Board 8 > Board 8 National Football League League (B8NFLL) Season 12: The Offseason

(+) Yeah! (+)

Being in charge of the Colts, I was planning on submitting an offer this round, which is why I haven't opened any of the PMs. However, I am opening one because the way the subject line is worded concerns me.
---

Oh if that was mine sorry. I meant to add it wasn't RFA related to the title.

No, it mentioned RFA Offer, but it added a "Conditional" to it, so I felt obligated to look.
---

Mine had a proposal for a new movie script, The Falcons Take Manhattan
---

Lions Steelers
Dolphins Falcons
Bucs Panthers

Trades are official
---

Damn, we already have over 200 posts. Thanks inaugural Hall of Fame?
---

Tradez!
---

Trades, hall of fame plus I went into a bit more detail on the sheets I produced this season

Phase 2 has ended.

Phase 3 will begin hopefully tonight.
---

I apparently only needed to PM one user, so this could be a short phase 3.
---

And Phase 3 is already over lol.

I will post the official rules later because I should and then the results
---

Aww yeah, time to trade all the draft picks

And also cry as I likely hideously underestimated wage demands of my FAs

Also don't feel bad pointing this out now as it would no longer draw attention to an available player unnecessarily (because a 4th for an 83 DT is a steal imo)

A couple of seasons back I said MLBs seemed to be cheaper than DTs giving a slight advantage to running 3-4. KCF said that wasn't the case (and honestly it might not be) but looking at RFA offers

MLB Paul Worrilow (1st) - 3 / $14.3 mil / $2.28 mil
DT Arthur Jones (4th) - 4 / $21.4 mil / $4.08 mil

Both same rating (83 unleas typoes) and both same team. DT is asking for more years but even taking that out of the equation the DT seems to be asking for more money than the MLB. There's also another MLB asking for identical money as Worrilow and has the same rating (Manti Teo) and I've kinda felt that wage demands are tied to basically rating alone (with maybe a few weird caveats). You kinda see it in FA where all the players of the same rating and position ask for the same money.

Might just be a quirk of RFA that the DT is asking for more as therea a low rated DT asking for a fortune (which I think might be tied to tender level set)

Trade to announce

Panthers Receive
C Josh Sitton (83 - 26yo)

Steelers Receive
Panthers 2nd Round (Pick 57)

Confirm
---

RFA Phase 3

I will PM any user who had an RFA of theirs sign a deal with another team. I will include the contract details, and you will have until a deadline that doesn't matter now to inform me if you intend to match the deal or decline to match and receive a draft or draft picks from the other team.
---

RFA Results

Bengals have signed Pioneers RT Donald Stephenson to a 3 year deal. The Pioneers have elected not to match and receive the Bengals 4th round pick.

Bills signed Jets FS Tyrann Mathieu to a 6 year deal. The Jets have elected to match

Broncos have signed Cowboys CB Monte Davis to a 5 year deal. The Cowboys have elected not to match and receive the Broncos 3rd round pick.

Chiefs have signed Rams MLB Manti Te'o to a 4 year deal. The Rams have elected to match.

Colts have signed Pioneers LG Andre Fry to a 6 year deal. The Pioneers have elected not to match and receive the Colts 1st round pick.

Lightning have signed Dolphins LT Lane Johnson to a 6 year deal. The Dolphins have elected not to match and receive the Lightning's 1st and 3rd round picks.

Lions have signed Dolphins DT Arthur Jones to a 5 year deal. The Dolphins have elected not to match and receive the Lions 4th round pick.

Packers have signed Broncos OLB Chris Ruud to a 4 year deal. The Broncos have elected not to match and receive the Packers 3rd round pick.

Panthers have signed Raiders SS Kam Chancellor to a 6 year deal. The Raiders have elected to match.

Panthers have signed Dolphins WR Rishard Matthews to a 5 year deal. The Dolphins have elected not to match and receive the Bucs 3rd round pick.

Pioneers have signed Giants MLB Brandon Spikes to a 5 year deal. The Giants have elected to match.

Rams have signed Bengals TE Rob Gronkowski to a 5 year deal. The Bengals have elected to match.

Ravens have signed Pioneers C Marshal Yanda to a 5 year deal. The Pioneers have elected to match.
---

Guessing the Bears RFA offer was trumped by someone else for it to not be listed?

