Grinders Discussion Thread

    splff3000
    splff3000

    Posts : 6181
    Reputation : 12
    Join date : 2010-08-23
    Age : 40

    Grinders Discussion Thread - Page 39 Empty Re: Grinders Discussion Thread

    Post by splff3000 on Fri Nov 09, 2012 3:54 pm

    Hey guys, check your cap space. Me and urb both or 1 billion dollars over the cap lol. You have to go to the resign screen to see it. If you go to the regular salary screen it will be right.
    Stephen A Smith
    Stephen A Smith

    Posts : 12
    Reputation : 1
    Join date : 2012-10-03

    Grinders Discussion Thread - Page 39 Empty Re: Grinders Discussion Thread

    Post by Stephen A Smith on Sat Nov 10, 2012 11:29 am

    What is up with you fools and Peyton Manning? One week he gets cut by Denver, then he signs with the Browns, who cut him before the preseason is even over! Then the Chiefs pick him up off of waivers illegally (still wanting to hear that punishment from the league office) and bench him mid-game for Josh Johnson!? Are you serious? First they make a grab for him that violates league rules, then decide he ain't good enough to play the game of football and bench him for a mobile clip holder?

    Alright, and here's the best part. After the game against the Pats, the Chiefs give Peyton his walking papers IN THE LOCKER ROOM FOLLOWING THE GAME. WHAT HAS THIS WORLD COME TO WHEN ONE OF THE GREATEST EVER IS TREATED THIS WAY?

    AND HERE'S THE BIGGEST KICKER OF THEM ALL! THE DENVER BRONCOS RESIGN HIM. Not only do they get him back, but they get to pay him 9 mil less then what he was do to make from then entering the season. And some say John Elway isn't good as the VP, he might go down as one of the best slight of hand accountants ever.

    Well, I only have one question for you all, HAVE ALL OF YALL LOST YOUR MINDS? HAS SKIP BEEN HIRED AS GM'S FOR HALF THE LEAGUE? I'M OUT, NEED TO GET MORE HAIR GREASE FROM THE PHARMACY.
    Muckem
    Muckem

    Posts : 617
    Reputation : 2
    Join date : 2011-08-30

    Grinders Discussion Thread - Page 39 Empty Re: Grinders Discussion Thread

    Post by Muckem on Sat Nov 10, 2012 4:56 pm

    Marco for GM of the year.

    Who gets Hawks 3rd rounder?
    splff3000
    splff3000

    Posts : 6181
    Reputation : 12
    Join date : 2010-08-23
    Age : 40

    Grinders Discussion Thread - Page 39 Empty Re: Grinders Discussion Thread

    Post by splff3000 on Sat Nov 10, 2012 4:57 pm

    Muckem wrote:Marco for GM of the year.

    Who gets Hawks 3rd rounder?

    I thin he said whoever lost it had to take a scrub player from the 7th round or something like that.

    Hey yall, I got bored. Enjoy:

    http://www.operationsports.com/forums/madden-nfl-football/590628-evolution-ccm-schemes.html#post2044418102
    avatar
    Jalen_d

    Posts : 86
    Reputation : 0
    Join date : 2012-05-11
    Location : Toronto

    Grinders Discussion Thread - Page 39 Empty Re: Grinders Discussion Thread

    Post by Jalen_d on Sat Nov 10, 2012 5:42 pm

    Hawk, can u put HossyBoy (jags) on AP when u get a chance - he said that he told you he was out of town
    TJ
    TJ

    Posts : 1309
    Reputation : 12
    Join date : 2012-01-24
    Age : 32
    Location : NC

    Grinders Discussion Thread - Page 39 Empty Re: Grinders Discussion Thread

    Post by TJ on Sat Nov 10, 2012 5:45 pm

    Hawk is incompetent when it comes to putting guys on and off of AP.
    TJ
    TJ

    Posts : 1309
    Reputation : 12
    Join date : 2012-01-24
    Age : 32
    Location : NC

    Grinders Discussion Thread - Page 39 Empty Re: Grinders Discussion Thread

    Post by TJ on Sat Nov 10, 2012 7:05 pm

    Muckem wrote:Marco for GM of the year.

