Flip Bid Rules Question

[Great White (Shark)]

I went back to the rules forum & read the Flip Bids Rules and Guidelines thread, but just to make sure I understand,

Will take place after Training Camps,
The startng Flip Bid is decided by the first flip bid bidder, right? It does not start at the points that the player was signed with, Right?

Example: DE Richard Bayless signs for 45-points to USCTs, UMHs place a 1-point Flip Bid on him, USCTs & UMHs exchange points bids for a little while, but UMHs won with 10-points. So, DE Richard Bayless become a UMH, right?

[Justin-Texas]

That is not correct. Read about it here:

http://www.pcfl.site/forum/viewtopic.ph ... p+bid#p665

Dean may be moving the timing this season, but in your example, Miami would be paying 55 points (45+10) to sign him, or USC, having already paid 45 points, would be paying 5 more (10/2) to keep him. USC would not be bidding, they would simply have the choice of options once other teams have the high flip bid locked in.

[Great White (Shark)]

That is not correct. Read about it here:

http://www.pcfl.site/forum/viewtopic.ph ... p+bid#p665

Dean may be moving the timing this season, but in your example, Miami would be paying 55 points (45+10) to sign him, or USC, having already paid 45 points, would be paying 5 more (10/2) to keep him. USC would not be bidding, they would simply have the choice of options once other teams have the high flip bid locked in.

I read the same thing & understood all of it & still cannot find where it says (in the same example) it would cost Miami the original Bid + additional points to beat the competition for DE Bayless. Now, do I think, in this example, Miami should NOT include original winning bid in the cost of Flipping De Blayless, NO WAY, but it just does NOT say that.

[Dean-Tennessee]

At the time of asking that question, Miami had 96 points bid on 3 players, including S English, HB Hudson, and LB Johnson. He lacked the points to try to flip DE Bayless, he would have to match the 45 CPU bid plus add to that, assuming flip bids are allowed on the CPU 5-star player bids, which we did not answer one way or another in the rule. We should close this loophole before the next recruiting season.

Given he posted the question on Sunday, the same day he tried to dump his bids on LB Johnson and HB Hudson, this could be another reason he decided that afternoon he didn't want to pay 96 points for the 3 players he massively bid the price up on. If he had planned on flipping DE Bayless, he should have focused on over-bidding S English and saving the rest of his point for a flip bid on DE Bayless.

[PCFLCommish]

I just read the flip bid rules again to check this. If a team whose player is targeted for flip chooses not to match the flip bid, the benefit for that is getting their original bid points back plus some compensatory points. Since CPU teams can not bid on other players o bid beyond the initial 45 point bid on the 5-star player, it means they cannot match since the single 45-point vid is the only attempt they have to win a 5-star player. Additionally, getting point back for the player being flipped is of no benefit since they can not bid on other players. Give those conditions, I think we should interpret the rule as not providing for flipping CPU-signed 5-stars, and we should note this in the rules for future recruiting seasons. Given that THREE CPU bids on 5-star were outbid by human coached teams, I think it's clear teams knew the way to obtain those players was to bid on them rather than hope to attempt to flip them.

[Steve-UCLA]

I fully agree. No flipping of CPU 5 stars allowed after the 5-star round. Your only chance to "flip" them occurs when the 5 star recruiting round is in progress and you bid 45.5 or more points on their player.

I do think a CPU team that loses a 5-star bid to a human coach should be compensated the following season with an additional 5-star bid though. So in the case of Colorado losing the QB to me, they should get two 5-stars next off season.

[PCFLCommish]

Each recruiting season we create a total of 21 5-star players that are the right number for 18 teams. This recruiting season we had 8 CPU teams bid 45 points on one 5-star player each. Three of those were out-bid by human-coached teams and FIVE of them were signed by CPU teams for 45 points. This appears to have worked if the goal was allowing CPU teams to have a shot at signing a 5-star player. And the 3 that signed with human-coached teams, it removed more than 135 points from the bidding economy that did not chase the other 5-star player in the recruiting process.

CPU teams are allocated TWO 4-star players per team to keep them competitive. The average teams, in our current process, wins 1-2 5-star players each recruiting season.

The question we can debate for the future recruiting seasons, is should we continue this system of CPU teams bidding on 5-star players as we just did, or should we eliminate this and simply allocate a signe 5-star player per CPU team, that would still come from those 21 5-star players created?

[Justin-Texas]

I think simply allocating them could work fine. Maybe Dean could simply list which ones have already committed to the CPU teams when the recruit pool is released? Also, it would seem sensible to me for this allocation be done for all recruits, not just the 5-stars.

[PCFLCommish]

The general idea I had for keeping CPU teams reasonably competitive in their rosters is to allocate one 5-star, two 4-stars per CPU team and a sufficient number of 3-stars to replace their seniors and bring them back to 53 players on the roster. We did that with the 4-star and 3-star players with this past recruiting season.