Edited: Mon Jun 3 10:28pm ET
14k Triad wrote:
Can someone remind me the rule on the super franchise tag?
$50. Protects the player from being exposed in the auction and allows you to sign them for any length contract you want: but once you use it you can’t use it again for another 3 years. So if you were to use it next year in 2025 you could use it again in 2028.
Detroit Dons wrote:
When the signings were processed, players that are being retained from prior season (that did not get bid on at auction) were not added to the rosters. At least in my case. Ty Conklin @ 2 years and Curtis Samuel @ 1 year. Thanks!!
Fixed! Sorry about that.
Edited: Sun Apr 21 8:48pm ET
Trade Block Update
Draft Picks on the Block:
- Round 2 Pick 11
- Round 3 Pick 11
- Miles Sanders for $5
Looking to trade these picks for 2025 future Picks Best Offer Accepted!!
Smugglers drop JuJu (2 years-$10)
Trade Block Update
Players on the Block:
- Jordan Love QB GB
- Tony Pollard RB TEN
- Quentin Johnston WR LAC
- Jake Ferguson TE DAL
- Dalton Kincaid TE BUF
- Tua Tagovailoa QB MIA
- James Conner RB ARI
- Najee Harris RB PIT
Positions Needed:
- Wide Receiver
Edited: Thu Apr 11 10:02pm ET
Trade Block Update
Players on the Block:
- JuJu Smith-Schuster WR NE
for $1
Bum #1 Ross 15$
Bum #2 Claypool 5$
This is Chris. I replaced Paul with Dana, whom most of us compete with in Bling and Capo. Thanks Dana for joining. Paul was a founding GM of Wiseguys and I appreciate the "good times" we once had and the work he put into this league. His funny segments are saved on the Forum. Remember those? The change for the draft picks is a better system and I'll stand by that decision made by Jordan. Dana knows this type of league as he is a GM in Capo and I moved quick as to get him in for the auction process, especially as he has some holes to fill. Jordan email me your thoughts on Paul quitting, I wasn't going to get into a big debate on message board. He made his decision, he's moving on, so is this league.
SoCal Enforcers wrote:Furthermore, as creator of this league, that "rule" was one I have the most regret over. I believe I got it right in Capo. It was discussed at the beginning, and I remember one thing said is that "That's how it's done in the NFL". We are only a 12 team league and we have to do what's best for the operation of our league, and I believe that the new process is the best way. I'm glad we are doing it this way from now on.
One thing I’ve always liked about the Wiseguy League was that it was different from other dynasty leagues. If we are going to just make it similar to other leagues vs trying to adapt strategies to the rules as created via mass changes in my opinion, I feel there is no reason to be in a duplicate league. So if the majority of owners wish to make this league like the other Dynasty leagues we are all in I think it gives me the push I was leaning towards which is to leave this league. This is not a rash decision on my part. I have been reducing my Involvement in fantasy leagues and I was only staying in this league cause I liked how it was different. So sorry for the abrupt decision but I think it’s best for me to walk away. I’ll still see you guys in Capo. Well till Morrow decides he doesn’t want to Co Manage. Haha
Edited: Wed Mar 27 3:34pm ET
Trade Block Update
Players on the Block:
- Marquise Brown WR KC
- DeAndre Hopkins WR TEN
- Elijah Moore WR CLE
- JuJu Smith-Schuster WR NE
Draft Picks on the Block:
- Round 2 Pick 11
- Round 3 Pick 11
Positions Needed:
- Running Back
- Tight End
Juju for $2
Furthermore, as creator of this league, that "rule" was one I have the most regret over. I believe I got it right in Capo. It was discussed at the beginning, and I remember one thing said is that "That's how it's done in the NFL". We are only a 12 team league and we have to do what's best for the operation of our league, and I believe that the new process is the best way. I'm glad we are doing it this way from now on.
In regards to the 1st base tag conversation. I am in full support that the compensation can be either this season or next season and is not limited to the GM's first available 1st. This puts ALL owners into the auction process, as we do in Capo. Not having it this way keeps those GMs out of bidding on a tagged player if they own a higher pick. The key word here is compensation. You will get a 1st round pick. This will increase the value of warbucks and the opportunity for those lower standing teams to take a swing on one of those tagged players without losing their current high pick.
Granville Island Shylocks wrote:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but we currently already allow future firsts to be offered up in acquiring a franchise player don't we? It would be a change to only allow current season firsts... Unless I'm totally on crack, I believe I acquired a 2020 first when losing Andrew Luck in 2019, which turned into Jonathan Taylor at #2 overall.
Personally I'm in favor of keeping it the same at allowing future firsts. It does suck not having the pick now, but a lot can happen in 12 months, and I'd rather gamble on the chance of getting a top 6 pick next year than knowing I'm losing someone like AJ Brown for 11th overall.
What I was wanting to see happen is to give the team that wins the Franchise player the option of choosing which pick they send as compensation. The way it works now is that the compensatory pick is automatically the highest pick a winning team has which to me is unfair as it limits the teams bidding only to those with lower 1sts in the current year or with only future 1sts.
For example, if Conspiracy wanted to get in on bidding this year he'd have to sacrifice his 1st overall pick to do so. I want it to be a level playing field for all 12 teams to bid on franchise players if they so desire to do without it automatically costing them a guaranteed top 6 pick.