My personal assessment of the Bears offer was that it was semi-serious. It was definitely eclipsed by a mile.
---

I'm surprised the AI matches so frequently. Don't know the offers but figured they wouldn't match big money offers. Seems like they match for most (all?) high end players? It had been something a few people had wondered in discord (and came up in a PM trade too)

Also kinda surprised at who the Chiefs went for because I offered Vinson for that same pick earlier but I guess Manti would be quite a few years younger so makes sense I guess

I was surprised that Ranlom didn't go after Worrilow, who has the same rating as Te'o, knowing I wasn't going to match any contract for him.
---

ShatteredElysium posted...

Also kinda surprised at who the Chiefs went for because I offered Vinson for that same pick earlier but I guess Manti would be quite a few years younger so makes sense I guess

Yeah, i was hoping he could develop alongside Dupree and Collins. But in hindsight, a team in our position shouldn't be so picky

I was surprised that Ranlom didn't go after Worrilow, who has the same rating as Te'o, knowing I wasn't going to match any contract for him.

I must have missed/forgotten that detail. But hey, just another small hurdle to overcome!
---

To Do:
- Add Hall of Famers to Wiki
- Update spreadsheet for all this crap that has gone on in just a few days
- I guess do UFA stuff
---

Ranlom posted...

I must have missed/forgotten that detail. But hey, just another small hurdle to overcome!

If you are referring to that I wouldn't match the contract, I mentioned on here and on Discord that the only reason why I decided to move on from Laurinaitis was because of his salary and because I was willing to pay Worrilow an under market contract of $2 mil. I wasn't going to turn around and match a contract calling to triple the latter's pay!
---

Willing to make more trades let me know
---

The Bills will also put it out there that we're willing to deal and just about everyone is available. The only two that come to mind that are mostly off limits are my starting DT and RE Kyle Johnson. Johnson isn't necessarily off the table if the deal was really enticing, but Jenkins is untradeable due to his massive cap hit.

Some awesome Bills players potentially include, but are certainly not limited to:

Top 5* CB Justin King (87 OVR),
Top 3* SS Lewis Baker (95 OVR),
and 92 OVR RT Alex Barron!

Baker in particular will very likely be dealt this off-season, so now's your chance!

For such amazing players, the Bills are looking to seriously upgrade at the WR and/or LB positions, so if those players interest you and you have the means to acquire them, or even the means to involve a 3rd team that has the means as part of a 3-team deal, let the Bills know!

*this is based on Shattered's outdated spreadsheet that I'm assuming was accurate to begin with, but they're at least close to those rankings still at any rate

To Do:
- Investigation
- Add Hall of Famers to Wiki
- Update team financial sheet from New England Patriots on
- I guess do UFA stuff
---

theawesomestevr posted...

The Bills will also put it out there that we're willing to deal and just about everyone is available. The only two that come to mind that are mostly off limits are my starting DT and RE Kyle Johnson. Johnson isn't necessarily off the table if the deal was really enticing, but Jenkins is untradeable due to his massive cap hit.

Some awesome Bills players potentially include, but are certainly not limited to:

Top 5* CB Justin King (87 OVR),
Top 3* SS Lewis Baker (95 OVR),
and 92 OVR RT Alex Barron!

Baker in particular will very likely be dealt this off-season, so now's your chance!

For such amazing players, the Bills are looking to seriously upgrade at the WR and/or LB positions, so if those players interest you and you have the means to acquire them, or even the means to involve a 3rd team that has the means as part of a 3-team deal, let the Bills know!

*this is based on Shattered's outdated spreadsheet that I'm assuming was accurate to begin with, but they're at least close to those rankings still at any rate

Guess you missed the link to the updated sheet?

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1ZfeeVy5eST-llaQv3DIAL7xtoUhtKAxpNF4VxHewdGc/edit?usp=sharing

Baker is joint 2nd SS by OVR
King is joint 3rd CB by OVR

Just from RFA offers, it might make sense for you to talk to the Panthers as they bid on an SS and missed out.

^Cool. Thanks!

Oh, and I guess I forgot to tell you this a while back, but Jamaal Ashley wasn't cut. He's the Bills' current FB.

He got renamed?

Yeah, KCF suggested it, and I concurred when we were signing draft picks that year.

Also, don't know if you care, but it looks like last year's draft has two #21 picks in the 1st round. I think DTs Short and Cox shifted back a pick as they were really #19 and #20 respectively.

Okay, so the spreadsheet is now up to date, and we will begin the next offseason event hopefully this weekend.

Before we do that, there was a discussion on our Discord channel, and it was determined that we should do away with the peer review for trades and have full power to pass and fail trades fall upon me. This will be effective immediately.

