FanGM

It certainly does prioritize the first one to make an offer. By the time I got on the site this morning, there were players already essentially priced out because the threshold to increase their bid was too high. Goodluck to anyone playing from a different time zone that can't get their bids in within the first hour. We've always worked to make this site so that you can check in anytime within a 24 hour window and not be at a disadvantage.

Ulrich82 wrote:It certainly does prioritize the first one to make an offer. By the time I got on the site this morning, there were players already essentially priced out because the threshold to increase their bid was too high. Goodluck to anyone playing from a different time zone that can't get their bids in within the first hour. We've always worked to make this site so that you can check in anytime within a 24 hour window and not be at a disadvantage.

I think smaller raises are certainly something to look at, but I've already had 2 of my players see a counter offer, so it's not as though you can't get into a bid war.

Ulrich82 wrote:It certainly does prioritize the first one to make an offer. By the time I got on the site this morning, there were players already essentially priced out because the threshold to increase their bid was too high. Goodluck to anyone playing from a different time zone that can't get their bids in within the first hour. We've always worked to make this site so that you can check in anytime within a 24 hour window and not be at a disadvantage.

We'll see how it plays out, but initially I am thinking it'll end up the opposite of that where teams with more patience will probably end up better in the end for a couple reasons.

Like regular peak free agency a lot of early bidders will see themselves countered throughout the day and those bidding later may end up winning more from day one when it's said and done.

Some teams will go all out early and put everything into signing just 1 or 2 guys to the max. They've put all their few eggs in a small basket involving players that usually don't work out historically.

I tend to be on the side expressed where quantity is perhaps more important and playing the odds to increase your chances instead of focusing just limited targets. Teams that can get 5+ guys within their 100K budget cap even if it wasn't the most demanded players may end up making better decisions to give them more chances one sticks.

Most of the highly active GMs will blow all their 100K by tomorrow. It's easy to think that's an advantage to early bidders now just an hour into things, but I think in a week it'll look differently when some new articles come out and the patient teams who didn't blow everything on day one still have SB cap left to spend and have more eggs in their basket. We'll see in the end if the teams putting everything into only 1 or 2 on day one or those that spread it out to more players of perhaps less demand end up being smarter in the long run.

It's not like we are talking all-stars here. These are players that didn't get chosen in 256 picks. You might have one or 2 of these guys ever make it as a usable starting in the league. I haven't seen anyone get the max $100K yet so I don't think time-zones really matter. If you want a player then put the $100K on it and be good. I've already been outbid on 2 of mine as well...so I'd say its far from a first come first serve. I think patience (like Troy said) might win the strategy here when said and done. Most of these will be practice squad fillers anyway, which then can be bid on if a gm really wants them on their 53 that bad.

soonertf wrote:It's not like we are talking all-stars here. These are players that didn't get chosen in 256 picks. You might have one or 2 of these guys ever make it as a usable starting in the league. I haven't seen anyone get the max $100K yet so I don't think time-zones really matter. If you want a player then put the $100K on it and be good. I've already been outbid on 2 of mine as well...so I'd say its far from a first come first serve. I think patience (like Troy said) might win the strategy here when said and done. Most of these will be practice squad fillers anyway, which then can be bid on if a gm really wants them on their 53 that bad.

DFFL has one player who's been offered the max, and it was a counter bid.

Was this really an issue before? Does anyone remember a specific example?

I'm just curious who gives a UDFA a ton of guaranteed money and what their situation was when they could have drafted them for far less guaranteed? I suppose if you had no or very few draft picks and a bunch of cash on hand you may throw some to guarantee you sign the player, but I'm struggling with the idea giving a UDFA the kind of money Troy is trying to prevent. I think the change sounds reasonable and am surprised it was even needed. To soonertf's point, there were ~250 chances to draft these guys and everyone passed.

Again, I think I'm fine with how its set up (though tweaks may be needed over time). I just wish it had been called a cap on signing bonus and salary rather than just calling it a cap on signing bonus.

JonC wrote:DFFL has one player who's been offered the max, and it was a counter bid.

Who is the player? Want to look into that after the clock times out.

Fish wrote:Was this really an issue before? Does anyone remember a specific example?

I'm just curious who gives a UDFA a ton of guaranteed money and what their situation was when they could have drafted them for far less guaranteed? I suppose if you had no or very few draft picks and a bunch of cash on hand you may throw some to guarantee you sign the player, but I'm struggling with the idea giving a UDFA the kind of money Troy is trying to prevent. I think the change sounds reasonable and am surprised it was even needed. To soonertf's point, there were ~250 chances to draft these guys and everyone passed.

Yes, our league has been around for 10 years of history and UDFA bids could often get unrealistic once people get competitive over players and just using fake money.

More than anything, this continues to put GMs in the same job as real GMs with the same restrictions in terms of what they can do to try to get as many top UDFAs as they can. In the NFL and here now, there are limits on what can be done and a cap where teams have to prioritize who they go after and how much, with those decisions impacting what they can do toward other players. It was all discussed and voted positively earlier this off-season. We'll see how things go and adjust ahead as needed/desired. Thanks

Ben C. wrote:Again, I think I'm fine with how its set up (though tweaks may be needed over time). I just wish it had been called a cap on signing bonus and salary rather than just calling it a cap on signing bonus.

We can work on that labeling or communication, but it was never hidden and always part of the proposal details voted upon. viewtopic.php?f=7&t=1420

All UDFAs would get a standard rookie contract salaries, with a signing bonus amount based upon competitive bidding among teams that have an equal limit on the amount of signing bonuses they can give to UDFAs.