|
|
Post by Brad (Texas Hellfire) on Mar 9, 2012 11:51:44 GMT -6
It was discussed several times during this past season (mostly via PM's, so I do apologize if this subject surprises you) but I feel as if the Crush's ownership is not up to the standard of this league and need to be replaced by someone more invested and more active.
The waiting list is now 2 years old, but we should still follow procedures if we choose to replace Chuck. James' friend Mike is currently at the top of the waiting list.
This will be a discussion on whether Chuck will be replaced or not. Should we kick him out due to lack of activity on a level that befits this league over the past two years or should we go another year? He did not win a game this year, failed to set lineups a few times and has generally been an absentee.
I vote for new ownership . . . how do the rest of you feel?
Chuck, please weigh in if you log in and see this . . . your thoughts count just as much as everyone else's as long you are a part of this league.
|
|
|
|
Post by ludloca on Mar 9, 2012 12:29:44 GMT -6
To Brad and league owership! I know that my level of activity is not what it should be and what I woud like it to be. I am going to agree with Brad as much as I would like to stay in the league I also understand you guys want someone more active. If you guys vote to kick my ass to the curb I understand and have no hard feelings. If you vote to keep me around I do have a co-owner ready to help me out this year. Joe Frisch AKA the Bus Driver is excited to get be part of the league. So just let me know how the vote turns out.
Chuck
|
|
|
|
Post by Brad (Texas Hellfire) on Mar 9, 2012 13:36:24 GMT -6
That's why we have discussions before we start voting  . . . just in case some situations have changed. With a co-owner on board I have no problem with the Crush continuing forward . . . how does everyone else feel? |
|
|
|
Post by Chris (RI Irish) on Mar 9, 2012 15:57:29 GMT -6
I guess I feel that he should of been setting lineups every week and that he has had his chance. Its nothing personal,but I would vote to remove him from the league.
|
|
|
|
Post by Chris (RI Irish) on Mar 10, 2012 10:51:29 GMT -6
Everyone is suppose to weigh in on this!
|
|
|
|
Post by Peter (Swamp Dragons) on Mar 10, 2012 18:53:17 GMT -6
The fact that Crush is aware of his less than stellar attendance the last few seasons, and has gone out and gotten himself a co-owner to help run his team, should give the Sonoma County Crush 1 more season to pick up the activity. After this season if we find it still lacking then we make a move.
I vote 1 more.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 11, 2012 15:48:32 GMT -6
With the co-owner now on board I am willing to retain Crush under the current ownership. And see how it goes for the year. But he gets this year to improve activity. If at any point during the 2012 season Crush's performance is not up to par he should be bounced eout during the season and new owner be put in. It would not be hard to do this and gives him at least the chance to proves he wants to be in league. You can discuss this with the #1 prospect on the waiting list and have him "on deck" during the season just in case the teams activity fails to change.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bill (Fog City Force) on Mar 11, 2012 20:19:27 GMT -6
I'll agree Chuck needs to step up his game, and I think he admitted that in his post above. I'll also vouch for his co-owner (Joe Frisch), I have played in neighborhood leagues with Joe for 15+ years, he has won his share of titles....Having said that, I concur with Ryan and Peter and suggest he is placed on a (1) year "Probation" period where if he slips up he will be replaced ASAP. I look forward to the task ahead with Chuck and Joe and very much hope they can quickly re-build their aging disgrace of a team! |
|
|
|
Post by Neil (OC Outlaws) on Mar 12, 2012 7:17:50 GMT -6
Agree with most here. I would have been for replacing Chuck as an owner (even though he is a friend) due to his lack of inactivity and generally apathy. The fact that we wants the opportunity to correct his actions, recognizes that he wasn't active enough, and is providing a legit co-owner is reason enough for me to give him another chance.
I agree that he should be on "probation" and that if his activity level does not increase, then he must be replaced.
I sure hope they can rebuild that dumpster fire of a team!
|
|
|
|
Post by Rob (MN M357's) on Mar 12, 2012 8:04:01 GMT -6
Im on board with a probationary period as well. If a co-owner will help becoming more active, then it will help the league entirely. I know for me theres been times ive not even bothered looking at Chucks team for trade potential as i knew it could likely be a long time before i heard back from him, so ive not personally had any issues other than fielding a true weekly lineup.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 12, 2012 10:30:52 GMT -6
I've been waiting to see if anyone could vouch for the proposed co-owner with Chuck.
If Bill and Neil are okay with it then that works for me. However.. this probation period should end with zero tolerance with incomplete lineups. Ie: bye weeks or l
injured players not covered. An acknowledgment of a pm within a reasonable amount of time couldn't hurt either.
|
|
|
|
Post by Neil (OC Outlaws) on Mar 12, 2012 12:29:14 GMT -6
However.. this probation period should end with zero tolerance with incomplete lineups. Ie: bye weeks or l injured players not covered. This is a must based on his previous track-record....this absolutely effects the integrity of the league. While not responding to a PM is irritating and the sign of a real douche, putting a reasonable starting lineup in every week is a must and IMO there should be a zero tolerance policy going forward for Crush on this issue. |
|
|
|
Post by Brad (Texas Hellfire) on Mar 15, 2012 15:33:05 GMT -6
The general consensus seems to be one probationary year added for the Crush with his new co-owner . . . I have gotten this process started, asking for Joe's contact information after he gets an account here. Thank you all for your input.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 17, 2012 21:01:41 GMT -6
This is the first I have seen this thread, so I will now weigh in, though probably too late.
I vote to boot Chuck.
Absolutely nothing personal whatsoever, but my friend Mike is a no BS FF player, will never leave his lineup unattended (even after eliminated from playoffs), and will promptly respond to offers on a daily basis. He is also known for proposing trades with other owners, pretty much on a daily basis. He is very aggresive with trades.
My two major pet peeves with fantasy owners--what can probably be considered a violation of two of the most important golden rules pertaining to all leagues and owners--are those who don't address their lineups before their matches, and those who don't check in to their leagues at least twice a week during the season to field any trade offers. The offseason may be slower as far as fielding offers, but in dynasty, effort must still be made.
Again Chuck, nothing personal, you're a good man. However, this is a free league and therefore I believe it is not as big of a deal to you as it is to the rest of us (granted this league is likely not a top priority league for any owner here). If you had money vested, I would certainly have a harder time not giving you every chance I could. Honor and participation are mandatory for this league to continue to be at peak competitiveness.
|
|
|
|
Post by Chris (RI Irish) on Mar 18, 2012 9:39:37 GMT -6
Maybe we should post a poll on this topic?
|
|
. . . just in case some situations have changed. With a co-owner on board I have no problem with the Crush continuing forward . . . how does everyone else feel?
