Proposal for rule changes

VGFL wrote:Trades, Free Agency & The Draft

1. All trades have to be accepted by the trade committee. You need to have 3 of 5 approvals. (Trades involving committee members need x of y or x of z approvals)

Trades must be posted on the forum with DaddyLeagues links. Please keep them realistic and as simple as possible.

A Trade Calculator is in effect to ensure parity amongst the league.

PLEASE Post a screen shot of the calculator along with your trades and tag all five committee members.

If the calculator accepts your trade it is very likely to be accepted by the committee.

If it is declined, it may still be accepted with valid reasoning. You should post your rationale for the trade. It is not 100% accurate but it doesn’t do too bad a job.

The committee members are: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 

2. Trades with CPU teams are not allowed.

3. Trades within your division is allowed but not encouraged

4. The trade deadline is week 8.

If a trade had full approval but was unable to be processed because one team was on a bye then it can be processed at the start of week 9 before the trade deadline is turned back off. It MUST occur before either user plays their week 9 game.

These are the rules I wrote a few months ago for VGFL. They have worked well and there has not been any significant heated debates over the last few seasons like what we have seen here. I offer these as a potential solution without a lot of effort needed from Brza etc here. I am not saying one is necessarily better than the other but the results from not having a trade limit has certainly been a lot more sim and no extra work in terms of number of trades occurring. Use this information as you wish, but it is evidence in support of Para's suggestions which I think are very reasonable.

You know I feel a trade calc is fair, maintains a reasonable level of sim and prevents stupid trades from sneaking through on a committee vote that undoubtedly has potential for unintended bias occasionally. I do feel it should be essential to be posted for all trades before voting, just to maintain transparency. It is not a gatekeeper. It is just a guide, but it is pointless to use it for some and not others.

I hope you might find the above useful if you chose to modify the rules here. Having unlimited resigning and limited trades doesn't make sense though. It may invite more crazy trading for multiple contract year players on the cheap.

Those rules aren't really different from ours. We have all the same rules with the exception of the trade calculator but since you posted the calc and were invited to the committee its been generally assumed you will post a screen shot of the calc anyway @dwevans . So its basically the same except we only allow 4 per season.

I do think that the calc should be more effective this year though with the change to progression eliminating the possibility of highly valuable low OVR guys that would trick out the calc in the past. And we could make it mandatory to post a screenshot.

I don't see how an unlimited number of trades will help stop someone from making their team unrecognizable though. Sorry @zill, for using you as an example but you guys said he went too far with trades and that was with only allowing 4. It took him multiple seasons because of that restriction. With no trade limit he could do it all before week 8.

I think if the aim is not to let teams become unrecognizable due to trading away so many players then we should possibly limit how many players above 90 or 85 OVR can be traded per season. And maybe no limits on lower OVR players. Possibly also no trades for original roster drafted rookies until at least season 2?

Also there should probably be a minimum amount of games played by coaches after a trade otherwise the trade reverts back. I don't believe any instance was intentional but it did lead to some complaints when trades were executed and one party went inactive or left the league afterwards. Think we had 3 instances of this and 1 or 2 trades where a guy left before even completing the trade. 

I like @Bartell_ idea of no trades during the draft, if they weren't conditionally pre-approved beforehand. It does hurt the draft when we constantly pause. And its hell on trade committee trying to balance their own boards and approve trades.

I would vote to stop trades during the draft unless pre-approved before the draft starts.

It isn't fun for the 30 people not involved.

As i wrote the original NFL rules around the turn of the 20th century i should be heard lol - The bottom line is clear, trading during M18 was simply not conducive to a positive league. 

Why? That's a grey area as opinions will get involved and no doubt differ. The above statement is fact and we need to address it - and have been discussing since S3 last year.

I suspect the following points will be the main discussion criteria (in no specific order):-

Number of trades allowed (and what format)
The Trade Calculator
Re-signings (as this is directly linked).

Rest assured it will be addressed for M19.

Well, the calc does help make mid draft trades a lot more simple. Just sayin'. 

They are exciting and a real part of football and shouldn't just be limited to pre-draft agreement as this will only involve high picks or big name players. A little organisation. A screenshot of the calc and a simple nod from commissioners should avoid any long discussion.

I don't think it is fair to expect me to post it. I can't always be available like any other member of the committee and it is silly to use it for some and not for others. 

I imagine there is more of an incentive to destroy a roster with limiting trades to 4. In order to get the one player he wants Zill packages together several identifying pieces for that player AND a first round pick. If it didn't exist he could trade one player for one player and then a less important player for a later first round pick or early second rounder that would be more realistic without running out of trades. At the moment they get forced to be so extreme because of greed and limited number of trades.

I only posted those rules to avoid typing so much. Of course they aren't so different. It wouldn't be a bad thing to align the two given the number of crossover players though. 

I also would recommend no trading of rookies at all. Again - it is almost completely unsim bar some very rare exceptions.

I think main reason for the discussion about max trades are un-sim trades with multiple players. This is what some didn't like in last Madden.
So I guess if we are not encouraging these types of trades and they get rejected, then we can leave the rule with max 4 trades as it is. If it's clear then that there would be more (realistic!) trades, it can be discussed again.

As long as it's not every second pick, I'm open to draft day trades. Wouldn't hurt to have pre-approved trades anyway, because starting the discussion about a trade and finalizing it in a few minutes, doesn't happen usually. If 30 guys have to wait 15 minutes until it's done, that's not fun for them. Especially if it happens several times in each round. So either pre-approved conditional trades or having the calculator with values ready directly when it's discussed, should be mandatory.

@bishbosh1985

Not everything discussed is grey or opinion based. Some has evidence and experience behind it. As far as I am aware, none of the admin team has been a member of another league for a while, so may feel some areas are unproven when they are not. Speak to other members privately and visit the forums of other leagues and see for yourself the results. You can decide then if they are for you but the opinions of everything isn’t grey and neither is the consensus that some trades we had here caused conflict. Some solutions are offered to make everyone’s enjoyment and life easier.

SML stands for Sim Madden League. I am sure that core ethos is what encouraged a lot of members to join. I guess some of the conflict comes from deviating from how sim or realistic we operate.

I don't have the time or the crayons to explain this 

Helpful

I read VGFL and calculator and them immediately stopped caring about what you posted. Happy to give top draw input as always

#FTC