    Who gets Hawks 3rd rounder?

    Shizzit. This is nothing against Marco, more against the fact that there is no rule against it and anything can fly until there is editing the rules, regardless of how blatantly people go into the grey, all is forgiven because not all 1,004 exploits/whatnot have been identified or thought of in advance. In the case of Manning's wild weekend, just add to the list of stuff that is not thought of in advance and in result is simply allowed to happen.

    You have a player who is taking up significant cap, who you then decide you would rather release and free up cap (no penalties either)than keep them on the roster. So you release them during FA bidding, where there is no waiver wire or claims, and drop him to free up more cap to bid on other players. Meanwhile, other teams bid on said player, but no one lands him. Then, to top it off, another team having no intent to bid on the player (and thus did not tie up cap room during FA bidding) swoops in right after draft grabbing them when they really have no need for them (other than in order to trade another player at same position) who realizes they don't want the player, drop them to waivers, where the original team gets to put in a claim for them and end up paying him nearly half as much as you were.

    This whole situation is bogus. I know there is no waiver process during offseason because their is no way to freely access FA, but there needs to be a way to prevent teams from simply cutting players and bidding on them in FA or picking them up during preseason/waivers to reduce their contracts. As of now, this is freely allowed. Granted, part of the reason this happened is Mannings age and demands in FA, but still, regardless of the player, this should not be allowed to happen. I think any player that is voluntarily released during the offseason to clear up cap should bar the team from attempting to sign them until at least the following offseason.

    To end my rant, I'll just point on area's that may need some looking into and improving.

    -No offseason waivers, understand the games limitation, but teams should still post drops in order to identify who is eligible to bid on or sign FA's in the upcoming weeks and who cannot due to dropping a player currently under contract. At no point should someone be allowed to drop a high cost contract and bid on a lower one without the player ever passing through waivers

    -Post-draft FCFS, many players don't get bid on for numerous reasons, whether it's lack of funds, age, contract duration, intents to draft that position, but having the first few people run into FA after the draft and scoop up needs to be looked at. No one wants to waste time with FA bidding, but something should be done to even the playing fields. Possibly a limitation on grabbing players with X amount of years in the league? UDFA's are free for the taking right after the draft anyways, but most teams don't sign 4 starting caliber players who've been in the league a while right after the draft.

    -Waiver wire bidding work around. Shock has mentioned his distaste for the current waiver system, which mainly is because we can't emulate the way the NFL works. One possible solution was to make any players with 4 or more years (I think) in the league ineligible to resign with a team that claims them off of waivers. This would allow them to enter FA bidding at the end of the year and in a backwards sort of way allow teams to bid on the player to emulate the waiver wire bidding that takes place in the NFL. This is a double whammy of goodness, lower ranked teams get help now, everyone else gets a fair shot later. Pazzzaaah.

    -Mark Schlereth's fucking chili. We get it dude, you make chili and you give it to your boy toys and suck it down like they suck your dick. Stop it and stop having them praise your damn chili on twitter all damn week

    Well that's enough for now, I'm sure Shooter will let me know what i'm crying again. But hey, I like identifying issues and trying to come up with alternatives and solutions. And hell, if anyone has anything else they want to point out they think needs to be looked at, fucking do it. It's a discussion thread, lets discuss something more than every other person saying LEEGGGOOOOO.

    Oh, and I just found another issue to fix. I haven't touched my drink since I started typing, time to solve this issue by clicking send.

    oh yeah, btw, LEGGGGOOOO.
    Joker12
    Joker12

    Posts : 1552
    Reputation : 4
    Join date : 2010-08-24
    Age : 29
    Location : Canada

    Grinders Discussion Thread - Page 39 Empty Re: Grinders Discussion Thread

    Post by Joker12 on Sat Nov 10, 2012 7:29 pm

    TJ...got something for ya....DON'T PRESS SEND!

