KRFL - a football simulation league
Forums
KRFL :: Forums :: KRFL Forums :: 2014 League Business
Proposed Amendment No. 8 - Eliminate $10M cap on saiaries << Previous thread | Next thread >>
Moderators: noodles, KRFL-BayCity, mark, MarkB
Author Post
Inverness
Thu Apr 03 2014, 02:51p.m.
Guest

Impacted Rule(s): 16.9
Proposed Change: Eliminate the $10M cap on salaries and make all players subject to the salary escalation provisions of rules 16.7 and 16.8 (+$1M for contracts of 4 years or less, +$1.5M for contracts of 5 years or more).
Conditions: (1) No initial salary can exceed $10M. (2) There is a $10M maximum salary cap penalty for any player cut with a salary over $10M, regardless of remaining years on their contract. (3) The new salaries will take effect next year. (4) Any coach with a player impacted by this change (player current salary is $10M with years remaining or will hit $10M during the current contract) will have a one-time opportunity this year to reduce the length of that player’s contract.
Explanation: It makes no sense to have to pay another $1M every year for a player like Riley Cooper when players like Brady, Witten, and Hutchinson continue indefinitely with no salary increase. This change will make more high quality players available to the league as free agents because it will be more difficult to hoard players. The provisions allow for a reasonable transition from current contracts and the salary cap penalty maximum will hopefully prevent a team from crashing because of a huge salary cap fine upon cutting a high value player. The escalation is no different than what everyone else pays.
Back to top
MarkB
Thu Apr 03 2014, 09:39p.m.
Mark Blume

Registered Member #81
Joined: Mon Oct 14 2013, 08:54a.m.

Posts: 1980
I am new to the league, so I do not have the background on why the $10mil max salary is used.

Lets say Rony Tomo was originally signed for $10.0 mil and 2014 will be the 4th year of a 7 year contract. Your proposal would say his 2014 salary stays at $10mil, his 2015 salary would be $11.5mil, his 2016 salary would be $13.0mil and in 2017 his salary would be $14.5mil, correct?

I think this proposal make some sense, but would like to hear from others in the league longer than I as I do not have the background/justification of the current rule.

I believe the current $10mil players are:
Gore-ATL
Witten-ATL
Brown-BAY
Romo-BEN
Babin-CAR
Bowe-CAR
Rivers-CIN
Hartline-CLE
Manning, E. - CRO
Roethlisberger-KTZ
Johnson, C. - RGG
Peterson - SAL
Brady - SEA
Schaub-SWF
Marshall-VAN
Flacco-WAR
Brees - WSS







Back to top
Inverness
Fri Apr 04 2014, 01:39p.m.
Guest

Correct.
Back to top
noodles
Sat Apr 05 2014, 02:25a.m.
Webmaster

Registered Member #1
Joined: Mon Feb 18 2008, 02:12a.m.

Posts: 1268
This proposal has my interest and I'd like to see a thorough discussion of its effects before I decide my vote. MarkB's list of $10m players is an eye opener. I expected to see a lot more QBs.
Back to top
Hawks
Sat Apr 05 2014, 09:54p.m.
Guest

We discussed this in 2012. I believe I made the comment that elite players (in KRFL terms, elite would mean a player with a $10mil contract) did not deserve special dispensation. Their salaries should increase over the course of a multi-year contract similar to other players without an artificially constructed ceiling. I recall two criticisms of the proposal: 1) some owners were against its implementation in the current year given they had already made trades for elite players and 2) the contract spreadsheet salary formula would have to be re-written, which one poster (I forget who) believed would be challenging. Not surprisingly those owners who had a $10mil player on their roster voted against the proposed amendment.
Back to top
noodles
Sun Apr 06 2014, 02:36a.m.
Webmaster

Registered Member #1
Joined: Mon Feb 18 2008, 02:12a.m.

Posts: 1268
I'm of two minds about this proposal. For me this is the Tom Brady rule. Years ago, Tom Brady was signed for something like eight or nine years locking him in at a $10m salary. That was a great deal for the owner who made that contract. In the real world, Tom Brady costs (I'm guessing) 20% of the Patriot's cap money or about $20m (or so) per year. In the KRFL, Tom Brady makes the same amount as a good left Tackle. That seems askew. I'm spit balling these numbers but the point stands.

On the other hand, I don't have a real grasp on what this proposal would mean to the league salary cap in the future. Our system works pretty well and maybe we should just tip our hat to the smart owner who locked in Tom Brady. I want to vote for this proposal but I need a better idea of how this would play out over the next few seasons.

One note: This rule, if adopted, won't take effect until next year.
Back to top
MarkB
Sun Apr 06 2014, 08:38a.m.
Mark Blume

Registered Member #81
Joined: Mon Oct 14 2013, 08:54a.m.

Posts: 1980
I this is implemented, our teams face the same issue the NFL Patriots have. If they give one player a huge contract, it is simply less they have to spend on everyone else. Maybe they are OK with that because the player is that good. But implementing this rule will make them think twice about give that player a 6,7,8.... year contract. If not, that player is back in the free agent draft after 4-5 years. Totally realistic insofar as how the actual NFL operates.

I am in favor of this rule change, but wonder what changes, if any, would be needed to the Franchise Player rule?
Back to top
Inverness
Sun Apr 06 2014, 10:23p.m.
Guest

The other aspect of the current rule is the fact that the owner of the $10m player effectively receives an extra million or $1.5m to spend on free agents because he does not have to spend it for the $10m player.
Back to top
noodles
Mon Apr 07 2014, 02:10a.m.
Webmaster

Registered Member #1
Joined: Mon Feb 18 2008, 02:12a.m.

Posts: 1268
Good point, Steve, about the advantage given.

I am in favor of this rule change, but wonder what changes, if any, would be needed to the Franchise Player rule?

At the moment, I can't think of any changes that would be necessary.

I'm warming up to this rule change. I'd like to hear from somebody who opposes it.
Back to top
 

Jump:     Back to top

Syndicate this thread: rss 0.92 Syndicate this thread: rss 2.0 Syndicate this thread: RDF
Powered by e107 Forum System