[USML Announce] USML Rules Voting

[SpringKerb at aol.com]

Jeff:  I think we're basically in agreement.  You wrote:

> As for the extra headroom in the salary cap, it was my original proposal to have the headroom match the floorroom, i.e. a $320 cap.  There was concern that this would be too 
> restrictive given a $100 FAAB budget

That's what I was referring to.  Because Option C would effectively kill the FAAB inflation, we could consider going to a more symmetrical floor and cap (although reserve roster salaries also add a bit of upward pressure).  It's not something that I think there's a great need for, but I think that might more of an issue than raising the floor.

On your other comment, about the effect of the floor, I don't think forcing teams to carry dead players just for their salary is consistent with what we're trying to achieve here--that was part of my point.  From experience, I think the existing floor is sufficient to keep teams from dumping excessively, while allowing a reasonable amount of rebuilding for the future as well as some flexibility for all the things that happen in the course of the usual season.

There's also no reason a $200 team can't remain reasonably competitive.  Last year, I finished 5th with a $200 team, with $86 tied up in Kevin Witt and Brian Roberts--so it was effectively probably more like a $100 team.

Mark