Typically you'll only three 3 or 4 teams going after Base Franchise players every year because they're the only ones where it makes sense to "sacrifice" a current year's 1st and I don't really like that. I think opening it up to everyone makes for a better auction frenzy while allowing the teams that need the most help the chance to get some of the better players, so Conspiracy could go ahead and get a Brandon Aiyuk or a Jaylen Waddle or Davante Adams without it costing them Marvin Harrison in the process.
And this isn't to say that every winning team is automatically going to give a future 1st as compensation either. Maybe a team doesn't like the current draft class and would rather hang on to their 2025. Maybe they'd rather send the 1.09 this year just in case their pick next year ends up being higher. Plus, if you lose a Franchise Player and you don't like the compensation you received, you can just as easily use it to go after a different Franchise Player yourself, you're not limited to just accepting the pick you've been given if you don't like it so again it creates more action in the auction as another player gets introduced. Lose Jaylen Waddle and receive a 2025 1st? Go after Aiyuk and send that pick back etc. The new format offers more flexibility for teams to plan their auction strategy.
I think opening it up to give everybody a chance to get in on the action adds a new level of excitement and strategy to the auction but maybe I'm totally wrong about that? Base Franchise tends to have the best available players with the least amount of action which I think would change under the new format.
Personally I'm in favor of keeping it the same at allowing future firsts. It does suck not having the pick now, but a lot can happen in 12 months, and I'd rather gamble on the chance of getting a top 6 pick next year than knowing I'm losing someone like AJ Brown for 11th overall.
Commissioner wrote:Chicago's Most Wanted wrote:
I only have one suggestion/ recommendation to this list of proposed changes emailed out. For the Base Auction I do not like the proposed ability to offer up a future year 1st. I believe it should be current year. So if an owner has multiple 1st round picks of that current year they could offer their choice. When you lose a base auction player you should not have to wait an entire year for compensation. It immediately weakens the team who loses their base player.
That’s my 2 cents.Thanks for the thoughts, Paul. I totally understand the sting of losing a Franchise Player and not getting an immediate return. My view on it is that it should sting to lose a Franchise Player. Limiting the 1st to current year only handicaps the weaker teams too much and that was my goal with the change. Opening up that portion of the auction to everybody means a more exciting auction and more strategy in planning out Tags. It'll be a bit of an adjustment but I'm confident it'll be a positive change.
I’m going to disagree as it is a very drastic change on how base tags work. I think if anything it would increase the value of a later round pick for trades if you really wanted to bid on a base tag. This is one change I would define against and hope it would not be forced in as we are proposing a lot of changes already.
Edited: Sat Mar 23 1:56pm ET
14k Triad wrote:👍Southgate Smugglers wrote:Trade Block Update
Players on the Block:
- JuJu Smith-Schuster WR NE
Draft Picks on the Block:
- Round 4 Pick 11
- Round 5 Pick 11
Juju for $2. Both picks together for $10
15 was more fair. Lol
Southgate Smugglers wrote:Trade Block Update
Players on the Block:
- JuJu Smith-Schuster WR NE
Draft Picks on the Block:
- Round 4 Pick 11
- Round 5 Pick 11
Juju for $5. Both picks together for $10
15 was more fair. Lol
Edited: Sat Mar 23 2:07pm ET
Trade Block Update
Players on the Block:
- JuJu Smith-Schuster WR NE
Draft Picks on the Block:
- Round 4 Pick 11
- Round 5 Pick 11
Juju for $2 Both picks together for $10
Chicago's Most Wanted wrote:
I only have one suggestion/ recommendation to this list of proposed changes emailed out. For the Base Auction I do not like the proposed ability to offer up a future year 1st. I believe it should be current year. So if an owner has multiple 1st round picks of that current year they could offer their choice. When you lose a base auction player you should not have to wait an entire year for compensation. It immediately weakens the team who loses their base player.
That’s my 2 cents.
Thanks for the thoughts, Paul. I totally understand the sting of losing a Franchise Player and not getting an immediate return. My view on it is that it should sting to lose a Franchise Player. Limiting the 1st to current year only handicaps the weaker teams too much and that was my goal with the change. Opening up that portion of the auction to everybody means a more exciting auction and more strategy in planning out Tags. It'll be a bit of an adjustment but I'm confident it'll be a positive change.
Detroit Dons wrote:
Hey Smugglers!
Way to swoop in on the last day for Herbert! I stopped looking at the damn forum cuz nothing was going on, and BAM!
Good job! And before anyone gives me grief, I'm saying this honestly! It's my fault, nobody else's! I'm just pissed at myself!
Good luck with Herbert, I hope he does you well!
Dons
Hey Sorry John Just thought i would give him a shot-Have him in 3 other leagues . I'm not sure what the 2025 Draft is shaping up tp be but hope it's a good one for ya' !!! I do hate to give up those 1st round picks
Way to swoop in on the last day for Herbert! I stopped looking at the damn forum cuz nothing was going on, and BAM!
Good job! And before anyone gives me grief, I'm saying this honestly! It's my fault, nobody else's! I'm just pissed at myself!
Good luck with Herbert, I hope he does you well!
Dons
That’s my 2 cents.
Capo dei capi wrote:Hey Commish,
I don't think my IR players had a year taken off their contracts when the league reset. I think all three should have one fewer year.
Since they were on IR so their contracts don't get reduced. It's one of the IR perks for guys who go down during the season.
