Madden 11 League-OFFICIAL CAG LEAGUE-That's all folks! Mini-tourney still coming tho!

Hey, I'm around, just been really busy this week. When I get on the 360 next I can jump back into the league. About free agents or anything, I don't really know enough about football to get into all of that so I will just pass and keep my team as is. I should be free pretty much all weekend to play though.
 
[quote name='DeskLaser']Hey, I'm around, just been really busy this week. When I get on the 360 next I can jump back into the league. About free agents or anything, I don't really know enough about football to get into all of that so I will just pass and keep my team as is. I should be free pretty much all weekend to play though.[/QUOTE]

No worries. I got your message on XBL too. I'm going to make the executive decision and awarded you Mike Brown, SS, OVR rating 76. :D Hope you don't mind.*

So the Bucs are on the clock. Please choose your free agent!

If anyone else has any questions about it (I know my first PM was a bit confusing and some of the other explanations got lost in the thread), feel free to ask.

*edit: in case people are wondering why I did that, his starting SS is rated 69. it seemed to be his weakest starting position.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='Darth0fTheDead']Where on the online franchise page can you view the FA pool? Can't seem to find it on here nor on the franchise user interface for that matter.[/QUOTE]

Sorry, I thought you guys could because I can. Had a long, confusing conversation with get abolished over this and apparently you cannot see the FA list from the website. Oops.

[quote name='RamesuThe1']Uber: I'd like to know what factors your considering when determining the merits of a proposed trade...[/QUOTE]

Wasn't ignoring this. BV summed it up fine. Something would have to be really outlandish and unfair for me to reject it.

Personally, I like to keep the teams fairly accurate to the NFL, but I realize when we each take them over a team they become our own. Not only that, not every team is rated in the 80s or whatever the Jets are, so I can see why others would want to make moves to improve or have a team that might not be their favorite fit their own style. That's my completely irrelevant side note for the night.
 
Vikings vs Packers (heard something about this, but can't seem to find it, assume it's scheduled)
Click to expand...

I think all I said was that I was sending him a PM, but he has since responded, and it looks like we're doing 9:30 P.M. Eastern on Sunday.

The NFC North is by far the shittiest division, record wise. 2-4 record has us tied for the division lead, LOL.
 
[quote name='ubernes']And lastly, a Friday night update on Week 7:

Browns vs Saints (Scotts have you heard from DeskLaser at all? I have a feeling he's not coming back)[/QUOTE]

He messaged me on XBL yesterday. I'm trying to set up a game for sometime Sunday as I'm busy from 9 am to 1 am today.
 
Anyone know if there is a good mobile solution for viewing CAG? I'm on my Android and viewing the site is kind of rough.
 
[quote name='ubernes']
Personally, I like to keep the teams fairly accurate to the NFL, but I realize when we each take them over a team they become our own. Not only that, not every team is rated in the 80s or whatever the Jets are, so I can see why others would want to make moves to improve or have a team that might not be their favorite fit their own style. That's my completely irrelevant side note for the night.[/QUOTE]

I'm all about accuracy too, but in terms of trades I think of it a bit like fantasy: Making trades is fun And like you said, wheeling and dealing, within reason, is a good way to make a team fit your style of play better.

I do think we should have a trade deadline though.

[quote name='BigAT']Anyone know if there is a good mobile solution for viewing CAG? I'm on my Android and viewing the site is kind of rough.[/QUOTE]

I don't have personal experience with it, but I know there is an iPhone/Android version of the site which some people seem to like. Should be available through the settings.
 
[quote name='ubernes']And lastly, a Friday night update on Week 7:

Browns vs Saints (Scotts have you heard from DeskLaser at all? I have a feeling he's not coming back)
Rams vs Bucs (you two seem to be in touch, is something scheduled?)
Redskins vs Bears (anything on this?)
Jags vs Chiefs (same)
Raiders vs Broncos (playing Monday night, should be last game of the week)
Vikings vs Packers (heard something about this, but can't seem to find it, assume it's scheduled)
Giants vs Cowboys (haven't heard much, but assume the same)[/QUOTE]


ive been tryin to get in contact with bears for the last 2 days with no luck,i left him a messege on xbl for how to get in contact with me whenever he is ready to play,...............as far as the deal with the trade with the 49ers there was a mix up in the details of the trade,i am talking to him now and he will post the right details in a few minutes
 
I just got a message from you this morning so I don't know what you mean by the past two days. Anyways, just sent you a pm via xbl.
 
