LogFAQs > #924384476

Emeraldegg posted...

Honestly, I don't even consider this a big deal because, while it is easy to lump all the AI teams together, let's not forget there are still more than a dozen AI teams all competing with each other as well, so it's not like all this juicy free agent talent is going to a select couple of teams. Even if all the big FAs went to AI teams, if they were reasonably distributed, it should not affect the power balance of the league that much. And if they weren't, then it means that the teams they did go to, way outspent their budgets and will be Dolphins level of cost cutting in a few years, but without the security of a gajillion first rounders to make up for it. Furthermore, it's not as if the AI having a higher cap than user teams makes it strictly impossible for users to land those free agents. It simply means that users need to be smart and pick their free agents wisely. Don't be like me a few years back and spend 9M a year on an OT when OTs are plentiful, and 8M a year on a HB when HBs are plentiful, and do both of these in the same year. It's harder, but not necessarily "hard" imo.

Sometimes, it just comes down to luck though. I learned my lesson awhile ago about HBs and was really lucky you outbid me on Reggie Bush however many years back that was, but even so, you can never quite tell which users are going to be active and who they might go after. If my team needs, just for an example's sake, a MLB, and there are 2-3 sitting there that would be a starter on my team. Let's just say the top 2 are rated 87 and the 3rd is 85.

Multiple users go after the lowest because they think everyone will go for a higher-rated MLB and multiple people go after one of the other two. By pure luck, an AI team signs the other 87 MLB on day 1 of free agency with a much closer to market value deal. No user would ever offer him as low of a deal because they rightfully fear being outbid, and if you were one of the user teams that lost out on all 3, being smart and going after FAs wisely didn't really play a factor.

Anyway, that's all beside my point that I intended to make which is that if this is such a significant issue it needs a rule change, it shouldn't be one that ends up being detrimental to user teams, and if it is, it's not a rule worth having imo.