Pred's Fantasy Football Forums - View Single Post

Miners · May 1st, 2016, 01:47 PM

Had I not been able to bring Brees back at a 50% discount I would be pretty upset with this move.

I just read through the rules and they state, "RFA's cannot be traded prior to the start of in-season free agency (August 31st). The team winning the rights to the RFA (either the tendering team if they decide to match, or the highest bidding team if the tendering team declines to match) cannot trade that player until the start of in-season free agency has begun."

I realize this was a drop and not a trade, but I feel this should fall under the same conditions. I also understand the reasons why the Swords chose to do this, but what is to stop a team from doing this if one of their tendered players goes to a particular owner and they don't want to compete against that player in the same division, etc. Not to mention that it could completely change the strategy for the manager winning the bid. They think they have to go another direction only to find out that the person is available later in off season free agency and not having the cap space to do anything about it.

As I said, it means nothing to me now and I believe it to be harmless, but none the less seems shady.

May 1st, 2016, 01:47 PM	#2
Miners SAC'D Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Colorado Springs, CO Posts: 2,576	Re: CUT QB Tom Brady, NE (1yr/2700cbs) Had I not been able to bring Brees back at a 50% discount I would be pretty upset with this move. I just read through the rules and they state, "RFA's cannot be traded prior to the start of in-season free agency (August 31st). The team winning the rights to the RFA (either the tendering team if they decide to match, or the highest bidding team if the tendering team declines to match) cannot trade that player until the start of in-season free agency has begun." I realize this was a drop and not a trade, but I feel this should fall under the same conditions. I also understand the reasons why the Swords chose to do this, but what is to stop a team from doing this if one of their tendered players goes to a particular owner and they don't want to compete against that player in the same division, etc. Not to mention that it could completely change the strategy for the manager winning the bid. They think they have to go another direction only to find out that the person is available later in off season free agency and not having the cap space to do anything about it. As I said, it means nothing to me now and I believe it to be harmless, but none the less seems shady.