TheRobSays wrote:I voted no and I also hate the idea of amnesty as I put a lot of work into my team and having room for free agents when they come due. Now after two years I could have dropped one of my fat contracts? No thanks.
So how else would you propose we get those managers like myself on a level playing field? By balancing out the rookie draft? Even in real life, teams have been "rebuilding" for what seems like decades (LA Clippers anyone?). And regardless of owner competency, I'm pressed to name a team of completely drafted rookies over a period of three years which was dominating by the third year. So that's probably not enough of an option to balance the playing field.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not asking to be where you are now
after two years of hard work. You've busted your ass to get your team where you want it, and you should be commended for that. But I'm sure there are a few other (if not most) "inherited" teams that aren't even where you
were two years ago
. They're actually worse off.
This is why the idea of a redraft DOES
appeal to me - if you're
so adamant about your work ethic, then I say let's reboot! That way I
can have a chance to show you MY
This argument can go in circles all day long - the bottom line is we're all
trying to find a happy medium so we don't have to resort to such a drastic measure as a redraft. Your opinion on amnesty is fine, and your entitled to it. However, amnesty is one of those things you may want to reconsider, simply because it completely avoids two other options - 1. A straight rebooting of the league, or, 2. Heaven forbid, a break up of the league.
Just something you ought to consider before you flat out, hands down turn your back on amnesty.