12

$5

$10

$2

$3

$1

$58

$16

$56

$14

$12

$51

$47

$10

45

$29

$51

$20

$42

$115

$27

$14

$25

$40

110

BILLION DOLLARS

$100

million dollars!

96

$1

4.13 DET picks RB - Xavier Jones - LAR

3.05 - Detroit Lions select WR - Devin Duvernay - BAL

With the 1.01 pick in the 2020 NFC Draft THE DETROIT LIONS SELECT. RB - Clyde Edwards-Helaire - KC

nope

last year the suplemental draft took place in july 10th.. since we are drafting afterwards why cant we just add supplemental draft players to our regular rookie draft?

against

i am against removing this.. it increases the the value of good qbs.. i am down for what james just said as well and i would be down for 5pts TD pass and -3 for INT.
NEVER superflex

im still in favor of this... cause its very unconfortable to call someone out for not being active enough. we already saw some tension recently about it. so we need a time in the year to stop e evaluate our owners.

i think our league is already deep enough. and i am against changing a WR to FLEX. allowing ppl to start 4 rbs is a recipe for potential unbalanced seasons imo. i think the league is great as it is now in terms of starting lineup. last year we already had to go deep to find starters in some weeks wh...

i vote yes

I would like to know if we have some sort of trade protection for IRL changes. Its offseason and i have about 7 trades offered right now. in case something significant happens to one of the players involved in those offers(retirement, trade, cut, etc) i would like to be able to review the trade befo...

i agree with pitt

i like the idea..
the owner of the pick will automatically monitor this.. and if he doenst.. his loss right

i like the idea as long as its not a substacial amount.. cause dollars are expensive for me lol

I am fine either way.

4 on the 1st
no limit on 2nd to 4th

agree.. and i also would not oppose the draft happening b4 the nfl draft. its just a adjustment in terms of draft strategy, but still fun.
but i am all good for this change

i agree with this change

no need for this.
i think trading faab away is a good way for bad teams to get assets and become relevant in a couple of years.

fine either way

against

agree

i think this change should come associated with a 5pts TD PASS
that would make good qbs more valuable and increase the value of the position overall

agree

agree

Disagree. Like how it is now.

totally disagree.
its a key part of offseason strategy. you can trade players at any moment b4 trade deadline.

vote against as well

i disagre..
maybe we vote for a terrible change at some point. we would force ourselves to play 2 seasons like that for no reason.

vote no

i vote no.
there is enough room for teams to manage their rosters on the offseason

i am fine with it either way

i think it is a good idea..
another idea is to just adjust TD score to 5pts
and INT to -3

rewarding good qbs and making it a more valuable position.
but i vote yes

i dont think is a good idea. it makes more likely for owners of bad teams to want to leave the league.

i think is fine as it is

i would like to wait a year and see cause we have the opportunity to see how it works irl.
maybe the nfl finds it to be a terrible idea and reverses it back. so would we do it too?
i am not against it the idea, but i would like to wait for next season

my vote is yes for this change

I disagree about cook being a knee jerk reaction.. i see players going for $100 plus this year as well. And i also disagree that teams will have less and less cap space moving forward as their starters begin to be players on original rookie deals. But i also dont think making people hold players for...

4.7 david sills - wr - buf

4.1 det picks qadree olison - rb - atlanta

3.7 DET takes RB - Bryce Love

2.12 - The Detroit Lions select Kelvin Harmon - WR - WAS

1.16 Detroit lions select AJ Brown - WR - Ole Miss.

$1

$7

$2

$13

$7

$11

$5

$1

$8

$9

$10

$98

$95

$92

$90

$50

$1

I think you should be able to keep your players as long as you can pay their salaries.
Fixing the salaries is the way to go. It's a no for me.

Oh i did not see that.. it makes a lot more sense then. I can agree with it now

i spoke my mind on the Topic "Remove the "no-bonus" award to Rookies".
Dont think this topic would make much of a difference.

i dont like the idea of trading Faab cause it goes away from real football so any rule that limits it i am all for it.
yes for me. 350 or less.

no for me. Not enough Qbs for a 16 team league.

I dont think its a good idea. Lets say you draft a Daniel Jones this year hoping he becomes good a couple years from now. And you have 2 startable QBs. If one of them gets hurt. Youre down to one. Youre out of QBs for the Bye week of your last startable QB. That would make you have to drop the guy y...

Its so rare that would be fun when it happens, so yes for me.

So, my vote is yes, starting as soon as possible. But i still dont think its the best way to deal with the problem. I will try to present a different solution for us to vote on as soon as i get some time to do it. Hopefully this next week.

This is the issue i have been banging my head around. I spent a lot of time simulating contracts of the most relevant players in the league right now to check what would their salaries be at this point with our league system. Just as an exemple: (Using the starting salaries at $5, which we are discu...

Its just gonna be dead money for too long. No for me on this one.

I understand the argument for removing K and DST from our league. But i also think the unpredictability these positions bring is a little fun. But i dont have any issue if people want to remove these positions. I am good either way on this one.

Lions are back rawr