This might be a sensitive subject for some people, but apparently I am in the minority in how I approach trades in being thorough by providing explanations on several fronts.When trades involve players, most people I guess just give people ratings and maybe ages without also discussing financial implications and also player performance, and in general just little discussion period to know if a user fully understands what they are agreeing to. I do not feel that this is operating in good faith, and if both sides are doing it, then I do not believe two wrongs make a right.

I have been vocal about not liking most trades that I see roll through, and I feel like in addition to people not paying attention to historical trends and how Madden 06 operates, I finally understand why most trades suck. Not that I think trades are suddenly going to not suck, but I think we can massively improve upon what they have been.
---

The new way we will handle trades is this:

1. Begin trade discussions like you normally do, and do not be afraid to ask me for my opinion or for additional info. I'm the expert and historian here. It's what I'm here for.

2. Ensure that all trade discussions include the positions, player ages, financial impact, player performance, and what each user involved is expecting to get out of the trade. If no player is involved, the last talking point still stands.

3. I want both parties to contact me via PM or Discord DM with the full trade details and demonstrate that they understand what they are getting into (the positions, player ages, financial impact, player performance history, and also what they and their trading partner(s) are looking to get out of it).

4. I will use my discretion in regards follow-up questions/responses.

5. If I feel everything checks out, I will post the trade and its details (along with some explanation), and it becomes official.
---

To Do:
- Add Hall of Famers to Wiki
- I guess do UFA stuff
---

So speaking of trades. I currently possess the following picks and I am looking to package some of the picks together to move up

1st - Pick 10
2nd - Pick 25
2nd - Pick 26
4th - Pick 7
4th - Pick 26
5th - Pick 26
6th - Pick 15
6th - Pick 26

So if you're looking to acquire multiple picks to move down then let me know. I'm basically looking for a higher 2nd or low 1st. Or maybe trying to acquire a 3rd

Sounds serious, so I will give a serious response.

Maybe I've been away for too long or not playing enough Madden, but from an IRL standpoint, I haven't liked any of these trades. I mean, on paper, they make sense: User A has a player they don't want/can't keep, and User B wants said player. The player is good, so it seems that User B isn't getting shafted, but look at the alternative. If User A can't trade the player, are they just going to keep him? A highly skilled backup, probably not seeing the field, and give him starter money? He's gonna get cut. User B can get him in free agency; at the very least User B keeps his assets. This past year aside, you almost never see players get traded, and when they are, you see Randy Moss traded for a fourth round pick before setting the single-season touchdown record. Pro Bowler/Hall of Famer Tony Gonzalez goes for a second round pick. All this player movement feels more like the NBA or MLB, where expiring contracts get moved all the time. Hell, people are even looking for sign-and-trades.

But...I figured that was just Madden. Maybe it is just Madden and I am completely off base. Maybe I am overvaluing my draft picks, and I should have taken part in RFA. In any event, as for the rule change, I am against it. If the people have fun making trades, let the people make trades. Then again, if the people are asking for the rule change, then change the rule. Or maybe, this isn't up for debate, and I just went around in circles for no reason. Hmm....forget I said anything. Or don't.

Whatever.
---

Your first tenure was during the golden age of B8NFLL. This isn't the same B8NFLL as before. Changes had to be made and changes will continue to be made as the landscape shifts. When it was revealed to me that pretty much everyone doesn't really understand what they are giving up or receiving in a trade, an epiphany struck me and significant trade reform had to be made.

I'm all for having fun, and I hope everyone does have fun, but as the league is shaped by the people involved, having a major part of it be riddled with ignorance doesn't make for a healthy league, and it has become obvious to me now why some users are so much better at trading than others. The small divide between user and teams is likely a result of that.
---

I honestly think we should have some kind of cap on trades for draft picks. Especially 1st round picks. There has been a huge shift towards this, and I just don't think, in the long run its fair for some teams to be making the playoffs year after year, and then get like 2-4 1st round picks the next year.

Once you get into the later round it kind of becomes a crap shoot, so I think late round picks are fine, but more often than not early picks, given a playoff team around them, usually develops into a good player. So a guy trading a player to get an early draft pick is literally getting the best of both worlds. A good/great player on a lower cap deal.

Just my 2 cents.
---

I know you weren't naming names, but literally the only team that fits that description is the Dolphins. I have decided to stop trading for future firsts for the time being as I don't want them and end up trading most of them away. I specifically seek out teams that could use more 1st round picks, so I feel like I am putting my 1sts to good use. Regardless, I don't think such a limit is fair.

