Originally posted by The Avenger
I like this alot
+1
I like this alot
+1
Originally posted by cdd757
Either one of 2 things needs to happen with this.
1. The agent can get opt out past day 32 with the owners permission
or
2. The LOI does not bind the player to the team
For GLB purposes I like the first option. It gives the LOI some validity while still offering flexibility.
And obviously players don't have to sign anything. If they are unsure of their status they just won't commit early. The provisions for retracting would just be for people who committed but then need to neg on their commitment.
My main enjoyment with this suggestion is that it really would provide structure to the 'behind the scenes' team planning that can become a mess. It cuts out some of the organization work and "need" to be on come D42 to instantly offer your antsy committed players contracts (since it'd do it for you).
Either one of 2 things needs to happen with this.
1. The agent can get opt out past day 32 with the owners permission
or
2. The LOI does not bind the player to the team
For GLB purposes I like the first option. It gives the LOI some validity while still offering flexibility.
And obviously players don't have to sign anything. If they are unsure of their status they just won't commit early. The provisions for retracting would just be for people who committed but then need to neg on their commitment.
My main enjoyment with this suggestion is that it really would provide structure to the 'behind the scenes' team planning that can become a mess. It cuts out some of the organization work and "need" to be on come D42 to instantly offer your antsy committed players contracts (since it'd do it for you).
Edited by Mat McBriar on Mar 14, 2011 14:42:15
If the "letters of intent" once signed would go to a teams "commitments" page would be great!
cdd757
offline
offline
Originally posted by Mat McBriar
For GLB purposes I like the first option. It gives the LOI some validity while still offering flexibility.
And obviously players don't have to sign anything. If they are unsure of their status they just won't commit early. The provisions for retracting would just be for people who committed but then need to neg on their commitment.
I would agree.
For GLB purposes I like the first option. It gives the LOI some validity while still offering flexibility.
And obviously players don't have to sign anything. If they are unsure of their status they just won't commit early. The provisions for retracting would just be for people who committed but then need to neg on their commitment.
I would agree.
PING72
offline
offline
-1
If this isn't binding, all you are going to see are tons of both agents and owners complaining about how they got screwed over by a broken committment.
If this isn't binding, all you are going to see are tons of both agents and owners complaining about how they got screwed over by a broken committment.
I like it. Someone make this guy a mod.
Although, I can already see all the "Oh hey I changed my mind, I wanna play on my buddy's team" or "I decided I'd rather retire this guy for flex" PMs from agents. Yeah, that happens with the current system, but it would suck more if you had 20 days you could have been recruiting lost.
Still a +1 from me, though.
Although, I can already see all the "Oh hey I changed my mind, I wanna play on my buddy's team" or "I decided I'd rather retire this guy for flex" PMs from agents. Yeah, that happens with the current system, but it would suck more if you had 20 days you could have been recruiting lost.
Still a +1 from me, though.
McCoySoDope
offline
offline
Originally posted by Mat McBriar
Anyone have any additions to the idea?
Yes, a team profile could even have a tab for the players they have for the next season. Maybe even a stat tracker there.
Anyone have any additions to the idea?
Yes, a team profile could even have a tab for the players they have for the next season. Maybe even a stat tracker there.
ken-in-rockwall
offline
offline
Originally posted by toobad4u_00
Originally posted by marcello
Then don't sign a letter of intent?
Is it worth mentioning that there is nothing binding in the LOI for college and thus not a good idea. In real life recruiters keep in contact with said player for a lock down phase. If you have ever been submitted by a recruiting company to one of their clients (another organization) then you have the same idea of what an LOI is for college football. Ultimately, all an LOI should do is remind the agent that the player has sent an LOI for x team, are you sure you want to accept a contract to team y.
Actually, this is incorrect as NCAA LOI are binding contracts.. When a NCAA player in February (for football) signs a LOI, it is a Binding contract and the only ways to get out of it is 1) the Institution/Coach can grant a release or 2) You satisfy the National Letter of Intent by attending the institution with which you sign for at least one academic year.
Originally posted by marcello
Then don't sign a letter of intent?
Is it worth mentioning that there is nothing binding in the LOI for college and thus not a good idea. In real life recruiters keep in contact with said player for a lock down phase. If you have ever been submitted by a recruiting company to one of their clients (another organization) then you have the same idea of what an LOI is for college football. Ultimately, all an LOI should do is remind the agent that the player has sent an LOI for x team, are you sure you want to accept a contract to team y.
Actually, this is incorrect as NCAA LOI are binding contracts.. When a NCAA player in February (for football) signs a LOI, it is a Binding contract and the only ways to get out of it is 1) the Institution/Coach can grant a release or 2) You satisfy the National Letter of Intent by attending the institution with which you sign for at least one academic year.
Jeimz44
offline
offline
Great idea, I cant tell you how many people promised to sign to me team and s***wed me when it came time to sign. I agree completely +5
Jeimz44
offline
offline
Originally posted by ken-in-rockwall
Actually, this is incorrect as NCAA LOI are binding contracts.. When a NCAA player in February (for football) signs a LOI, it is a Binding contract and the only ways to get out of it is 1) the Institution/Coach can grant a release or 2) You satisfy the National Letter of Intent by attending the institution with which you sign for at least one academic year.
Actually, this is incorrect as NCAA LOI are binding contracts.. When a NCAA player in February (for football) signs a LOI, it is a Binding contract and the only ways to get out of it is 1) the Institution/Coach can grant a release or 2) You satisfy the National Letter of Intent by attending the institution with which you sign for at least one academic year.
KingCheez
offline
offline
Originally posted by Dub J
Why do you have such a problem with agents being able to opt out without owner's consent up to day 41? Why such a rush to lock in players on the same day many agents begin marketing their players? This is just a tool for shitty owners to put the screws to unaware agents.
Why do you have such a problem with agents being able to opt out without owner's consent up to day 41? Why such a rush to lock in players on the same day many agents begin marketing their players? This is just a tool for shitty owners to put the screws to unaware agents.
M2thaC1369
offline
offline
Don't like this at all. If this is supposed to be a pro football simulator, this would be tampering that was not only implicitly allowed by the GLB, but explicitly allowed and even encouraged. Just encourages laziness and gives people with free time another leg up.
You are not logged in. Please log in if you want to post a reply.
