Scott
Starter
Cincinnati Reds
BBSBL-Cincinnati Reds
Posts: 1,022
|
Post by Scott on Apr 10, 2007 13:49:57 GMT -5
if people are allowed to sign FAs and allowed to trade, there is no way there should be a limit. i'd still be down for making a rule that prevents trading players that are incapable of gaining bird rights... and if prefered... not on a rookie contract. it doesn't seem like people are too thrilled with that but that is the only fair ground. either we allow the trading of FAs or we don't, i don't like the idea of a limit. There won't be a limit if you have to wait a sim before dealing a FA that you can sign. You can sign as many FA as your roster would allow.
|
|
|
Post by jahallstar on Apr 10, 2007 13:50:23 GMT -5
simple just limit the amount of trades 2 teams can do with each other. 1 trade per day. So if they want to do an elaborate deal like this it would take 5 sims. I don't agree with this but that is the answer to the so called problem I don't think that really fixes anything. And sometimes teams might want to make two trades...I've done it before. I'd make a trade with one team then a few hours later make a different one.
|
|
|
Post by duce on Apr 10, 2007 13:51:52 GMT -5
if people are allowed to sign FAs and allowed to trade, there is no way there should be a limit. i'd still be down for making a rule that prevents trading players that are incapable of gaining bird rights... and if prefered... not on a rookie contract. it doesn't seem like people are too thrilled with that but that is the only fair ground. either we allow the trading of FAs or we don't, i don't like the idea of a limit. There won't be a limit if you have to wait a sim before dealing a FA that you can sign. You can sign as many FA as your roster would allow. that's cool with me and so is the "sim before trading back and forth thing". it's no disrespect but i don't think either fixes the problem at all, it's more of a delay... just my view on it.
|
|
Scott
Starter
Cincinnati Reds
BBSBL-Cincinnati Reds
Posts: 1,022
|
Post by Scott on Apr 10, 2007 13:52:57 GMT -5
There won't be a limit if you have to wait a sim before dealing a FA that you can sign. You can sign as many FA as your roster would allow. that's cool with me and so is the "sim before trading back and forth thing". it's no disrespect but i don't think either fixes the problem at all, it's more of a delay... just my view on it. i think it solves it because teams would have to submit separate trades to put trades through. An example like this ORL/SAC trade couldn't have gone through as 3 separate trades. If it had been 3 separate ones, it would have been vetoed probably.
|
|
|
Post by jahallstar on Apr 10, 2007 13:53:57 GMT -5
if people are allowed to sign FAs and allowed to trade, there is no way there should be a limit. i'd still be down for making a rule that prevents trading players that are incapable of gaining bird rights... and if prefered... not on a rookie contract. it doesn't seem like people are too thrilled with that but that is the only fair ground. either we allow the trading of FAs or we don't, i don't like the idea of a limit. There won't be a limit if you have to wait a sim before dealing a FA that you can sign. You can sign as many FA as your roster would allow. Yeah that would be fine. How ofton would two teams have more than 3 roster spots. If we don't do something it would be like playing Madden on rookie. Sure you'd win 120 to 0 but does that mean your good? No. Take the step up where there is actually a challenge. Take the step up and actually make the salary work for a trade instead of taking the cheap way out.
|
|
|
Post by jahallstar on Apr 10, 2007 13:55:02 GMT -5
There won't be a limit if you have to wait a sim before dealing a FA that you can sign. You can sign as many FA as your roster would allow. that's cool with me and so is the "sim before trading back and forth thing". it's no disrespect but i don't think either fixes the problem at all, it's more of a delay... just my view on it. I think the majority agree with you about the sim before trading back and forth thing. Thats why we are upping it to four sims.
|
|
|
Post by duce on Apr 10, 2007 13:57:45 GMT -5
*jukes left*
|
|
|
Post by jahallstar on Apr 10, 2007 14:00:03 GMT -5
Hit stick..your finished.
|
|
|
Post by duce on Apr 10, 2007 14:05:21 GMT -5
i can't even win on rookie mode
|
|
|
Post by King of Kings on Apr 10, 2007 15:08:19 GMT -5
I voted 3. No limit is too unrealistic.
|
|
|
Post by ducky on Apr 10, 2007 17:59:38 GMT -5
12-11, the 3/2s are winning!
|
|
|
Post by ducky on Apr 11, 2007 17:54:03 GMT -5
0 new votes, so whats the verdict?
|
|
|
Post by d2acollectables on Apr 11, 2007 18:02:49 GMT -5
we need every gm to vote on this cause 3 is more than enough
|
|
|
Post by duce on Apr 13, 2007 17:01:33 GMT -5
what makes you think that other voters won't see it the other way?
|
|
|
Post by Spencer on Apr 13, 2007 17:13:29 GMT -5
Deadlock. Kinda funny. Guess it stays as is.
|
|