Big At I have the motorola droid and use the iphone view , its fast and smooth you just can't quote replies or at least I haven't found out how ?
 
[quote name='eddie291']I just got a message from you this morning so I don't know what you mean by the past two days. Anyways, just sent you a pm via xbl.[/QUOTE]


get the thread i been tryin to play u since they start this week,but its all good,im just anxious to get this game in,you ready to play now??cuz i can hope online
 
I have a few things to suggest and questions to ask:

1. What is the final decision on picks being used in trades? I've read both angles in recent pages.

2. To those that don't like the idea of trades, why don't we limit the number of trades a team can execute in a season (I have done two, so maybe two or three is a good number).

3. Also, perhaps midseason (Week 8) should be the deadline for trades.

4. Is the waiver process as suggested by the commissioner going forward?
 
I don't know how much limiting the number of trades would work just because one deal could include 3 players and one deal could include one player, or a person could aquire a player someone else wanted but didn't have the pieces to move so they contacted someone to make a three way trade. In esscence the system in place is good to me, we do need to decide on a last week for trades though.
 
ESPN is reporting trade talks with the Redskins and 49ers are breaking down which means Brian Orakpo may be back on the trading block .
 
[quote name='PacerPerspect']I have a few things to suggest and questions to ask:

1. What is the final decision on picks being used in trades? I've read both angles in recent pages.

2. To those that don't like the idea of trades, why don't we limit the number of trades a team can execute in a season (I have done two, so maybe two or three is a good number).

3. Also, perhaps midseason (Week 8) should be the deadline for trades.

4. Is the waiver process as suggested by the commissioner going forward?[/QUOTE]

1. Picks are fine. But like I stressed, if you're dealing picks make sure you're a. sticking around for year 2 and b. you're sticking with the team you have now. I really don't see myself letting someone switch teams if he traded away a bunch of his picks and players in year 1.

2. Not a bad idea, but I don't think we need to do that unless it gets out of hand.

3. Week 8 might be too early. Since we just opened it up officially in Week 7. Week 10 could be good though. Week 12 at the latest if an overwhelming amount of people have a problem with 10.

4. Yes, if you check the OP, 2 FA picks have been made. The Bucs are on the clock now, waiting to hear his pick. Some of the teams that follow PMed me their choices so hopefully this moves a bit quicker soon.
 
What does every one think for a time limit for FA picks? 12 hours? 15? I've PMed some people up to 2 times since we started this a day ago (I think it was a day ago), and it still feels like it's moving at a snails pace. We're not in a huge rush as it's only Saturday but if we keep up this pace then we're never going to get through it.
 
Aaaand, Saturday morning update. Thanks to everyone who updated me on the status of their games. Helps a lot.

Jags vs Chiefs (haven't seen either, what's up here?)
Rams vs Bucs (in touch, schedule?)
Redskins vs Bears (in touch)
Giants vs Cowboys (sometime Sunday)
Browns vs Saints (sometime Sunday)
Vikings vs Packers (9:30pm EST Sunday)
Raiders vs Broncos (playing Monday night, should be last game of the week)
 
you have to remember that its a long weekend and people arent around that much. You might have trouble getting a response. Anyways, Im taking Ogunleye.
 
There should certainly be a time limit for FA picks but I think it would take too long to do it one at a time for say, 12 hours per pick...

I think you should lump 10-16 teams together within that time-frame.

Maybe you should have those 10-16 players submit a 3 player list as a waiver claim and if the same player(s) are claimed by different teams then obviously that player would go to the user who is higher on the list.

The user who loses out would then be awarded his second choice....etc...

It may be rough keeping track of your pm's but I think this is the most efficient way, in terms of timeliness
 
With the Tampa Bucs selecting LE Adewale Ogunleye and the Redskins taking CB Shawn Springs, the Minnesota Vikings are now on the clock.

The Bills sent me a list of players he wants. So Eagles, Chiefs, Lions, Bears stay on your toes today or send me a list of your own via PM.
 
are we going to do a second round of FA pick ups. I know some people didnt want to, but I would definitely be interested... big time.
 
