Spin
Footballguy
Quick question on if this should be allowed.
In a 10 team dynasty league that I commish, we have a RFA month. Which means during the month of April, any player who has 0 years is up for bid by the other owners. The original owner then has the option of matching the highest bid and keep the player. Each owner is given 75 "snotes" each year, and these carry over. They are currency which is used to bid on RFAs as well as bid on free agents during the season.
Players are allowed to designate one player each year as their Franchise player. Meaning they pay 10 snotes up front, then they only have to match half of the high bid, If they lose their franchise player, by not matching the high bid, they get compensation in terms of a pick. The downside to franchise tagging a player is they only get a 1 year contract, so you get to do it all over again next year.
This year Team C franchise tagged Peyton Manning. Team C had 11 snotes (after matching a bid of 55 on Adrian Peterson).
Team A has 122 snotes and bid 45 on Peyton, so Team C would have to spend 13 to match (half of 45 + his 10 snotes cost of tagging player), but he only had 11. So he spent a day trying to "sell" draft picks for snotes but no one would make a deal with him, so he instead chose to trade Peyton.
Team B acquired Peyton Manning and now has the option of matching to keep Peyton or letting him walk and get the compensation. Team A approached team B and offered to give him 30 snotes in order for him to not match on Peyton.
So it would be a trade that consists of:
Team A gives:
30 snotes
Team B gives:
A promise to not match the current high bid on Peyton
This has never happened before so there is no league bylaw that covers it, and I'm not sure I like the idea of people trading league commodities for "promises" to do something, or am I way over thinking this?
In a 10 team dynasty league that I commish, we have a RFA month. Which means during the month of April, any player who has 0 years is up for bid by the other owners. The original owner then has the option of matching the highest bid and keep the player. Each owner is given 75 "snotes" each year, and these carry over. They are currency which is used to bid on RFAs as well as bid on free agents during the season.
Players are allowed to designate one player each year as their Franchise player. Meaning they pay 10 snotes up front, then they only have to match half of the high bid, If they lose their franchise player, by not matching the high bid, they get compensation in terms of a pick. The downside to franchise tagging a player is they only get a 1 year contract, so you get to do it all over again next year.
This year Team C franchise tagged Peyton Manning. Team C had 11 snotes (after matching a bid of 55 on Adrian Peterson).
Team A has 122 snotes and bid 45 on Peyton, so Team C would have to spend 13 to match (half of 45 + his 10 snotes cost of tagging player), but he only had 11. So he spent a day trying to "sell" draft picks for snotes but no one would make a deal with him, so he instead chose to trade Peyton.
Team B acquired Peyton Manning and now has the option of matching to keep Peyton or letting him walk and get the compensation. Team A approached team B and offered to give him 30 snotes in order for him to not match on Peyton.
So it would be a trade that consists of:
Team A gives:
30 snotes
Team B gives:
A promise to not match the current high bid on Peyton
This has never happened before so there is no league bylaw that covers it, and I'm not sure I like the idea of people trading league commodities for "promises" to do something, or am I way over thinking this?