You can't get a new contract agreed when a player is on a 1 yr deal, hence he'll become a FA at the end of the season.

I'd suggest this stipulation is amended.

Seems to me the NFL has had more 1 year "prove it" deals. As a Miami fan, Moreno, Finnegan had them. Indeed the biggest rationale for being allowed to have them here would be Brent Grimes. 1 year deal, impressed, parlayed into a multi year deal.

I can understand the rationale behind the way the game runs, was wondering if the "prove it" deals could be modelled here. I'd suggest maybe this should be limited - each team can have a limit of say 1-3 players with 1 year deals where you can renegotiate during the season. Once that limit is hit, others become FAs as at the moment.

For these prove it deals, if implemented I'd suggest that they can only be a low-ish figure for the 1 year with the stipulation that the subsequent offer has to be above a minimum value - market related?

The benefit for me would be you often get players you're not entirely sure about as a fit so you'd not necessarily want to commit at that point to more than a season to see how they perform, fit in the system etc. At the moment, you have to offer a minimum of a two year deal. That basically makes 1 year deals pointless for the most part. Limiting the number of these prove it deals means you have to think very carefully about offering them.

Aye, I hate this rule. Bit potty if you ask me

I don't disagree with the rule per se - it would kill FA even more having everyone doing 1 yr deals and then renewing straight away.

What I'm suggesting is allowing a very small number of such deals per team per season to be allowed.

Personally, I like the way 1 year deals work now.

I only offer 1 year deals to players who are basically just getting me to the 53 man limit. If I think a player has a chance of actually getting some significant playing time, I'll offer at least a 2 year deal.

I think it makes the FA period more interesting when there are more decent players available. Allowing owners to re-sign 1 year deal players would reduce the number available.

Agree totally on the latter point which is why I'd limit it to a very small number you can renew. The only reason for 1 yr deals at the moment is one-and-probably-done deals for a player to get you over the hump.

But those special deals would be for the better players that otherwise would have been FAs that might be signed by someone else.

Not necessarily. If it's a "fairness" notion, well, those players would have been FA's / undrafted prior to a team bringing them in on a 1 yr deal, so everyone had the opportunity to offer tham a contract in the first instance.

Scenario.

I see a player for my weak secondary, stats are low but may or may not be promising.
I want to see how he fits into the scheme, how he works out.
I've 1 of the say 2 "prove it" deal slots left so offer a 1 yr deal.

He does well - I sign him. No difference to offering a 2 yr deal as far as FA is concerned. All slots have been used, I can't use them again.

He does poorly - cut/traded. May work out for another team.

Well that works right now, but when this new fatigue comes into play having a strong 53 man team is going to be paramount.

OK, keep the rule as is, and they go FA, but factor in (somehow) favor to the team they were on the previous season, maybe offering a longer more lucrative contract?

I don't understand what all the fuss is about.

If you don't like the 1 year deal rule, don't offer 1 year deals. Simple.

So remove 1 yr deals from the game all together in that instance.
That way, you want to check if a player may be a "steal" you have to up front offer a multi year deal.