We're sticking with a 53-man roster limit, right? I'm not sure if the online franchise enforces the limit the way the offline one does, but I think we should.
 
[quote name='jbrun85']are we going to do a second round of FA pick ups. I know some people didnt want to, but I would definitely be interested... big time.[/QUOTE]

I'm thinking Week 14 we'll do another round. So people can assess their mid/late season injuries. It'll be done in a much more streamlined fashion. Top 15 will have 24 hours to PM me their top 5 or so picks, if it's not in, you get skipped. This time around I'm not too worried about it being slow, like as you said, it's a holiday weekend.

[quote name='bvharris']We're sticking with a 53-man roster limit, right? I'm not sure if the online franchise enforces the limit the way the offline one does, but I think we should.[/QUOTE]

It does, when I added Brown to the Browns I had to drop their lowest rated safety.
 
Trading draft picks should be a no-no, just because of the fact that if someone doesn't stick around, it totally fucks the new owner of that team.
 
So the Vikings take Randy Thomas. The Bills take Ken Lucas, CB. The Eagles grab LOLB Adalius Thomas.

And the Chiefs are on the clock, with the Lions, Bears and Packers following.
 
[quote name='HydroX']Trading draft picks should be a no-no, just because of the fact that if someone doesn't stick around, it totally fucks the new owner of that team.[/QUOTE]

Well, not totally, since the new owner would still have whoever those picks were traded for. So while it might fuck them a bit, it would totally fuck them, haha.

Anyone who trades picks is committed to that team for year 2 (unless they leave the league entirely). That's fair.

Ubernes - I'm gonna be out all day, so if we get to my pick I might not be able to make it. I'm PMing you with a few things I'm looking for, so go ahead and make a pick for me if my turn comes up anytime before 7 or 8 tonight.
 
[quote name='gbpackers94']Any word on when the next power rankings are scheduled to come out?[/QUOTE]

This FA thing is taking up too much of my time. Look for them again in Week 8, at the latest.
 
[quote name='bvharris']Well, not totally, since the new owner would still have whoever those picks were traded for. So while it might fuck them a bit, it would totally fuck them, haha.

Anyone who trades picks is committed to that team for year 2 (unless they leave the league entirely). That's fair.[/QUOTE]

It's not entirely fair to the new guy if someone just outright quits (see: Redskins, Browns). Now, I plan on sticking around for as long as I'm wanted (lol) but for example's sake, if I were to trade Peyton Manning and Reggie Wayne for say Frank Gore and a 1st round draft pick, and I rage quit the league or something, the new owner of the Colts would wonder where his team was at. Granted, he has that extra 1st round pick, but considering you're choosing from a random pool of players it really does fuck that new owner over.

I know there are people that are in the CAGFL every season, but you can't guarantee that everyone is going to stick around, which is why there should be a set limit on the amount of trades (2 or 3 sounded good, as suggested earlier), and why there should be no draft pick trading. I don't know, it just seems like common sense to me.
 
Sometimes the only thing that can even out a trade with the balance tipping in one direction is a draft pick to limit trades and draft picks would force more uneven trades in my opinion. For instance if I was to send you frank gore and that was my third trade than I would have to wait til next season to get another running back or put recievers around manning. He could retire by then, or get injured, plus sometimes after major trades are done you trade a player that is not needed anymore for instance if I got another cb I would have no need for either clements or spencer so I would want to move them and vice versa if I move clements and that's my last trade I have to wait til next year to fill his spot ?
 
im all for trading draft picks. if someone wants to get into this league at a later date, then they should deal with what they got. I mean, I certainly didnt want the bucs. and i would bet a lot of people have teams they arent thrilled about. Its just part of the game. Besides, how am I supposed to have any chance of making my team better if I cant trade for picks. Everything would need to be too even.
 
[quote name='HydroX']It's not entirely fair to the new guy if someone just outright quits (see: Redskins, Browns). Now, I plan on sticking around for as long as I'm wanted (lol) but for example's sake, if I were to trade Peyton Manning and Reggie Wayne for say Frank Gore and a 1st round draft pick, and I rage quit the league or something, the new owner of the Colts would wonder where his team was at. Granted, he has that extra 1st round pick, but considering you're choosing from a random pool of players it really does fuck that new owner over.

