Here is the final version of the amendment. I guess it needs three additional people to support it to be on the ballot...
Impacted Rules: 13.0, 13.1
Proposed Change: 13.0 – CUT DOWN DATE After the conclusion of the season and prior to the next season's drafts, the Commissioner will set a Cut Down Date wherein rosters are trimmed to abide by an off-season salary cap of $80 million.
13.1 - A team must protect a minimum of twenty-two players from the previous season at a total combined salary of not more than $80 million. Each owner is responsible for keeping track of his team's total salary during the draft. Once the draft is completed, all salaries will be summed. If any owner exceeds the $83 million cap, that owner will lose the fewest number of players necessary to get under that maximum limit. For example, if an owner goes $200,000 over the cap, he will lose two $100,000 players. If he goes $1 million over the cap, he'll lose one $1 million player. The last player(s) chosen in the draft at the required salary range will be the first player(s) released.
Explanation: I propose changing the $70 million cut down date salary cap to $80 million. NFL teams do not have to be under a certain number below the cap before free agency/draft, and I don't think we should either. Moving it to $80 million guarantees teams will have enough money left for the free agent draft, yet gives KRFL teams financial flexibility. No NFL team who is under the cap would release a player they would want to keep to get under a secondary cap, yet this rule forces us to do that. If a team wants to enter the draft with very little money (enough to be able to draft a full squad), I don't see a reason to stop them.
(Thread Subject edited for clarification by commissioner.)
Sorry to say, but this proposal still needs a tweak because the math doesn't add up. A simple example: Team A exceeds their salary cap by $2m dollars. It's not a simple matter of just removing a $2m player. His position must still be filled to meet the mandatory 52 player roster so we need open up $2.1m in cap space. On top of that, the rules mandate that the team could incur a cap penalty of $.5m for the infraction (see below). At a minimum, to replace the $2m player would cost the team $2m + $.100 (to replace the player) plus a possible fine of $.5m for a total of $2.6m. Now we have to drop the $2m player and a $.6m player (which is not a tier in our salary system) and replace them with two $.1m players still leaving us with $.2m to make up to stay within the $83m cap. I guess that means we need to find some combination of players whose salary equals $2.8m. Then we have the problem of what to do with the two dropped players who are now free agents.
This is not a criticism of the merits of this proposal. It is just to say that it needs to be more fully developed to make sense in our system.
Here is the applicable rule which, in itself, is not transparently clear and could use an edit: 4.6 - Teams which do not comply with Rule 4 roster requirements will be given a warning and opportunity to correct their roster before being penalized $500k per infraction applied to the current and next season's salary cap. If the League Office needs to act to bring a franchise into compliance, players will be assigned by alphabetical listing of free agents at the given position and players will be cut on the basis of the lowest salaried player and then by alphabetical order. Teams which make no reasonable attempt to comply with the roster requirements will risk expulsion from the league.
Here's a thought, Jeff. Just propose changing the number in 13.0 and 13.1 to read 13.0 – CUT DOWN DATE After the conclusion of the season and prior to the next season's drafts, the Commissioner will set a Cut Down Date wherein rosters are trimmed to abide by an off-season salary cap of $80 million. 13.1 - A team must protect a minimum of twenty-two players from the previous season at a total combined salary of not more than $80 million.
I'll then work on a rewording of 4.6 in a separate amendment that will clarify the procedure for over drafts.
Hmmm...my intention is that this takes place after the draft. So, if I team is 2 million over, then they lose one 2 million player. In order to meet the roster requirements, they would need to add one player during the first week waiver process and are now subject to the 93 million cap.
I think you are over-complicating the intention of this rule. You are welcome to subject the team to fines, but since the wording of this rule says 'after the draft', then this seems like the quickest and easiest solution.
