2018 General Managers Discussion Thread

I believe he means the fact that 90% of the teams are using max restructures in this exercise, which is no where close to real life. I could be wrong...@RTTRUTH??

 

Only 13 of 32 teams restructured the max of 3 players. Another 2 restructured 2 players and 5 teams restructured 1 player.

 

I stand corrected, I would definitely have thought it was a higher percentage. Regardless, what are the stats for restructures in the NFL, excluding the Steelers?

 

I think the misnomer is that everyone max restructured and spent wild in free agency making things unauthentic. In reality I think people did the restructures early in the process so they could check off that box and move on to free agency.

I did the same myself even though I know the Steelers set things up with certain players in advance and then only execute when they need the money. I finished with 11M in cap space that I didn't need. And that was in the low end.

Most of the teams that max restructured 3 players last year didn't need the money. I believe they did it like me just to get it out of the way. Ten of the 13 teams finished with double digits cap space:

11M
37M
12M
19M
34M
77M
114M
26M
27M
13M

If there is a lesson to be learned I think it would be to identify the players you may re-structure and execute only as needed. Had all the teams above done that this exercise would have appeared far more authentic.

 

I cleared $21.33M in cap space on 3 max restructures with the Eagles (Cox, Johnson and Ertz).
The real Eagles restructured Cox and Johnson and Brooks to save $19.25M in cap. Actually somehow the Eagles saved $5M more on Johnson than we could with the tool.

That is pretty close and add in the fact a couple other minor restructures and in my case it would have been crazy if I didn't have them.

 

I agree, some teams NEED it and will absolutely do it in real life. It is impossible to know which of these teams are, so there is no way to keep other teams from doing it in this exercise..I guess that was my whole point.. It will be difficult to change the rules drastically to make it more realistic. For some teams, it is unrealistic to NOT allow them to do it, while other teams it is unrealistic to allow them to do it, like the Browns. There was no way any of these players were getting restructures done this off season...so I decided not to do it in this exercise. I could have, which would have allowed me to over extend on another free agent or two. It just isn't what I personally am into this for.

 

Same here. The Steelers actually re-structured 4 contracts.

 

Didn't you finish with 84M in cap space?

 

Yes, which made doing restructures for the Browns something of an extreme, don't you think? I could have run up free agency (like some players were) on quite a few players. I chose not to, but the restructuring of Browns players would have allowed me to pretty much redo an entire franchise through bullying in free agency in this exercise. I didn't do it regardless, but using ALL TOOLS available would have made for a pretty boring experience for everyone not GMing the Browns.

 

You know what, my bad for giving ANY input into any of this...

Carry on with "your" discussion beach.

 

Okay definitely you could have bid up everyone and screwed the whole exercise up. Glad you didn't. Just didn't see how that tied into restructures when you finished with 84M in space.

 

?????

 

Yeah that’s basically my issue with the realism. So I’m the Colts. I start with the 3rd most cap space. After everyone max restructures 3 guys each, I’m at best 12th most cap space. Then the bids all get carried away. Some guys surprise you in real life and reach those numbers. But I guess in the end the zero repercussions to bad cap management is where my issue lies. And I can’t get mad at other GMs for manipulating the rules as they exist. I could just do the same. But personally I play Madden to exploit loopholes. I enjoy these exercises more for the realistic boundaries of player valuation/cap management. When those loosen, my enjoyment is capped somewhat. I’m beating a dead horse here, but that’s why I vote for less available restructures. Not the elimination altogether. They do happen real world. It’s just usually teams in the bottom 4-6 for cap room that utilize it out of necessity. And every one used makes cap management/roster flexibility in future years more difficult

 

Just my newbie opinion but, that ^^^^^ is where the realism falls off the ledge. Roster moves, including restructuring, within the GMO exercise don't carry over into the next year. From my limited exposure (correct me if I'm wrong) every team starts fresh every year based on the roster and cap space in place on the day they are frozen. There are no consequences caused by restructuring, free agent aquisitions or outright player releases beyond the time frame of the current exercise.

 

If they carried over the rosters would be different. It wouldn't be the same exercise anymore.

A few years down the line the rosters of some teams would be that team in name only. Plus you'd need everyone committed for years on the same team.

 

Yep, it's up to us to take on the fiscal responsibility aspect of the role on our own. Some will, some won't. We both did, as did Irish and Beach and many of the others.

But is it unrealistic to make it so easy for GMs to mortgage the future? That's tough to say. You walked into cap hell when you took over the Saints purely because their true GM has been kicking that can down the road for so many years. So it happens in real life too. I guess as long as the GM understands he's doing it, then it's probably "okay" from a realism standpoint.

 

Either way, these are fun regardless.
It’s draft day people (at least for us L4SN dynasty guys). Nothing to be perturbed with today.
I’m counting down the hours.

 

Yes and no. As I pointed out above most of the restructuring teams didn't even use the cap space they created. If our restructures were going to carry over into next year's exercise so too would the excess cap. It would rollover. So the idea that L4SN GMs were fiscally irresponsible didn't happen from what I can see.

 

In theory I think you're correct. But I didn't see that this year and as I mentioned in the post above there really aren't any repercussions for most of the teams that re-structured in 2018. They still have their cap space and it would rollover into 2019.

 

I never said that the L4SN GM's were fiscally irresponsible. Only that where a team, any team, ended at in the 2018 GMO exercise is not where they start out at in the 2019 GMO exercise. The are no consequences that carry over. And that . . . is where the realism falls short.