Quote:Originally posted by Eggy Nog@Jan 9 2017, 04:19 PM
I don't know if I fully understand the reasoning behind this? Not for/against it, just not sure why this is necessary or desired.

Making management more relevent, mostly - it's more commonly just a weird side amount of cap space that currently can't be counted towards meeting minimums. It standardizes things and stops random distribution of money.

Quote:I also wonder here if it might make more sense to cap tier 5 contract lengths as well if you're going to cap contract lengths, because if not it still allows for cap circumvention.

$4M is so much higher than the current limit of $2M that I think we're just not super worried about it, honestly. We had discussed a middle tier of payments, and could possibly revisit if necessary.

Quote:I'd kind of like to see this kept in some more limited way, honestly, so that vets who really don't need the money can take a pay cut to allow younger players who need the money more to get it. I'm sitting here with 155M in the bank, I don't need 5M a year

We've had multiple discussions around this, and it just got brought up again, so something may come of it.

Quote:One question I'd have on this would be whether people who are in tier 5 can just sign for tier 4 value at whatever term? Because right now if people are signed for, say, $2M, will they have a grace period where they can sign longer term at the tier 4 level to compensate for the change? (I may have phrased this terribly, let me know if I did and I can try to say this more clearly).

Already answered, I think.

Quote:Is there any limit on compliance buyouts? Or is it just limited by the number of players you have on your roster? No opinion on that, just a question.

We talked about limiting it, but since the GM is effectively just losing a player and we expect it to be used primarily as a last resort we decided the limit was unnecessary.