Nobody knows how much cap space anyone has.

Unless you haven't made up your mind yet or are otherwise just getting a crafty bastard, the standings page shows how much cap space you have.

So unless you're slow playing it, we all know you're sitting on $700 in cap space.

****

So....not slow playing, then.

Yes, we all know what kind of cap space you've cleared.

Free agency, 2012: Cedar Rapids, Richmond and Denver claim all the good talent. Everyone else gets shit. LMAO

LMAO

Im going my entire 444 on Sherman I will either get him or make my league pay

LMAOLMAOLMAO

This is actually more fun than the games sometimes.

I used to play online franchises in Madden and we had a hoot. A HOOT.

Offseason was the best.

Haha ya online franchise was insane sometimes.

Maybe Richmond, but the other 2 of you have 12 or 13 spots to fill with your $700-$800. I've got 3 spots to fill with my $300. Who do you think can afford to go higher on a single player?

Question.

League 1 has teams with 67,64,64 and 59 players on the rosters.

League 2 has teams with 65,64,64,63,63,61 and 60 players on the rosters.

How many days before the free agent auction are you going to require teams to cut to 53? The odds of them releasing players better than what is available is pretty good, and I'd like time to figure out who has been released. That just seems right.

Secondly, some of these teams appear to have been abandoned by their owners. Who/How is it decided which players will be cut from those teams?

That's 42 and 69 players just to get them to roster limit.
Some will be no brainer retired players, but some will have offered production in 2012, and some may still be on NFL teams. This stuff should happen prior to the free agent auction, IMO.

Third, the reason this came up is I was offered a trade from a team with 59 players on the roster. I don't think it's right that teams can be offering trades while holding more than the roster limit now that a free agent system is in place.
Nothing against the dude that offered the trade, but that is as flawed as being able to trade players without contracts now that the contract system is in place.

BTW, I'm just offering input in case it helps.

Good points all.

Technically, teams don't have to be down to 53 players until free agent bidding starts on June 9th. And now that I think about it, they don't even have to be at 53 then. They just can't bid on free agents until then. We may have to make an adjustment to that rule to get them to 53 by the start of free agency for the reason you mentioned.

We're developing a nifty automated system to handle roster cutdowns and contract signings for abandoned teams. It's not in place yet so if someone's abandoned their team I may leap into the fray on June 8th and do it for them. I need to send some reminders to teams first, though, because I'm not sure who's abandoned and who's just bidiing their time, thinking and pondering and paciing in front of their desk as they ponder their roster moves.

If they're really abandoned, I'd take on another team.

Cool. I'll inquire. My suspicion is that people are just laying low, but if anyone is having cold feet about the intense pressure and fan scrutiny of running a Sandbox team, I'll let you know.

After a little evaluation of The Sandbox, I thought I would share my findings with the group.

Named roster spots on offense = 18
Named roster spots on defense = 17 (4-3) or 16 (3-4, I assume, both my teams run 4-3)

The breakdown goes thusly:
Offense
LT
LG
C
RG
RT
QB
TE1
TE2
TE3
WR1
WR2
WR3
WR4
WR5
FB
HB1
HB2
HB3

The question is to the team owner as to how many positions to carry back ups at.
Positions with built in depth seem less necessary to carry them than solo spots.
BU Tackles can be found to cover both sides, and a G/C combo can cover one interior line issue.
BU QB seems a must, but how about BU FB? You can adjust your offense to compensate for the loss of multiple skill position players, so BUs everywhere but QB seem a luxury more than necessity.

Defense got interesting to me, seeing as we've not chosen yet for this season. Like I said, both my teams run the 43, and I think I see a distinct advantage to running the 34 in The Sandbox. I'm assuming the NT rotation isn't three deep, obviously, if it is, then it's fine. I know the 43, so I'll use that here:
RDT1
LDT1
RDT2
LDT2
RDE1
LDE1
RDE2
LDE2
WLB
MLB
SLB
RCB
LCB
FS
SS
NICK CB
DIME CB

Same thing on defense. How many BU LBs can you get away with? If you can get a combo LB, can a team carry just two BUs?
It seems it's unavoidable, you need to carry at least 6 DB, but can you adjust your nickle and dime defenses rather than carry BUs at those spots?

Figure in a punter and kicker for two more named spots and that is 37 names to plug in.

After those 37 names you put in, the question is can a street free agent perform reasonably as well as someone you commit contract dollars and years to?
That number, IMO, seems to be 3-6 justifiable BUs on offense and 2-6 on defense.
So what I've found is that a roster of 42-49 seems to be a fairly responsible number to land around for a Sandbox team.
Or is that just stupid?