"Should players need to be retired to get under roster limits, the manager should do that on their own..."

How can we do this in Session 9 and 10, once the transfer deadline has passed?  If you don't have an Age V (or older) player who you can turn into a BRB, there's no way for us to generate a roster spot.

"...(else the commissioner will do at his discretion)."

Does this mean we would email you and say who we want to retire (presumably for no money) and you would use your discretion to follow our wishes?

I'm open to opinions on this.   Retiring a player for no money sounds reasonable (lose the money but avoid the fine).  

Sounds like a reasonable course of action for a situation that really should never occur.

agreed

"Sounds like a reasonable course of action for a situation that really should never occur."

I'll say again, I have 30 players, which includes 8 youths. If one of those youth players get injured in session 8 I need to sign another. I can't trade away a player, nor convert to BRB and so can't sign another player. Obviously it has never happened in United before.

I think the reason you are getting the "its no big deal Steve" reaction is that it hasn't occurred...yet.  :-)

What typically happens at the deadline is that teams sell off 1+ players to earn some income before they age.   Not all teams do, but "many" do.  

The reason is that while its nice to have those "extra 2 CP" at the end of the season (and potentially the following season), teams know they have to make room for the following season's SBY's and auction pickups.

So for your team, the current age IVs are mostly off limits as 3 of 4 will already age into BRB territory and the 4th will if you elect to CP him in one session.

But moving down a tier...your III/8 player is worth 240k this season and 60k to start season 2.  Or your II/9, worth 350k now, 160k next season as a III/6 who becomes a IV/2 (value 0k) in season 3.

On the one hand all of these players are CP earners until they retire.  On the other hand if no one retires there's no room for new players next season.   And if, for example, the III/8 doesn't retire by the session 8 deadline, you can still retire him after session 10, but its at his season 2 (60k) value.

So those are the tradeoffs in play later in the season and its perhaps why we're all so cavalier about "oh that hasn't happened before".   :-)

With all that said...

I would like some opinions on this (as its really a manual, commish intervention, sort of deal):

Perhaps a fine (because the rules say you can't sell after the session 8 deadline; and I like that rule as it forces managers to decide on keeping players for a little more CP or getting income before they age) and then the sale of a non-injured/non-suspended player at the manager's discretion.    I'd set the fine at 40k but am open to opinion.

I've been in United since the beginning. I don't recall this ever being an issue, though it is possible, especially with Dancin' Dave lurking around.

I like Al's proposal.  Pay the 40k fine.  Sell off a player of manager's choice (non-injured/suspended).  Otherwise, you could simply sell off the injured youth player and replace with a new one, albeit a 0/0, yet still reap the full CP benefits of keeping around the full 22 older players on the 30-man roster.  Or else sell a player you couldn't use in session 10 anyway (due to 2 or 3-game suspension) and still get the max $ for him before aging sets in.

Al's proposal makes sense to cover this unlikely scenario. However, can I clarify something Al said:

"Players that are age V or higher CAN be converted to BRBs after the session 8 deadline and before the session 10 deadline."

In such a case, would the BRB be age I on conversion, and so age to II during the Close Season?

Ellis: Yes, a player that converts to BRB always converts to age I.  As you noted, that would mean a player converted to BRB during session eight would start the following season at age II.

Brian: thanks for that.

With what you say Al about making room for next season's auction buys and what Kevin says in reply to my other forum post it seems like it's best to sell the player rather than take the CP anyway.