    Nah I'm just kidding I agree with what you're saying.
    Marco_SNAPS_55
    Marco_SNAPS_55

    Posts : 257
    Reputation : 3
    Join date : 2012-02-01
    Age : 26
    Location : El Paso Texas

    Grinders Discussion Thread - Page 39 Empty Re: Grinders Discussion Thread

    Post by Marco_SNAPS_55 on Sat Nov 10, 2012 7:31 pm

    Lmao thanks guys manning took less cause he wanted to be a Denver Bronco till he retires
    jhawk886
    jhawk886

    Posts : 2724
    Reputation : 5
    Join date : 2010-08-23
    Age : 31
    Location : Kansas

    Grinders Discussion Thread - Page 39 Empty Re: Grinders Discussion Thread

    Post by jhawk886 on Sat Nov 10, 2012 8:40 pm

    Clark and hooch are on auto.
    splff3000
    splff3000

    Posts : 6181
    Reputation : 12
    Join date : 2010-08-23
    Age : 40

    Grinders Discussion Thread - Page 39 Empty Re: Grinders Discussion Thread

    Post by splff3000 on Sat Nov 10, 2012 8:40 pm

    tmjohns18 wrote:
    Shizzit. This is nothing against Marco, more against the fact that there is no rule against it and anything can fly until there is editing the rules, regardless of how blatantly people go into the grey, all is forgiven because not all 1,004 exploits/whatnot have been identified or thought of in advance. In the case of Manning's wild weekend, just add to the list of stuff that is not thought of in advance and in result is simply allowed to happen.

    You have a player who is taking up significant cap, who you then decide you would rather release and free up cap (no penalties either)than keep them on the roster. So you release them during FA bidding, where there is no waiver wire or claims, and drop him to free up more cap to bid on other players. Meanwhile, other teams bid on said player, but no one lands him. Then, to top it off, another team having no intent to bid on the player (and thus did not tie up cap room during FA bidding) swoops in right after draft grabbing them when they really have no need for them (other than in order to trade another player at same position) who realizes they don't want the player, drop them to waivers, where the original team gets to put in a claim for them and end up paying him nearly half as much as you were.

    This whole situation is bogus. I know there is no waiver process during offseason because their is no way to freely access FA, but there needs to be a way to prevent teams from simply cutting players and bidding on them in FA or picking them up during preseason/waivers to reduce their contracts. As of now, this is freely allowed. Granted, part of the reason this happened is Mannings age and demands in FA, but still, regardless of the player, this should not be allowed to happen. I think any player that is voluntarily released during the offseason to clear up cap should bar the team from attempting to sign them until at least the following offseason.


    Actually TJ, I have said numerous times that I did have this in as an original rule when we were first started:

    http://ncaa.forumotion.com/t846-some-things-i-m-thinking-for-grinders-13

    - I'm thinking of adding a new rule that if you trade or drop someone, you can't put in a waiver wire claim for them until the end of the NEXT season. For example, someone trades Andy Dalton in week 4 of the 2012 season, but he get's dropped in week 11. That person that traded him couldn't put a claim in for him for the rest of the 2012 season and ALL of the 2013 season. He would then be able to put in a claim for him in the 2014 season. Thoughts?

    As usual tho, a bunch of people said they didn't like it and gave all kinds of excuses as to why we shouldn't have the rule.

    I don't like this rule. Like I said above, sometimes a guy is dropped not because you want to drop him, but because necessity at another position dictates so. In real life, often times these players are valuable to a team and when they're waived, they're done so in the hope that they'll make it through unclaimed and land on the practice squad. Maybe I'm alone in this, but I try to pick my players well, even down to the guys who should never see playing time. So if I waive a guy for any reason, and then two weeks, three weeks, six weeks down the line I have an opportunity to bring him back, I should have that option.

    So it was thought of TJ. Just as usual with most of my rules, you guys didn't like it or thought it was too much.