I know there are people that are in the CAGFL every season, but you can't guarantee that everyone is going to stick around, which is why there should be a set limit on the amount of trades (2 or 3 sounded good, as suggested earlier), and why there should be no draft pick trading. I don't know, it just seems like common sense to me.[/QUOTE]

This is my issue with trading "big names" in the first place....continuity becomes a real problem when ppl aren't committed but that have traded their best players away
 
[quote name='jbrun85']isn't that where the peer review/commish approval comes in though?[/QUOTE]

Yes, but not everyone subscribes to the idea that "stars" shouldn't be dealt, the concern seems to be more about perceived fairness based on the current ratings in the game....(Brian Orakpo, Terrell Suggs, Sam Bradford!?, Stephen Jackson) all of these players in real life are absolutely untouchable, outside of some sort of off the field scandal...but these are a few of the players actively being shopped here.

I'm more of a traditionalist when it comes to these things and in my own personal opinion, it would be better if we had a trading block that closely resembles what would really happen in the NFL. I feel like a lot of the rosters could turn into something that resembles results from a fantasy draft and I am far more intersted in sim-style, realistic moves being made.
 
Some teams need more help than others, this is my problem with limiting trades and even limiting isn't always fair because I could make 3 trades involving 10 players and you could do 3 trades involving 3 players. That's why the system in place is the best.
 
[quote name='Mr Grand Cru']Some teams need more help than others, this is my problem with limiting trades and even limiting isn't always fair because I could make 3 trades involving 10 players and you could do 3 trades involving 3 players. That's why the system in place is the best.[/QUOTE]

Then maybe we should limit the number of players you can trade......some teams do need more help than others, no question. They are given first crack @ free agents....presumably they get to pick the best players in the draft....
 
Obviously I don't see a 10 player trade being made let alone being passed on here, so that's just being ridiculous. Thats why I said trade wisely. I agree that it should be more realistic, sim style since that seems to be what ubernes is going for in the league.
 
As far as Ramesu comment I see what you mean but what may seem untouchable in real life is different on the Madden gridiron, because of how players are rated, and the playing style of those respective owners, now with the system of approval that's in place, I believe this is the only way that trades will work the most fairly because in a league of thirty two human players no matter the outcome someone will disagree.
 
To hydro I wasn't saying one ten person trade I was thinking moreso like three three player trades vs three one player trades, ..... ten would be ridicolous and take a lot of time to negotiate.
 
[quote name='RamesuThe1']Yes, but not everyone subscribes to the idea that "stars" shouldn't be dealt, the concern seems to be more about perceived fairness based on the current ratings in the game....(Brian Orakpo, Terrell Suggs, Sam Bradford!?, Stephen Jackson) all of these players in real life are absolutely untouchable[/QUOTE]

Terrell Suggs was shooped in two of the past three seasons in real life... the reason he's being shopped by me is cuz #1, he has done next to nothing for my defense, #2, his coverage skills are non existent(which is why he plays DE now) and i use a lot of zone coverage, #3, he's the only player of value i can trade and get something that i NEED like a CB of WR that can come in right away and contribute. I would love to send Willis McGahee or Tom Zbikowski or Paul Kruger or Kelly Gregg or a plethora of other players away to get something substantial but the bottom line is nobody wants to trade for old guys, or guys that arent figured to be a factor in a game. I'm with you as far as being a traditionalist (Grand Cru can attest to that), but my reality is i've lost 3 games this season... and thats 1 more than i lost in any other season i've been in this league. I know why i'm losing (when it's not the cpu dickin me) so i have to make sacrifices and adjustments. It's nice seeing Suggs' name but if u take a look at my season stats, Suggs might as well be on the bench the whole game.

Having said that, Suggs might fit in someone else's scheme and in return for him, i could get a CB that i desperately need or a WR to draw some attention away from Boldin. I wouldnt be looking to get Nnamdi Asomougha(spell check) or Revis... i would want a CB/WR in the low-mid 80's and under 28 years of age... i like to build my team to fit my playing style and Suggs just doesnt fit being a LB that cant cover AT ALL... I'm sure most of the people making trades are based on necessity but fairness and rationality need to be brought into the negotiations as well.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top