OOTP Developments Forums - View Single Post - OOTP10 Suggestions: Player and Staff Contracts

aewin · 01-20-2009, 08:08 PM

Suggestion

Get rid of the current "mutual options" as they are pointless. Requiring BOTH team and player to agree means that it is not an "option" in the true sense (ie no party has the unilateral ability to execute it) and it really doesn't add anything of value to either party to the contract. Team and player can agree to an extension at anytime anyway.

Replace current "mutual option" concept with an option where EITHER the team or the player can execute the option. This would truly be an option and would potentially be of value to one party come the time - ie an undervalued contract salary would benefit the team and an overvalued contract salary would benefit the player.

AT THE VERY LEAST A CURRENT MUTUAL OPTION SHOULD HAVE ZERO VALUE WHEN THE AI EVALUATES A CONTRACT OFFER.

Reason

It is currently pointless and actually MIGHT (I don't know how contract offers are valued) be used to unfairly distort contract offers.

Let me give an extreme example of possible abuse. Let's say I want to offer an FA a 4 year contract at say $10m per year. I can offer him a 5 year contract with a 5th year mutual option with salaries of $10m, $10m, $10m, $10m and $50m knowing that I as GM can always refuse the 5th year.

Priority

High

01-20-2009, 08:08 PM	#26 (permalink)
aewin Major Leagues Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Perth, Western Australia Posts: 374 Thanks: 1 Thanked 2x in 2 posts	Suggestion Get rid of the current "mutual options" as they are pointless. Requiring BOTH team and player to agree means that it is not an "option" in the true sense (ie no party has the unilateral ability to execute it) and it really doesn't add anything of value to either party to the contract. Team and player can agree to an extension at anytime anyway. Replace current "mutual option" concept with an option where EITHER the team or the player can execute the option. This would truly be an option and would potentially be of value to one party come the time - ie an undervalued contract salary would benefit the team and an overvalued contract salary would benefit the player. AT THE VERY LEAST A CURRENT MUTUAL OPTION SHOULD HAVE ZERO VALUE WHEN THE AI EVALUATES A CONTRACT OFFER. Reason It is currently pointless and actually MIGHT (I don't know how contract offers are valued) be used to unfairly distort contract offers. Let me give an extreme example of possible abuse. Let's say I want to offer an FA a 4 year contract at say $10m per year. I can offer him a 5 year contract with a 5th year mutual option with salaries of $10m, $10m, $10m, $10m and $50m knowing that I as GM can always refuse the 5th year. Priority High Last edited by aewin; 01-21-2009 at 06:16 PM.