TRADE TEMPLATE
NEW TEAM:
PLAYER > CONTRACT/REWORKED > RFA/UFA STATUS
IF Prior Team paying part of player Contract post as follows
PRIOR TEAM
PLAYER > CONTRACT PAYMENT
RFA Eligibility (FCC VOTE)
+3
DmanofGod1
ericdm70
Xezus
7 posters
Page 1 of 1
Consecutive Years for RFA eligibility
RFA Eligibility (FCC VOTE)
Our current rules read
Restricted Free Agent Eligibility (Veterans):
Completed a 3-6 year Pro contract (not including options).
Spent a minimum of 2 full consecutive seasons with the current team.
Never been listed on waivers.
None of the player's salary paid by another team.
Had any club options picked up.
I would like to open up the discussion and vote for decreasing the minimum consecutive years down from 2 to 1.5
1.5 years essentially being that the player was obtained prior to the trade deadline of the year, then kept all of the following year.
If passed this would apply to all players traded so far this year that have 2 years remaining on their 3 year deals.
I will start voting sometime tomorrow after i get some feedback and hear some opinions.
So post opinions please
Restricted Free Agent Eligibility (Veterans):
Completed a 3-6 year Pro contract (not including options).
Spent a minimum of 2 full consecutive seasons with the current team.
Never been listed on waivers.
None of the player's salary paid by another team.
Had any club options picked up.
I would like to open up the discussion and vote for decreasing the minimum consecutive years down from 2 to 1.5
1.5 years essentially being that the player was obtained prior to the trade deadline of the year, then kept all of the following year.
If passed this would apply to all players traded so far this year that have 2 years remaining on their 3 year deals.
I will start voting sometime tomorrow after i get some feedback and hear some opinions.
So post opinions please
Last edited by Xezus on Sat Feb 16, 2013 8:37 am; edited 1 time in total
Xezus- Premium Member
Re: RFA Eligibility (FCC VOTE)
I like the change. Restricted Rights are traded in the NHL without any minimum amount of time. So if we have any rule, this seems good.
ericdm70- Premium Member
Re: RFA Eligibility (FCC VOTE)
i have no problem with the change
_________________
"If it doesn't matter who wins or loses, then why do they keep score? "
"If you can accept losing, you can't win."
Vince Lombardi
bshirt7- Premium Member
Re: RFA Eligibility (FCC VOTE)
voted
_________________
"If it doesn't matter who wins or loses, then why do they keep score? "
"If you can accept losing, you can't win."
Vince Lombardi
bshirt7- Premium Member
Similar topics
» FCC Draft Pool Eligibility (Vote)
» FCC RFA Waivers (Vote)
» IR Cap Exception Vote (FCC)
» Divisions Vote FCC
» FCC RFA Compensatory Picks vote
» FCC RFA Waivers (Vote)
» IR Cap Exception Vote (FCC)
» Divisions Vote FCC
» FCC RFA Compensatory Picks vote
Page 1 of 1
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum