Retired Players

[Philadelphia Eagles (Andrew)]

So apparently Zach Orr is coming out of retirement. He used to be my player but I put him on the retired players list when he hung it up last year. It seems to me like if a retired player comes out of retirement then the team that had him before should either get him back or if not they shouldn't have to pay his cap hit. I'm going to be taking a $2 cap hit for him this year and he's going to be getting a salary from MIN too(unless he gets outbid). That's not how it works in the NFL and it was my belief that we were trying to make this league as similar to the NFL as possible within reason.

I can understand not giving the player back to me but it doesn't seem right that I should take a hit for him also. Any thoughts on a rule change?

[Cincinnati Bengals (Chris)]

I too have had these feelings/thoughts before Andrew. It's unfortunate when a player "retires" and then unretires, and for the purposes of our league, to date, there just hasn't been a good answer as to how to handle that. For example, I felt the same way when I had three LBs retire prior to the 2015 season, especially with Borland, as if he returned, I would likely be outbid for him in the open market, even if I am the team that recognized his talent, took the initiative to get him, and then by some freak occurrence (his retirement), lost him after one year.

There is a contingent of this league that will say tough titties, that is how it works, but it doesn't have to, you're right. And although these scenarios are somewhat unlikely, and there's no guarantee that Orr, for example, even gets medically cleared, I think there should be some recourse for the team that was effectively penalized for their player's decision to retire, whether that be them being offered the player back first, or taking off the remaining cap hit, or some other way that I haven't thought of yet. If articulated the right way, I would be a supporter of this were it to come up in a poll.

[Minnesota Vikings (Matt)]

I think it should remain the same as a team is not required to cut a player when they retire. Same if a player has 4 years left on his contract in our league and goes a full season without signing with a team so the team cuts him and takes the cap hit for 4 years. But if he signs with another team a year later the team that cut him is not offered the player back or any relief if someone else signs them. Personally I was never a fan of the retirement rule as it brings in many different factors such as this one where a player returns. I would rather it be whatever contract you sign a player to that's what the cap penalty would be, I know there have been some unfortunate early retirements but it has bailed some guys out of bad contracts they signed an older player to. Obviously the above mentioned Orr and Borland contracts were not the case but injuries happen and I don't think we should give relief every time something unfortunate happens to a team.

[Philadelphia Eagles (Andrew)]

it just doesn't really make sense to me to have two teams pay the guy's salary. I'm not going to fight you for Orr. I'd like him back but in the NFL if someone comes back they often resign with another team. That's fine with me. I mostly just have an issue with me paying a cap penalty for a guy who quit football, just to come back and hop on another team. In the NFL that player wouldn't get paid by both teams and it shouldn't happen here either. Zach Orr won't get paid 1 cent by the ravens this year if he signs with another team, why does it make sense that I should pay him anything?

All contracts in this league are treated as though they're 50% guaranteed. If you cut someone you still pay half his salary. However if you retire from football you forfeit 100% of your salary. No money gets paid, the team gets no cap hit. Idk guys, this just seems like a no-brained to me.

[Deleted]

Orr should never have been eligible for retirement in our league because he never officially filed retirement paperwork with the NFL...

[Cincinnati Bengals (Chris)]

Jun 29, 2017 6:34:49 GMT -5 @treyb3 said:

Orr should never have been eligible for retirement in our league because he never officially filed retirement paperwork with the NFL...

Well, we ran into this problem several years back and felt we were too rigid on it because some guys never file retirement papers with the NFL. And that's a pretty unreasonable standard to meet in a fantasy league that's about fun. I know it's the extreme of the argument, but there are dead guys that haven't filed their papers either. Are they not retired? And the reason I bring up that point, as stupid as it was, our old JAX owner signed Aaron Hernandez AFTER he was accused of murder (perhaps even after he was arrested, I don't remember), and he just recently came of JAX's cap. So let's imagine, for argument's sake, that he was still rostered by that idiot who signed him, and was in prison, without filing his paperwork for retirement, and then killed himself as he did. Again, as stupid as it was to sign him, would we then deny him the opportunity to retire him even if he were dead? And Fantrax, last year, for example, had over 5,000 rosterable players, many of whom have been retired for years or dead themselves (including Aaron Hernandez, who is STILL listed as rosterable) but not officially retired. So I just think the burden of proof on that takes away from what we try to do here.

[Minnesota Vikings (Matt)]

I think this also shows why I don't like the retired player option. There are so many technicalities on retired and not retired. Are Romo and Cutler technically retired? Can teams retire those players if they are owned? There is a slight chance that one or both gets signed if an injury happens. It just gets so cluttered that I think our contracts should be whatever you sign them for and cap hits last until expired.

As for a player getting paid by two teams, that happens a good amount in our league, a player gets cut so that team has a cap hit, player goes unclaimed and then is signed the next week so he has a cap hit for two teams as well. If we tried to just like the NFL with contracts we would all need lawyers to sign someone. I would like it as simple as possible, sign them to whatever you want, if you cut the player is a cap hit of 50% for the remaining years. Doesn't matter if they retire, get hurt, or just take a year off. Just my opinion to make things simple and then there would be no question of, did this guy really retire or not.

[Indianapolis Colts (J.R.)]

Let the TRC or some other 3 team committee decide retirement status. Have the player's owner submit a Retirement Request. If CDFL places said player out to pasture, the team owning player will have the player dropped without a Cap Hit. Salary and Contract Years removed.

Should player return to the NFL, normal player rules established by CDFL would then apply for player ownership.

[Buffalo Bills (Salvatore)]

Im of the opinion that if a player retires as a member of your team and unretires the owner of said team should have the option of retaining said player at w.e contract the player had when they were retired in our league. Thats the way it works in the nfl. If a player decides to come out of retirement they are still contractually obligated to play for w.e team holds their contract if one does.

[Philadelphia Eagles (Andrew)]

MIN, I just don't see how it's in the best interest of the league to say "sorry but we're going to punish you for your player retiring"

[Minnesota Vikings (Matt)]

So should we take away penalties if a player gets hurt? Or signs with a new team and doesn't start? Unfortunate things happen in the NFL and in our league. If teams don't want to do away with the retired players rule that is fine I was just stating my opinion on it. As for taking away your cap pentaly because he is trying to come back? That would be a no, the rule says you only take 1 year of a cap hit which is already great for you as he had 3 years remaining. You weren't required to cut him and used the retired players rule so the cap penalty will last for only 1 year. Using the retired player rule is a form of waiving a player so he is a free agent.

[Baltimore Ravens (Goose)]

If a player retires in the NFL does he have to give back signing bonus money? Does the NFL team take a cap hit for that bonus money that was supposed to be spread over the life of the contract. I think the answers are no to the bonus money and yes to the cap hit, so I think our rules are close to the NFL in this respect.

[Philadelphia Eagles (Andrew)]

MIN keeps bringing up that I didn't have to cut him. While it's true that I'm not forced to cut him it just doesn't make sense to roster some and pay them at a full salary. I don't have the cap or roster space for someone who won't play at all.

If you want to use that as an argument then I think we should have a designation for retired guys similar to IR. A retired player doesn't count against your 53 man roster in the NFL and you don't pay his salary either. So if you're wanting to force people to hold on to likely worthless players then we need to create a separate roster spot for them.

So the player wouldn't count against your normal roster and you'd only pay 50% of their salary to satisfy BAL signing bonus cap hit argument. If they return from retirement then you can either activate or drop them.

[Deleted]

I don't really see the issue here, this is no different than a team waving a player. Once that player clears waivers he is free for all teams to bid on. If a player I waived becomes a starter later in the season I would not get that player back, and I'm still paying a cap penalty for that player if another team resigns him. For instance I waived Trent Murphy and he is currently on CIN's roster. So by what's being said I shouldn't pay the penalty if he is resigned by another team.

By no means am I saying that I want that cap penalty removed. I'm just saying that I don't think this is a can of worms that should be opened

[Philadelphia Eagles (Andrew)]

Jul 1, 2017 20:13:40 GMT -5 @tmett5454 said:

I don't really see the issue here, this is no different than a team waving a player. Once that player clears waivers he is free for all teams to bid on. If a player I waived becomes a starter later in the season I would not get that player back, and I'm still paying a cap penalty for that player if another team resigns him. For instance I waived Trent Murphy and he is currently on CIN's roster. So by what's being said I shouldn't pay the penalty if he is resigned by another team.

By no means am I saying that I want that cap penalty removed. I'm just saying that I don't think this is a can of worms that should be opened

The difference is that your guy is still an NFL player collecting an NFL paycheck and my guy isn't. You made a choice to drop your guy. My guy made the choice to quit football.