Quote:
Originally Posted by Bingo
I've always wondered how a team would do, say in a generation (25 years) with a hard rule where you can't sign a single player past the age of 34.
28 year old wants to stay ... 6 year deal
32 year old wants to stay ... 2 year deal
And then at 34 it's year to year.
A lot of turnover. A lot of players leaving before the team or the player want them too, but cap space and likely assets with players getting traded.
I think you need to take it decision by decision, truly, but it would be interesting to put a rule in place and see where it takes you.
|
In my opinion this is the only way that you can stay competitive year after year without having to go through the cyclical downswings that lead to fans wanting to tank.
I would move it to 32 years old. Continually moving out players that are going for their third contracts and bringing in younger players, prospects, and picks. You would have to have a good scouting staff to make it work to an excellent level. In a lot of ways like the junior hockey models but with an extended life cycle.