The primary source of additional 1st round picks for me is via RFA, and I don't think it is reasonable by any stretch of the imagination to require of teams to match all contracts offered in the second phase of RFA to ensure that they do not exceed two 1st round picks or whatever figure you had in mind. It also isn't reasonable to trade players solely for players because, using me for example, the reason why I trade most players in the first place is due to cap constraints, and to receive a player or players of similar caliber will more often than not fail to be financially prudent.

The only logical solution to the problem that you have is to require me to step down as a participant in this league. My #1 skill, in my opinion, is constructing a competitive roster in my vision, of which the draft is a major part of it. I have a great track record all over the draft, so if you have a problem with my drafting strategy and development plans, then you simply have a problem with me participating in the league.

I brought it up after the playoffs last season, but I did offer to step down if people really wanted me to. I didn't want to, but if my involvement was hindering everyone's enjoyment, then I would be willing to. Nobody wanted me to, but if things have changed, I would like for people to speak up.
---

I still think you should continue to participate, but I think Jukkie's idea was specifically about trading players for draft picks, not getting draft picks from RFA, which are two similar, but distinct things.
---

Oh, I did misread. I thought his issue was with owning a bunch of 1st round picks in general and not specifically with trades. I think that I have never owned more than two 1st round picks in a given draft that came via trade, and like I said, I give away most of them. Hell, sometimes people insist that I take a 1st in return.
---

If you really want to pinpoint the source of the Dolphins extra 1sts then it is probably their O-line.

The Dolphins have a revolving door of O-line rookies who are drafted in the 2nd-4th round. A decent amount of those players develop into starting caliber by the time they hit RFA and then the Dolphins let them go for either a 1st or a 1st+3rd. The ones who don't develop then sometimes get taken anyway in RFA because they get low tendered and a 3rd or 4th for a 82-85 24-26yo is still a good deal.

This season they lost OT Lane Johnson 96 to RFA but they also had C Josh Sitton 83 who was traded away prior to RFA

Last season they lost G Kelechi Osemele 91 (at the time) and G Johnathan Fletcher 89 (at the time) to RFA

Next season I am sure they will lose C Weston Richburg 87 to RFA (and I fully expect him to be 90+ by then). I think OT Eric Fisher 82 is also RFA eligible but I think he was a 2nd so he might be safe

I think if we really want to highlight a trade type that is potentally problematic then it's the sign and trade (and I've done these plenty myself). I'm really on the fence about whether they should be allowed or at the very least limited

They don't happen in real life and they reduce the talent that hits free agency. It feels like high end talent hits free agency one of three ways.

1. A user idles and the randomizer doesn't favor them
2. A user doesn't understand retirement ages / the rate a player will likely decline and so lets a high rated 'old' player walk when realistically they have another 2-4 years left.
3. The AI does something odd and lets someone walk

I think if people couldn't sign and trade then they would have to make tougher decisions when resigning players and cap management. People would likely have to let players walk to stay under cap and so theoretically we should see more talent available in free agency. Whereas right now there's no point letting a good player walk as you can probably find a trade partner and even if you have give a discounted deal you're getting something back for them.

On the other hand, I am not certain we wouldn't just be helping the AI get better if we did away with sign and trades. Usually a sign and trade means at least the talent stays with a user team whereas if they hit free agency, the userbase does not have a good track record of targeting the right players and preventing the AI getting better.

Sidenote - Sign and trades with AI teams absolutely shouldn't be allowed (I'm not sure this has actually happened in the first place)

(the 4th way highly rated people hit FA is cap management fuck ups. At least that's why Vick did)
---

Well there's the difference between some users too and why sign and trades are potentially unfair.

You let Vick walk for cap management reasons whereas some users would have just signed him and then traded him away before the deadline. Remember you can go into the negative cap to sign players, you just have to be under cap before preseason starts.

Or maybe you did try trade him and got no takers? I do remember you saying he was available.

Lol, you were the first to an AI sign and trade with Eric Winston
---

Ah, I couldn't remember if he was a sign and trade or if he was just on the books. I just remember he was the only movable one as Pearson was on a holdout contract with a ton of guaranteed money.

I know I've done plenty of sign and trades which is why I said as much in my initial post. I still feel like they are questionable if we are trying to crackdown on unfair trades.

ShatteredElysium posted...

Or maybe you did try trade him and got no takers? I do remember you saying he was available.

IIRC no one sent me an offer with enough time to do so.
---

the niners are always open to hear trades because they dont know what they are doing :)
---