Hey Kori..

[Nbadan]

Shouldn't those well over the cap be made to surrender players who will bring them back into compliance? Otherwise, the bidding will continue to be unrealistic.

[Nbadan]

That is valid. You have to stay under the cap only in month 1, but you can lose your players in subsequent months if you don't have the cap room to keep them when they become FA's.

Isn't that unfair? I mean, who besides the person losing the player they overpaid in the first place, in any given month, is still going to have the money to pay FA's they had to release, even if their "open" cap space is only $1000?

For Instance, let's say that Cat wins Iverson, but is unable to meet salary requirements in subsequent month number 4, but since everyone else is already locked into 12 players with 5-6-7 month contracts, and close too or over the cap.

Cat is able to resign Iverson for a unrealistic $100,000 or worse yet $1 in open cap space?

[timvp]

For Instance, let's say that Cat wins Iverson, but is unable to meet salary requirements in subsequent month number 4, but since everyone else is already locked into 12 players with 5-6-7 month contracts, and close too or over the cap.

That is where you are misunderstanding the rules. You can go over the cap in subsequent months due to natural raises in the contracts. However, if you are already over the cap, you can't go out and try to sign someone else.

So right now, you must stay under the $43.8M cap in first month salaries. Even though there isn't a rule about what raises to use, it would hypothetically be wise to keep your caproom manageable for future transactions.