Warrior General Games

Every contract should have contract accelerators(stat/rep based salary increases), player options(for contracts longer than 1 season), and stat/rep based stipulations for agent forced player release.

I figure accelerators should be a pretty obvious one to understand. The bigger issue is the contract stipulations scenario. It seems one of the major follies of this game is it's inability to correctly handle the owner/agent problems that occur. This is one way to eliminate the opportunity for a he said/she said childish squabble. During the contract process the agent and owner can come to a set of terms(avg reps/game etc, etc). Once they have come to an agreement have a fields to input the contract data which would then track those perameters. If the owner can't fulfill the contracted obligations the agent can force-release their player. There has to be a waiting period so the numbers have a chance even out and give accurate data(I'd probably say 4-6 games), and give the owner a chance to keep their end of the bargain. This idea ties very well into player options.

When a player has signed a contract that spans more than one season they chould get an option to renew based on the data set in the contract stipulations. If the owner matches all of the stipulated requirements then the contract option switches from the agent to the team. This way there is a balance and checl to the contract issue. Here are two examples of how it should work(1 for agent/ 1 for owner).


Agent example:

You have 3 contract stipulations on a 2 year deal. The team has met 2 out of the three buy the end of the season. Based on whether or not you enjoyed playing on the team, or want to move on you are no longer tied to that team if you so choose.

Owner example:

same scenario as above 3 stipulations 2 year deal. The team has met all 3 stipulations. The contract option now switches from agent control to owner control, and now ownership can make the decision on whether or not to retain the player. This way if they decide they want to go in a different build direction from your player or whatever the reason may be, they no longer have to let a dot rot on the sidelines getting dick for reps etc, etc,.


I'm sure the system may be abuseable in some way, but I think it's at least a step in the right direction.

-1

-1

any thoughts other than -1?

My main comment would be to only sign one season contracts if it is with owners that you do not know. (If it is someone that you do know you are likely going to be a TEAM player and know what you are getting yourself into anyway......)

as for your scenario:

The Agent - again, sign one season deals..... try to sign with people you know..... don't resign if you have a bad experience. (IF, in the extremely rare instance someone recruits you and doesn't put you on the DC, contact support as they won't allow someone to bring you aboard and rot you from day 1 IMHO)

The Owner - doesn't need anything flashy as he can release players at will.


I can honestly tell you that I send out tons of applications for my network and one of the questions relates to how the team owners deal with their agents. It is VERY rare that a team owner rots a player and most will release them to avoid drama. This idea just isn't needed IMHO as bad experiences are fairly rare and there are already ways to handle them IF the person goes the right route instead of trying to act like a d*ck.

-1

Originally posted by TaySC
My main comment would be to only sign one season contracts if it is with owners that you do not know. (If it is someone that you do know you are likely going to be a TEAM player and know what you are getting yourself into anyway......)

as for your scenario:

The Agent - again, sign one season deals..... try to sign with people you know..... don't resign if you have a bad experience. (IF, in the extremely rare instance someone recruits you and doesn't put you on the DC, contact support as they won't allow someone to bring you aboard and rot you from day 1 IMHO)

The Owner - doesn't need anything flashy as he can release players at will.


I can honestly tell you that I send out tons of applications for my network and one of the questions relates to how the team owners deal with their agents. It is VERY rare that a team owner rots a player and most will release them to avoid drama. This idea just isn't needed IMHO as bad experiences are fairly rare and there are already ways to handle them IF the person goes the right route instead of trying to act like a d*ck.



This more simple and not all the steps

-1 Too much drama in glb as it is, don't need people jumping ship because they would only sign if you agree to giving them the ball 40 plays a game and they got 35 one game.

Originally posted by happylittletrees
any thoughts other than -1?

-2

+1