    Also TJ i think a new rule could be no trading a player that you traded for back to the original owner of the player ie Rob traded Cobb to Urb, then urb tried to trade Cobb back to Rob. The Trade committee pretty much voted no on it, but I think it should be a rule so people won't keep trying to do it.


    TJ
    TJ

    Posts : 1309
    Reputation : 12
    Join date : 2012-01-24
    Age : 32
    Location : NC

    Grinders Discussion Thread - Page 39 Empty Re: Grinders Discussion Thread

    Post by TJ on Sat Nov 10, 2012 8:54 pm

    splff3000 wrote:

    I don't like this rule. Like I said above, sometimes a guy is dropped not because you want to drop him, but because necessity at another position dictates so. In real life, often times these players are valuable to a team and when they're waived, they're done so in the hope that they'll make it through unclaimed and land on the practice squad. Maybe I'm alone in this, but I try to pick my players well, even down to the guys who should never see playing time. So if I waive a guy for any reason, and then two weeks, three weeks, six weeks down the line I have an opportunity to bring him back, I should have that option.

    So it was thought of TJ. Just as usual with most of my rules, you guys didn't like it or thought it was too much.


    Well, to clarify my side of it, I was referring to players you cut that end up passing through the waivers untouched and you can pick them up later. There is always a risk waiving players (see Giants waiving injured TE during last offseason). If though I waive a guy (due to another position injury or he spilled some wine or whatever) and his still in FA later on I feel I should have chance to pick them up again. The Manning example was one where the player never went through the waiver process. Very Happy

    Man Bama wants to lose.
    Aftershock9958
    Aftershock9958

    Posts : 314
    Reputation : 0
    Join date : 2012-02-04
    Age : 36

    Grinders Discussion Thread - Page 39 Empty Re: Grinders Discussion Thread

    Post by Aftershock9958 on Sun Nov 11, 2012 12:42 am

    splff3000 wrote:As usual tho, a bunch of people said they didn't like it and gave all kinds of excuses as to why we shouldn't have the rule.

    I don't like this rule. Like I said above, sometimes a guy is dropped not because you want to drop him, but because necessity at another position dictates so. In real life, often times these players are valuable to a team and when they're waived, they're done so in the hope that they'll make it through unclaimed and land on the practice squad. Maybe I'm alone in this, but I try to pick my players well, even down to the guys who should never see playing time. So if I waive a guy for any reason, and then two weeks, three weeks, six weeks down the line I have an opportunity to bring him back, I should have that option.

    So it was thought of TJ. Just as usual with most of my rules, you guys didn't like it or thought it was too much.

    Also TJ i think a new rule could be no trading a player that you traded for back to the original owner of the player ie Rob traded Cobb to Urb, then urb tried to trade Cobb back to Rob. The Trade committee pretty much voted no on it, but I think it should be a rule so people won't keep trying to do it.



    You can't quote me and take it out of context splff. The rule you proposed was in direct response to a trade-waiver situation that took place during M12, NOT because of situations like this (which were completely unforeseeable).

    I wasn't "giving all kinds of excuses". The simple fact is that our rules should mirror real-life as often as possible if it can be done in a reasonable fashion, and our current waiver rules just happen to be something that I think can be done closer to correct, while the rule you proposed goes in the opposite direction.
    jhawk886
    jhawk886

    Posts : 2724
    Reputation : 5
    Join date : 2010-08-23
    Age : 31
    Location : Kansas

    Grinders Discussion Thread - Page 39 Empty Re: Grinders Discussion Thread

    Post by jhawk886 on Sun Nov 11, 2012 1:53 am

    Advance is tomorrow at 1 PM ET.

    Only user game left is yung/ho and a scheduled time wasn't posted by the deadline so advance will be at 48 hours. Guys who have CPU games; drew, misteraok, and jalen; get your games in by then or they'll be simmed.
    jhawk886
    jhawk886

    Posts : 2724
    Reputation : 5
    Join date : 2010-08-23
    Age : 31
    Location : Kansas

    Grinders Discussion Thread - Page 39 Empty Re: Grinders Discussion Thread

    Post by jhawk886 on Sun Nov 11, 2012 1:57 am

    As far as the weird situation and rules discussion; from now on drops during the offseason will need to be posted, but all will go through the FA bidding period. Any player who does not accept a contract during the FA period, will be on waivers to start the preseason.

