| Forum » Doubts and questions » Re-Sign abuse? | Date | |
|---|---|---|
|
Is re-signing players with low salaries, just to keep them from being hostile claused an exploit?
|
||
|
425 msgs.
First-team player
|
As I'm digging through potential candidates to replace one of my top players that was sniped by a higher division team, I'm noticing a strong propensity for coaches to re-sign players very frequently, while still holding their hostile clauses well below market value. This seems like a way to get around actually paying your players what they are worth, to the point of being an exploit, and it does not make sense that such an artificial restriction should be in place. After reading through the help section, and the tutorials, FAQs, etc, it seems to me that the spirit of the game is to pay your players what they are worth, and if someone still wants to buy them out, or try to get you to trade them, then so be it. What are everyone else's thoughts on the matter? |
29/07/2011 09:19 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
425 msgs.
First-team player
|
It would seem as though of the 3 current votes, 2 think this is not an exploit. I wonder, do the two no-voters use this tactic? | 03/08/2011 04:43 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
Username
997 msgs.
MVP of the game
|
Here's a problem with your suggestion. If you are not able to re-sign your youth players and lock their contract for your team, you are opening a door to the "big money" teams to steal the good prospects. If you are well established team, you can have high salaries on both sides, seniors and juniors. But if you are just starting off and just can't afford high salaries for youth players the only way for you to protect the is to have them re-sign with you and be safe for the rest of the season. Also in real life it's called restricted free agent (they are young players who haven't earned "unrestricted" status yet), that means that the original team who signed the player has the rights to re-sign that player before anyone else can. So, as much as I understand your frustration, you also have to realize that by removing the re-sign option from youth would be like shooting yourself in a foot. |
03/08/2011 05:23 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
Username
997 msgs.
MVP of the game
|
By the way, sorry about your RDF. But this is an example of what I'm talking about. | 03/08/2011 05:30 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
Username
705 msgs.
MVP of the game
|
Well....if youd look at my squad instead of pouting to try and prove your point...you'd realize I don't use that tactic ....but if I were to choose to, I wouldn't be breaking any rules or be in the wrong. It is the right of any manager to protect his youth players, as long as they stay within the rules. | 03/08/2011 05:39 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
Username
705 msgs.
MVP of the game
|
And at a glance....it would appear you're guilty of using the same tactics you're suggesting are wrong. | 03/08/2011 05:46 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
Username
78 msgs.
Rookie
|
I agree with Mozleron. I think something should be done to improve the feature. Br0dy, I think his point wasn't that it was illegal, but that it should be improved. I think it might make sense to force players to pay their junior players, or at least be able to resign them without restricting the buyout clause. If my youth player is 38/14, and his hostile clause is $600,000, I must resign him because someone will buy him since his market value is $2,500,000 (Mozleron, you got market value for your RDF). If you want to allow the newer players to protect their youth, then I'd suggest limiting number of restricted youth players to 3-5. If not, new players could also just profit off other people buying out their juniors. |
03/08/2011 08:22 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
Username
3363 msgs.
Best scorer
|
Romasik2000 said: "big money" teams to steal the good prospects. +1 Romasik2000 said: But if you are just starting off and just can't afford high salaries for youth players the only way for you to protect them is to have them re-sign with you. +100 |
03/08/2011 10:48 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
425 msgs.
First-team player
|
dominatord said: I agree with Mozleron. I think something should be done to improve the feature. Br0dy, I think his point wasn't that it was illegal, but that it should be improved. I think it might make sense to force players to pay their junior players, or at least be able to resign them without restricting the buyout clause. If my youth player is 38/14, and his hostile clause is $600,000, I must resign him because someone will buy him since his market value is $2,500,000 (Mozleron, you got market value for your RDF). If you want to allow the newer players to protect their youth, then I'd suggest limiting number of restricted youth players to 3-5. If not, new players could also just profit off other people buying out their juniors. I absolutely agree with you. I am not saying this should be flat out disallowed. As it stands, I now have an extra $2.7m to spend on other players, or whatever else I want to spend it on. I think i got a pretty fair deal for him. Would i have liked more money for that player? Sure. Would i like to have had that player develop more and make it to my senior squad? Without doubt. But, as it stands, I now have a guaranteed chunk of money for a player that i don't know the final potential on, and can use that to improve my team in other ways, whereas i have now passed on the risk associated with that youth player to another team. Romasik2000 said: By the way, sorry about your RDF. But this is an example of what I'm talking about. As dominatord said, i think you've just proven my point. Again, i now have nearly $3m extra to spend thanks to selling a pretty decent player for what looks to be about an average price. I'm actually quite ok with you dropping that much money to take one of my players into an upper division. I wish him well in the future, and am glad to see he is going to be paid more than i think he's worth. Looking over your team, it looks like you've got a pretty high powered payroll totaling $685,000 for just your players. That's about 6 times higher than my player salary total. If that's what it takes to compete in div 4, then you appear to be doing it right, and when i get there next season, i'll have some adjustments to make. br0dy said: And at a glance....it would appear you're guilty of using the same tactics you're suggesting are wrong. You're going to need to be more specific. The only players i have under Renewal are players with less than a year left on their contracts, and i think i'm paying most, if not all of my players a market competitive wage. Some managers (Romasik2000 is a prime example) are willing to pay more for select players, which makes it a learning and wallet fattening experience for me. In general, I'm looking at this from the perspective of what i see happening in real world professional teams. Typically, the only time contracts get renewed is when they have less than a year left. One thing you also tend to see is the players best year ever is in the year leading up to his contract negotiations. I get that offering someone a trade at below the Hostile Clause may or may not get accepted, and the buyout value needs to be there or no one would ever trade their best players, but artificially stifling competition for the best players through a loophole seems like it's outside the spirit of the mechanism. Besides, if you want to closely monitor your players progress, and adjust his contract frequently, then why not just sign them to 1-2 year deals instead of 6-7? I do think dominatord's idea of limiting the the number of restricted players you can have somehow, whether it be allowing only a certain amount of players to be restricted, or only allow contract negotiations to happen during a "contract year", or some other solution not yet mentioned, would help bring overall player salaries in line with where they should be relative to player skill levels, and managers that are willing to field a good team will be rewarded with promotions. Managers that do not manage their funds well, through getting poor billboard deals and failing to live up to their sponsor contracts, will find themselves in lower divisions. |
03/08/2011 22:44 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
Username
705 msgs.
MVP of the game
|
Your junior RDF....RF.....OM...When you at their history...draws a pattern of what appears to be the tactics your discussing ... | 03/08/2011 23:33 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
1
