I think we need more discussion on it. Once we get are season started we will vote on it again, but we can discuss it now. Even I am confused. I believe the purpose was to say that if you renegotiate a player, whether you match or don't match, you will have to pay at least 20% of the contract as if it were on a 1.0 contract. So, if you don't match, you get a cap penalty of 20%. If you do match, it has to be at, at least 20% of the contract. Below is wording I thought I about using. Does this make sense?
When a player is renegotiated and no bids are made, the controlling owner must pay a penalty of 20% of the original contract amount on a 1.0 contract. In other words, the salary cannot go below 20% of the original amount for the controlling owner. This still allows owners to get out of bad contracts, but not for nothing. If the highest bid is less than 20% of the original contract and the controlling owner wants to match, he will be matching at the 20% mark. If he does not match, the player will go to the highest bidder, for the highest bid amount. If an owner does not match on a CR player, he will still pay a cap penalty of 20% of that players salary, however this allows that owner to not have to keep that player on their roster.