2010 RULES: Waivers

[Goodell]

Waivers kind of went under our radar when league first founded because they aren't used as much in the NFL, but last season Larry Johnson being cut and going through waivers brought up that issue that we should consider adding that process.

That would also have a big impact (for better or worse) for our current mechanisms for teams to force players to take pay-cuts by cutting them and trying to re-sign for less. Sometimes other teams may out-bid them and sign those players away. Adding a waiver process would make it even more risky to cut a player and try to bring back at a lower cost, as all teams would have some time to put in a claim to snag the player before they even hit free agency.

For cap impact, the cutting team would have to take any remaining SB left cap hit and we'd treat it not unlike a trade where the claiming team wouldn't have any Signing Bonus as part of that player's deal anymore (as paid by cutting team in cap hit) but would just pick up their contract from that point in terms of annual salary and roster bonuses. There may be some signing of a claimed player to a different agreement in reality, but can't really see us putting contract bidding negotiation into the claim process so just would have to be taking on the annual salary under their contract as is. If you didn't like their salary, you'd just not claim and hope they hit free agency with nobody else claiming either and then try to sign them as a free agent.

I thought I might have read something somewhere about restrictions of the cutting team to bring the waived player back perhaps, which would really end that practice of cutting players here and trying to force a price cut and sign for less, but wouldn't be practical for us as we can't really negotiate with the players to reduce salary and our only means of doing so is cutting and trying to resign. This would just add that they have to clear waivers with nobody willing to pay them that current salary because they hit the streets as a free agent looking for a new bidded contract.

The claim order is a little complicated in that it starts out as last year's standings (we'd use draft order of original slots since we generate that order for the draft) with the worst teams getting first priority to claim, and then changes later in the season to be the current year standings once enough games played for that to matter (9/28 I read last year). If we can find a date in an NFL calendar if it changes each year we can go with the exact date, and if not just go with some week of the season that matches that generally.

[Jared A]

It looks like everyone wants to change this one. But, wouldn't just making it anyone cut is a vet be simpler?

[Goodell]

It looks like everyone wants to change this one. But, wouldn't just making it anyone cut is a vet be simpler?

You mean everyone cut is a free agent like it is now? I think a lot of people from the LJ discussions at the time and some other reactions to some teams cutting a lot of big name players to try to re-sign in the middle of the season (when less competition and less cap space available for most teams) thought...

- NFL has it, and we try to give our GMs similar tools and environment to the real thing.
- Waiver order helps teams that need the most help (like the draft) in giving them first cracks at picking up good players on waivers.
- Some didn't seem to like the frequency of good player cut in the middle of the season by teams trying to re-sign for a longer deal against less competition to maybe get under-market deal, or the possibility of that top player changing teams late in the season after trade deadline unrealistically.

With our league extremes (usually a handful of great teams at the top and a handful of complete rebuild jobs looking for high picks... both could be sensible strategies) a waiver system may bring more balance in boosting the talent of some of the worst teams by giving them first cracks at waivers as the NFL does.

But I think we can live with or without them. Just another reality element that came to prominence with Larry Johnson last year and him having to pass through waivers, and seeing if most people wanted to bring in that real element and examining what other benefits or difficulties created.

[soonertf]

I think the rule should be in place for all players released, but 4 yrs & after trade deadline is a start. Releasing a player to resign during the season always backfires on GMs anyway, so this rule being in place will help curb those moronic decisions.

[whteshark]

Yes, releasing a player in mid season does often backfire. It cost me a 35 million SB when I tried. Needless to say it was a lesson learned.

[Onyxgem]

Yes, releasing a player in mid season does often backfire. It cost me a 35 million SB when I tried. Needless to say it was a lesson learned.

Ha ha I remember that

[Jared A]

Sorry Troy... I meant to say all players onto the waiver wire. Everyone who is cut goes to the waiver wire.


I don't see the benefit in differentiating between vets and nonvets. Just treat them all the same... 3 day wait for a team to claim a player at a given contract.

[Goodell]

Sorry Troy... I meant to say all players onto the waiver wire. Everyone who is cut goes to the waiver wire.

I don't see the benefit in differentiating between vets and nonvets. Just treat them all the same... 3 day wait for a team to claim a player at a given contract.

I don't see a benefit for gameplay as much either, and does make it more complicated -- but the thing on that side of that is realism. Ideally, the league functions in an entertaining competitive way but also the rules similar enough to the NFL so that our teams are built in a similar realistic way to compare our results to real team rosters under similar conditions, as well as kind of edu-taining about the most popular sport and some of the more obscure rules that impact team building that our players get to understand more through our game and become more knowledgeable about NFL operations.

But we don't understand all of the complex NFL rules, and take liberties in some places for either simplicity or technical reasons or because we aren't quite real and need some modifications based upon our differences.

I personally could go with either of the waiver options for either NFL realism (and vets to waivers only after trade deadline) or a simpler way of everybody through waivers at all times. So long as we keep a good service time as part of the player profile (uploaded when I update rosters each year from NFL.com roster lists that show experience) I think either way could be implemented. I generally lean more toward what the real rules are (or at least spirit of those rules if we can't implement entirely) unless there is strong support for modification in a different way as it applies to the game here.

[dinkatoid]

I could see it making a difference if someone else big was cut during the season. Obviously if someone goes on waivers, only the lesser teams could have a shot at him. If the guy is a vet and becomes a UFA instead of hitting waivers, it would be an open bidding war for the guy, and he may be payed more by a contender who sees him as the missing piece

[Jared A]

Well... I like the "everyone goes on waivers" because it eliminates teams trying to sneak players through. Or sneak extensions.