Minimum Salary (FCC Vote)

This will pave the way for many rules so we should start here.

I like $500k for hockey... just my opinion. Would like to see what everyone else thinks.

should we decide how many players on a roster and our budget first?

yeah, kinda agree with yogi

tho, why not we do 250k for hockey since its the cheapest sport!

better, yet, lets do 100k minimums and have a very, very small cap to reflect hockey being so cheap!

I agree w/Yogi Budget first then roster size then we can see about the minimum $$

30-man rosters

it doesnt matter what the rosters are... the minimum is the minimum. the team salary would be the only thing effected by the roster size/league minimum

why not do 30 man rosters, 60 mil cap... thats an avg of 2 mil per guy

a min guy can be 500k

in baseball, we have 30 man, 200mil, which is an avg of nearly 7mil but then again, baseball is a richer sport

football is 30 and 135 and thats about 4.5 mil avg.

basketball is 105 and 15 which is 6.5 or so

hockey def needs to be the lowest avg. maybe we can do a 100mil cap to make it nice and even and the 3.3 avg will still be well under football's avg

either way, 500k would be a fraction of the avg and is a good minimum

Please don't make the minimum $1mil. Even in fantasy it would be a shame for some of these guys to make $1mil...

im cool with 30man 60m 500k

works for me

I'm cool with the 30 man, 60 Mil, 500K min. I still think a roster size of 30 is too much. If so, then we should be able to rollover unused salary like the other leagues. It may not amount to much but a few mil a year can make all the difference to some teams. Main reason being that somebody who's good with money management shouldn't feel the need to max out their roster/cap just because it won't be carried over.

We can vote on this too. Please don't call for my ouster and riot!

i think roll over is okay... i mean, we do do it in hoops and that has worked out

well, we do it baseball too but thats because baseball is almost a pure money game and teams do have warchests

but yeah, id be good for a max of 10 mil rollover

for rollover i like to keep it like the real sports. football and hockey have hard caps. hoops a soft cap and baseball no cap.

ahh.. this is true

i like the 30man, 60m, 500k since it copies the NHL. we can have a slotted draft by picks or o-rank. f/a style was kind of a failure compared to the other 2 sports with owners managing thier money so maybe the o-rank method could be better. problem is, id like to start before yahoo opens. we could do it like baseball and it is what it is for avg salary, which i think was a lot of fun.

yeah, i say we slot things by draft position... OR, use the final O ranks at the end of the year, here

i liked how it was for baseball...draft first and then wait for o-ranks to come out. I didn't experience the other drafts for the other leagues so I can't compare.

Baseball was fun in that nothing was guaranteed and some guys dropped in the draft because their projections had them making too much.

ya i think o ranks at the end of this year like JI said could work. Id rather do it that way or wait for new O rank projections to come out but that might take forever.

nostratimus wrote:i liked how it was for baseball...draft first and then wait for o-ranks to come out. I didn't experience the other drafts for the other leagues so I can't compare.

Baseball was fun in that nothing was guaranteed and some guys dropped in the draft because their projections had them making too much.

i agree 100%. either do it this way or slotted picks. only 2 possible options.

Xezus wrote:ya i think o ranks at the end of this year like JI said could work. Id rather do it that way or wait for new O rank projections to come out but that might take forever.

you cant do it like that. top players that got hurt wouldnt be ranked and end up with very low contracts

AND... if we're going to have such a tight cap limit at 60m, we'd almost have to wait til the ranks came out. Drafting pre-orank release may require us to have salary assigned to each pick. this way it works out and nobody ends up screwed. i did like the turnout in baseball tho. was fun.

maybe do 500k/10m max/30man/90m. (thats 3m avg)

figure if your 2 top players cost 18m, that puts you at a 2.5m avg

that's true, we just have to decide what we are allotting to each top pick, i think having 80, or 90 mil would work. if top 2 guys cost 18 mil and 2.5 average after that i think we could definitely make that work

I am in agreement with 60m/500k/30 man. I also like drafting after the o-rank has been released for all of the reasons previously posted.

90 may be best, i did a quick 30 player sum and got 75m

10
8
7
6
5
5
5
4
3
3
3
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
75M

Why not start with 90M this year and then see how it works and make changes in season 2? That way, nobody gets screwed and if it's too much, well, we'll all be in the same boat with the excess money. Maybe 80M may seem more realistic and challenging though...hmm. I like challenges. I like 80M.

its not about challenging and tough. its about roster size. believe me i love challenging and tough. I showed you the example there. if we do 80m thats 5m left over. you want to be in a league where someone bids 500k and nobody else can bid because we're all limited to 500k players? We need to have some room and flexability to keep it fun/challenging for a salary league. I agree that hockey should be the lowest sport because it is in real life. Salary Hoops has half the roster and 105M cap and a few of us have excess cash but in time with bidding a little more in f/a that cash will go away (unless youre DC and refuse to bid on anyone!). We gotta keep it more on the fun side when it comes to salary. If we do 90, we cant change it next year. Not fair that some guys worked to make it happen and maybe cost them a championship or a player or 2 and other guys played loosely and get a break.

I think with a 10m max player salary we're defintely going to take JI up on his idea of 3 10%+ bids.

what about 85 mil cap... that'll give us 10 mil to play around with (enough to get some guys on FA) and a little more strict than 90. and now that we might have that injured player salary exception thing i think we need even less cash

id go to 95 before 85. You dont want it that tight to start. It will get tight on its own thru f/a. all you would be doing is limiting activity.

thats 75m with more than 1/3 the roster at the bare minimum.

gotta keep it flexible and fun. Teams need to be able to make trades, sign f/a, etc at the beginning. when in 2-3 years the team will be close to cap or have room that's up to the owner, but putting them close to cap off the bat and no room for movement is no good for team improvement or league activity.

alrighty that sounds good then 90 mil it is =)

Bravo wrote:id go to 95 before 85. You dont want it that tight to start. It will get tight on its own thru f/a. all you would be doing is limiting activity.

thats 75m with more than 1/3 the roster at the bare minimum.

gotta keep it flexible and fun. Teams need to be able to make trades, sign f/a, etc at the beginning. when in 2-3 years the team will be close to cap or have room that's up to the owner, but putting them close to cap off the bat and no room for movement is no good for team improvement or league activity.

Okay, your idea made more sense to me in this post. 90M makes sense to me too based on 30-man. I made a note about 30-man roster on the other thread.