    Beyond that, we can discuss things further, but that rule will be in effect from now on to prevent another situation like we saw this past offseason.
    jhawk886
    jhawk886

    Posts : 2724
    Reputation : 5
    Join date : 2010-08-23
    Age : 31
    Location : Kansas

    Grinders Discussion Thread - Page 39 Empty Re: Grinders Discussion Thread

    Post by jhawk886 on Sun Nov 11, 2012 2:19 pm

    Advanced

    Scheduling Deadline: 9:00 PM CT Monday

    Advance Deadline: 11:00 AM CT Wednesday
    splff3000
    splff3000

    Posts : 6181
    Reputation : 12
    Join date : 2010-08-23
    Age : 40

    Grinders Discussion Thread - Page 39 Empty Re: Grinders Discussion Thread

    Post by splff3000 on Sun Nov 11, 2012 3:05 pm

    Aftershock9958 wrote:
    splff3000 wrote:As usual tho, a bunch of people said they didn't like it and gave all kinds of excuses as to why we shouldn't have the rule.

    I don't like this rule. Like I said above, sometimes a guy is dropped not because you want to drop him, but because necessity at another position dictates so. In real life, often times these players are valuable to a team and when they're waived, they're done so in the hope that they'll make it through unclaimed and land on the practice squad. Maybe I'm alone in this, but I try to pick my players well, even down to the guys who should never see playing time. So if I waive a guy for any reason, and then two weeks, three weeks, six weeks down the line I have an opportunity to bring him back, I should have that option.

    So it was thought of TJ. Just as usual with most of my rules, you guys didn't like it or thought it was too much.

    Also TJ i think a new rule could be no trading a player that you traded for back to the original owner of the player ie Rob traded Cobb to Urb, then urb tried to trade Cobb back to Rob. The Trade committee pretty much voted no on it, but I think it should be a rule so people won't keep trying to do it.



    You can't quote me and take it out of context splff. The rule you proposed was in direct response to a trade-waiver situation that took place during M12, NOT because of situations like this (which were completely unforeseeable).

    I wasn't "giving all kinds of excuses". The simple fact is that our rules should mirror real-life as often as possible if it can be done in a reasonable fashion, and our current waiver rules just happen to be something that I think can be done closer to correct, while the rule you proposed goes in the opposite direction.

    Shock, how am I taking what you said out of context? People can look for themseleves. It's post #39 in this link:

    http://ncaa.forumotion.com/t846p30-some-things-i-m-thinking-for-grinders-13#41779

    What I quoted was a direct response to my rule that I proposed. Can't be taken out of context when it's a direct response to what I posted. You didn't mention anything about trades in your post. It was related to drops. You know my post was not just about trades and waivers because you didn't mention anything about a trade or a waiver in yours. You wasn't the only one with something to say about it tho. Don't get me wrong. There were a lot more people saying they didn't like it, hence the reason I scrapped it. I'm tired of you guys saying it was unforeseeable when I had a rule in place in and you guys didn't like it.
    avatar
    JoeyJ1203

    Posts : 885
    Reputation : 2
    Join date : 2011-09-01
    Age : 32
    Location : !! Michigan !!

    Grinders Discussion Thread - Page 39 Empty Re: Grinders Discussion Thread

    Post by JoeyJ1203 on Mon Nov 12, 2012 2:19 am

    ho when u wanna go?
    TJ
    TJ

    Posts : 1309
    Reputation : 12
    Join date : 2012-01-24
    Age : 32
    Location : NC

