I understand what free agency is but when was the last time a player like Tavares hit free agency?

what's wrong with waiting? I'm gonna do everything i can to make sure i just match the highest JT offer.

If we can come up with something reasonable for extensions, it's something that occurs in real life all the time and makes sense to incorporate if we can.
These players are still available outside of free agency, you just have to be willing to trade for them. UFA's with 1 year left hold less value than they perhaps should, and some prospect of being able to sign them rather than fight for them in free agency would help mitigate that.

Here would be my proposal...any feedback would be welcomed.

1. Only players entering/on the final year of their contract can be extended.

2. Players under the age of 27 MUST be signed for 5+ years
Players 27-29 MUST be signed for 4+ years
Players 30-33 MUST be signed for 3+ Years
Players 34-36 MUST be signed for 2+ years
Players 36+ MUST hit FA

3. All signings would be voted on and ok'd or declined by the BoG as RFA signings basically were.

the only problem with this is that it doesn't work with the BOG being made of GMs. Also every team should have a chance to make offers in my opinion anyway.

suggestion: you are allowed to trade your FA's simple

Rodzik is sick of Markov already

How does it not work? Between 7 people I am sure they can come to an agreement on what a fair deal is.

There would be too Manu opportunities for bias. Not trying to say that bias will be occurring, its just that there is opportunity to be bias.

If someone can't be unbiased then they shouldn't be on the BoG

Not disagreeing, but if someone in society has power, they shouldn't become corrupt. The fact is that there is always opportunity, regardless of who is in "office".

By that logic nobody should be in power and the BoG should be eliminated for league wide voting.

All we are talking about is player X should get somewhere around dollar amount X. It's just talking numbers, this happens all day in the AGM Forum

i like this idea too.

You took it too far. It should be the people that are least to become corrupt that go into office. Cleary there is opportunity for something to go wrong everyday, even in practical uses of driving, eating, etc.

I think that having players being able to be resigned at an agreed price doesn't fit with the style that v1 is. The whole point is to make it unrealistic. Look at the Home Rights, NMC being disregarded, etc. The game should be fun. What fun is it to not have every player hit the market?

We did exactly that with RFAs. This was supposed to be as realistic as possible. The home team rights was to at least give some sort of advantage so a team doesn't just outright lose their UFAs but what I am proposing makes it more realistic and will do away with the home rights thing.

to be fair, RFAs were being signed before there were all the teams established. they were being signed before RAIF could envision the game going this much further. only a few people actually checked to see if the signings were fair in value. Parayako is signed at like 3.5M, about 63% of his IRL contract, as are many others .

I'd rather have home rights instead of just being able to sign your FAs before ever hitting the market. It takes away from the aspect of FA if teams can just offer the fairest price for them.

Sure parayko is cheap in this game for 2 years but after that his price is going to inflate to well above what his actual contract is.

IMO it makes zero sense to have all players with 1 year left be worthless in the game all because a few teams want all players to go to FA. The only reason you are fighting this is because you have cap space and want guys like Tavares to hit the market. Which in real life won't happen and if by some long shot it did happen he wouldn't pick a team like Vegas anyways. The way we ran FA was the most unrealistic way to do it so why not try and make it more realistic?

But anyways I am done debating with you since we obviously don't agree. Let's get others opinions.

Opinions?

i think we should just go with the 'all players must go to FA if they're on an expiring contract, though the home team can match the offer' FA plan. Anyway it's a year until next free agency, this will probably be decided later. We have a whole year.

I said "others" opinions...we already know yours.

I'm not going to get into it too deeply yet, but my thought was a combination.
Teams get the following at their disposal:

1. Up to 3 extensions for players with 1 year of term remaining only.
2. Up to 10 contract years to divide among those players (negotiable, I'm just setting an example).
3. Up to 20% of the salary cap can be used towards extensions (at the current $76M, that equates to $15.2M, again negotiable).
4. You must have the required cap space for next season at the time of the extensions.
5. The extensions kick in prior to free agency (to prevent teams from excessively exceeding their budgets).
6. Extensions must include an NMC and extensions over a certain length must include an NTC (optional. I'm just throwing it out there as a consideration, and/or in combination with 7.).
7. Players signed to extensions can not be retained by the team signing the extensions (you can't extend someone and then make them cheaper to sell them off, buyer's remorse, etc.). I want people to put serious consideration towards their extensions and preferably use them on players they aren't going to flip within a week.

Those are just some quick thoughts.

As for age restrictions, it's a possibility, but I'm not sure it's a necessity if there is already a contract/extension approval process.
Prior age restrictions were limited to things like ELC's and preventing extreme contracts. An approval process would take care of those on its own.
Unless you see a need I'm not considering?

I see what you are saying but I think this over-complicates things. This reminds me of initial FA talks and then how things ended up. We had a solid plan in place. It was simple and everyone could have done it with minimal questions asked. Then we had (have) FA still ongoing a week after it started. when it should have taken a few days max.

Even if we are doing extensions it's a whole year until FA.

Please don't make useless posts.

how was that a useless post?