the additional cap space was assigned is where the players should have been considered to be placed. IE, if the cap space and extra contract year was given to the active squad, then the players should be returned to the active squad. That is my interpretation of the rules.

That said, I cannot tell from the 2002 Roster application where the additional years and cap space went. Maybe Mike can enlighten us there.

The contract years and salary credit were given to the active roster, thus the reason both players were placed on the active roster in the 2003 app.

Now to be honest, the formulas aren't setup to have IR for either or, nor do I think they should be.

DS is DS... if a guy is there you shouldn't be able to stash them on your IR and thus free up another DS slot IMO... its a double bonus that way and an uncompetitive practice. DS players are already placed there to develop, using the IR for DS is like giving teams a 4th or 5th DS slot.

Now saying that, the rules appear to contradict my thinking on the issue... placing it all back on to where the player entered the IR from. Were either of these players ever "officially" on your DS? I haven't taken the time to research that, but I'd argue you need to prove the existence of them being DS players to have them placed back onto your DS... plus, you'd need to have ROOM on your DS prior to the start of the 2003 season (which Jim did not have).

I see this as being able to go 2 ways... a) the players are automatically released and your assessed the 2002/2003 soft cap charge (against either the active or DS depending on where the proof lies), or b) they are placed on your active roster and you can deal with them as you please. I don't think you can place them on your DS at this point since you do not have open slots before the new season started and did not make any cuts in time to accomodate them.

Thats my 2 cents anyhow.

[Philadelphia Freedom]

For what it's worth I am not sure that the rules were clear enough to restrict Jim from doing whatever he wants in this case. I doubt he intentionly tried to take advantage of the system (and if he did find a "loophole" more power to him).

Going forward I would say we need to tighten this up so it will be clear what it is allowed and what the process will be. However, to try and retroactively amend the rules does not seem like a good idea to me.

[Preds]

Originally posted by Philadelphia Freedom
For what it's worth I am not sure that the rules were clear enough to restrict Jim from doing whatever he wants in this case. I doubt he intentionly tried to take advantage of the system (and if he did find a "loophole" more power to him).

Going forward I would say we need to tighten this up so it will be clear what it is allowed and what the process will be. However, to try and retroactively amend the rules does not seem like a good idea to me.

I don't think I've tried to retroactively amend the rules. If you read the 2nd half of what I wrote you'd see that I stated what the rules say on the specific issue, however Jim does not have room to accomodate these players on his DS, and it's what, May 5th, a week after we've moved on to 2003 that this is brought up? We should not go back in time on this IMO. He had no room on his DS to accomodate these players (if in fact they were placed on IR from the DS originally). Further IR has to be cleared BEFORE the start of the new season, thus he would have had to make som DS moves before we kicked into gear with 2003 (again, if in fact these players came from the DS originally). Finally, the 2003 app has been out a month or so, plenty of time to have brought this issue up in a timely manner. I stand by my thoughts that he should have the options I laid out in my previous post.

[Philadelphia Freedom]

Okay, it is May 2, but I get your point.

After re-reading your post I think the 2 options you are fair and allow the issue to be addressed so that we don't have a similar situation down the line.

[Preds]

Originally posted by Philadelphia Freedom
Okay, it is May 2, but I get your point.

After re-reading your post I think the 2 options you are fair and allow the issue to be addressed so that we don't have a similar situation down the line.

May 2nd, May 5th, whatever . My body is on Australian time still so it does feel like atleast May 3rd to me !

[Nittany Dodgers]

I think we're in agreement on this, and I am cool with Mike's two options as well. But, just in case there is still any doubt, here's another argument against allowing them to go back to the DS. The rules are clear that the cap bonuses will go to the DS or Active squad, wherever the player was assigned. Each players cap bonus (for going on IR) went to the active roster, and Jim had that bonus for the ENTIRE season, and failed to mention any time during the season that they should be on the DS.

[Royal Hawaiian Opihi]

First of all, it was just a question for clarification... no grand scheme to undermine the very fabric of the Frenzy League . Second, I'm FINE with whatever decision is made by the rules committee... that's why I asked it. Third, I don't think the rules are very clear on this issue, as we were never given an option to say whether or not we pickup players on the DS vs. Active squad before placing on IR. If this "test case" helps bring clarity to the league and rules, that's great!

I'm a big boy... I can deal with them being on the active squad. Let's just clarify this for the future!

Peace.

[Nittany Dodgers]

Sorry for the attitude, Jim. I didn't mean to insinuate you were devising any grand plan. It's just that it's actually a nice day here in Minnesota, it's Friday, and I don't want to be stuck at work!

Mahalo!

[Royal Hawaiian Opihi]

No offense taken, Brian.

Glad to help us clear this situation up.

Enjoy the beautiful outdoors when you get off of work! It's 10am here in Hawaii... I'm just starting my day!