    Grinders Discussion Thread - Page 39 Empty Re: Grinders Discussion Thread

    Post by TJ on Mon Nov 12, 2012 10:12 am

    So whats up with the teams that can't resign players and won't be able to do FA bidding, any ideas on how to handle this? Do they retain all their last year players? Do they only get a certain amount? Does chicken have a flavor if so many non-chicken foods taste like it? Can they get granted an extra player trade to compensate Very Happy ? Got plenty of time to figure it out, and hopefully EA can hotpatch online and fix it.
    splff3000
    splff3000

    Posts : 6181
    Reputation : 12
    Join date : 2010-08-23
    Age : 40

    Grinders Discussion Thread - Page 39 Empty Re: Grinders Discussion Thread

    Post by splff3000 on Mon Nov 12, 2012 8:43 pm

    tmjohns18 wrote:So whats up with the teams that can't resign players and won't be able to do FA bidding, any ideas on how to handle this? Do they retain all their last year players? Do they only get a certain amount? Does chicken have a flavor if so many non-chicken foods taste like it? Can they get granted an extra player trade to compensate Very Happy ? Got plenty of time to figure it out, and hopefully EA can hotpatch online and fix it.

    This looks like a viable workaround for us:

    http://www.operationsports.com/forums/madden-nfl-football/585684-negative-billion-cap-space-fix-temporary-least-2.html

    It's kinda what I think Hawk had in mind anyway, but just in case it isn't, I figured I'd post it so he can see it and consider it as an option.
    Sinister
    Sinister

    Posts : 603
    Reputation : 1
    Join date : 2011-08-31
    Age : 42

    Grinders Discussion Thread - Page 39 Empty Re: Grinders Discussion Thread

    Post by Sinister on Tue Nov 13, 2012 2:06 am

    i read that it seems to be legit
    avatar
    JoeyJ1203

    Posts : 885
    Reputation : 2
    Join date : 2011-09-01
    Age : 32
    Location : !! Michigan !!

    Grinders Discussion Thread - Page 39 Empty Re: Grinders Discussion Thread

    Post by JoeyJ1203 on Tue Nov 13, 2012 2:18 am

    Me n ho playin tommorrow
    TJ
    TJ

    Posts : 1309
    Reputation : 12
    Join date : 2012-01-24
    Age : 32
    Location : NC

    Grinders Discussion Thread - Page 39 Empty Re: Grinders Discussion Thread

    Post by TJ on Tue Nov 13, 2012 11:33 am

    So I take it joey/ho playing this afternoon and shooter tonight, so advance is gonna be sometime tonight. Time to schedule wk 3 fools.

    Also, who are all the teams that have the resign glitch (negative billion cap # when you go to resign)? The ones that I know are, I think, NYJ,OAK,DEN,CIN,MIA. Wonder how many teams are effected and how awesome is EA huh?
    drew-73-stl
    drew-73-stl

    Posts : 147
    Reputation : 1
    Join date : 2012-09-25
    Age : 45
    Location : st. louis, missouri

    Grinders Discussion Thread - Page 39 Empty Re: Grinders Discussion Thread

    Post by drew-73-stl on Tue Nov 13, 2012 11:49 am

    tmjohns18 wrote:So I take it joey/ho playing this afternoon and shooter tonight, so advance is gonna be sometime tonight. Time to schedule wk 3 fools.

    Also, who are all the teams that have the resign glitch (negative billion cap # when you go to resign)? The ones that I know are, I think, NYJ,OAK,DEN,CIN,MIA. Wonder how many teams are effected and how awesome is EA huh?

    im (RAVENS) still waitin on K15nichols to get back to me so we can play also...and i think i am not affected by that BS...thank goodness..EA seems to get worse and worse every year...
    TJ
    TJ

    Posts : 1309
    Reputation : 12
    Join date : 2012-01-24
    Age : 32
    Location : NC

    Grinders Discussion Thread - Page 39 Empty Re: Grinders Discussion Thread

    Post by TJ on Tue Nov 13, 2012 12:13 pm

    I assume you'll play the cpu since you guys are past the deadline to schedule.

    Sponsored content

    Grinders Discussion Thread - Page 39 Empty Re: Grinders Discussion Thread

    Post by Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Fri Aug 23, 2019 10:31 pm