Potential rule discussion for the coming off season

[Leb]

I'm fairly neutral on this since I rarely restructure any contracts but I would be more against than for it. This is a team benefiting decision on the players part and while some players may agree to it, I think making it an option for all is not realistic. Also, the mechanics of it would be relatively easy to exploit. You could franchise a player, restructure after x years then extend without adding any of the signing bonus escalation that normally accompany a longer deal.

On the flacco deal, I think it was a 3 year extension at 66 million from what I read. So instead of the 2 year 60 million deal it is now a 5 year 125 million deal. Essentially it works out to additional years at franchise tag + 10% and the new money 50-60% guaranteed with cap hits normalized to the average of the new five year deal

[Ritz Blitz]

We're gunna have two LTCs a year?.......Sick

[larry linke]

Free agency is already tilted heavily towards teams retaining their players. I am against a 2nd LTC and a second restructuring for that reason.

Larry
Minnesota AFFL

[Nathan S.]

Is it two LTC a year?

If that is too much let's just do three over two years.

[Adam K]

Free agency is already tilted heavily towards teams retaining their players. I am against a 2nd LTC and a second restructuring for that reason.

Larry
Minnesota AFFL

I think many owners - including myself - would be frustrated on a flip flop since I based my moves late last offseason knowing I would have an extra LTC in 2016. All rules were voted on for the next season so I would think if we wanted to replace the second LTC for this, which appears pretty hard to quantify would have to be voted on to replace the second LTC in 2017.

[Onyxgem]

Free agency is already tilted heavily towards teams retaining their players. I am against a 2nd LTC and a second restructuring for that reason.

Larry
Minnesota AFFL

I think many owners - including myself - would be frustrated on a flip flop since I based my moves late last offseason knowing I would have an extra LTC in 2016. All rules were voted on for the next season so I would think if we wanted to replace the second LTC for this, which appears pretty hard to quantify would have to be voted on to replace the second LTC in 2017.

Agree

[Knighty Knight]

I would be more interested in having the ability to roll over an LTC from one year to the next.

[whteshark]

Free agency is already tilted heavily towards teams retaining their players. I am against a 2nd LTC and a second restructuring for that reason.

Larry
Minnesota AFFL

I think many owners - including myself - would be frustrated on a flip flop since I based my moves late last offseason knowing I would have an extra LTC in 2016. All rules were voted on for the next season so I would think if we wanted to replace the second LTC for this, which appears pretty hard to quantify would have to be voted on to replace the second LTC in 2017.

Agree

I agree too.

[Jared A]

Yes, I am very much anti a 2nd LTC... but the rule passed, and people made decisions based on it. We could potentially discuss removing it for NEXT year, but this year it is a done deal.

[larry linke]

I agree with Jared A, if the rule was passed we should live with it. I didn't remember the rule passing, but suffer from CRS.

Larry
Minnesota AFFL