Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 20, 2008 13:45:22 GMT -6
However, we should have a clause that prohibits eliminated teams from playing the WW. I totally disagree in a dynasty/keeper league with the above; in a redraft league this is understandable. A little biased?  First, do you really think that some random FA that pops up in week 15 or 16 will suddenly become a stud? The only players still FAs during the playoffs will be the 2nd and 3rd stringers getting PT because the starters ahead of them are being rested. Those players will become irrelevant next year, and if they will hold relevance, it will be very minimal. Scour the FA pool and give me 1 name w/ stud potential. If you find 1 then that player shouldn't be a FA, w/ 360 players being owned. Second, locking out eliminated teams would come w/ the territory of sucking during the regular season, and the early rounds of the playoffs. The WW would be a small reward for those teams still competing during the postseason. |
|
|
|
Post by Neil (OC Outlaws) on Nov 20, 2008 14:32:08 GMT -6
I totally disagree in a dynasty/keeper league with the above; in a redraft league this is understandable. A little biased? First, do you really think that some random FA that pops up in week 15 or 16 will suddenly become a stud? The only players still FAs during the playoffs will be the 2nd and 3rd stringers getting PT because the starters ahead of them are being rested. Those players will become irrelevant next year, and if they will hold relevance, it will be very minimal. Scour the FA pool and give me 1 name w/ stud potential. If you find 1 then that player shouldn't be a FA, w/ 360 players being owned. Second, locking out eliminated teams would come w/ the territory of sucking during the regular season, and the early rounds of the playoffs. The WW would be a small reward for those teams still competing during the postseason. Matt Cassell two weeks ago was potentially WW fodder; today he is potentially a dynasty gem with his impending FA on the horizon come March 1, 2009. Backups who are soon-to-be FA get the chance to audition and sometimes come from nowhere to be studs. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 20, 2008 14:49:50 GMT -6
A little biased? First, do you really think that some random FA that pops up in week 15 or 16 will suddenly become a stud? The only players still FAs during the playoffs will be the 2nd and 3rd stringers getting PT because the starters ahead of them are being rested. Those players will become irrelevant next year, and if they will hold relevance, it will be very minimal. Scour the FA pool and give me 1 name w/ stud potential. If you find 1 then that player shouldn't be a FA, w/ 360 players being owned. Second, locking out eliminated teams would come w/ the territory of sucking during the regular season, and the early rounds of the playoffs. The WW would be a small reward for those teams still competing during the postseason. Matt Cassell two weeks ago was potentially WW fodder; today he is potentially a dynasty gem with his impending FA on the horizon come March 1, 2009. Backups who are soon-to-be FA get the chance to audition and sometimes come from nowhere to be studs. ...but not during the last few weeks of the NFL season. In this league, any player, like Cassell, who has been thrust into starting positions, were gobbled up by us immediately, since we have so many roster spots to deal w/. By now, every backup RB is owned, every rookie RB who is 3rd string or better is owned, most backup QBs are owned, and most 3rd string WRs are owned. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 20, 2008 17:12:37 GMT -6
Not every back RB is always owned... Let the record show that JJ Arrington was just recently picked up, dropped and picked up again. The defense rests.  As for my 0.02 - WW/FA pickups should absolutely be allowed during the playoffs. And I don't see why only the playoff teams should be allowed to continue to make moves in a dynasty league. What are you afraid Senor Wiz? ;D |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 21, 2008 10:56:08 GMT -6
I don't see why only the playoff teams should be allowed to continue to make moves in a dynasty league. i.e. During week 16 before the Championship game, one of the two contending team's starting QB gets rested, and the veteran QB backing him up gets the start. That player may or may not be good, and will probably perform at a lower level than what the 1st string QB would, but he may get enough pts to help one of the contenders win a game. The league member who owns that QB wants to put a WW bid on his backup getting the start, since he suddenly has a void in his roster. However, an eliminated team decides to pull a dickhead move and pickup that player w/ no intention of keeping him for mext season, and the team playing in the Championship gets screwed over. Is that fair? Dynasty format is different, but w/ 360 roster spots, there is no talent left in free agency at the end of the season, other than old-ass backups. I actually like TD Machine's suggestion of allowing everyone to play the WW during the playoffs, but the contending teams have priority over eliminated teams. That seems fair for everyone. As far as the trade deadline, I agree on a week 13 Sunday deadline. |
|
|
|
Post by Bill (Fog City Force) on Nov 21, 2008 11:14:58 GMT -6
I don't see that happening, if it does, it will be obvious and Brad/Chris will have the support from the rest of us to veto the deal. Not sure how easy it is for Brad to shift the priority protocol at playoffs to shift priority ahead to those still "alive", if it can be done I wouldn't have a problem with that.......
|
|
|
|
Post by Brad (Texas Hellfire) on Nov 21, 2008 11:51:07 GMT -6
Not sure how easy it is for Brad to shift the priority protocol at playoffs to shift priority ahead to those still "alive", if it can be done I wouldn't have a problem with that....... It's as easy as going in and changing some numbers on a single page under LM tools . . . is this the system we want to use? reset waiver priority during the playoffs so that the playoff teams have priority over non-playoff teams? Priority will be in reverse standings order, playoff teams first then non-playoff teams behind them. As teams are eliminated they move into the non-playoff part of the priority list. I can do it . . . just remind me if the order looks hinky during the week. |
|
|
|
Post by johnboora on Nov 21, 2008 12:57:38 GMT -6
Not sure how easy it is for Brad to shift the priority protocol at playoffs to shift priority ahead to those still "alive", if it can be done I wouldn't have a problem with that....... It's as easy as going in and changing some numbers on a single page under LM tools . . . is this the system we want to use? reset waiver priority during the playoffs so that the playoff teams have priority over non-playoff teams? Priority will be in reverse standings order, playoff teams first then non-playoff teams behind them. As teams are eliminated they move into the non-playoff part of the priority list. I can do it . . . just remind me if the order looks hinky during the week. You already know this what I agree with so this has one vote. |
|
|
|
Post by Bill (Fog City Force) on Nov 21, 2008 13:25:46 GMT -6
TWO VOTES
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 23, 2008 11:46:38 GMT -6
Not sure how easy it is for Brad to shift the priority protocol at playoffs to shift priority ahead to those still "alive", if it can be done I wouldn't have a problem with that....... It's as easy as going in and changing some numbers on a single page under LM tools . . . is this the system we want to use? reset waiver priority during the playoffs so that the playoff teams have priority over non-playoff teams? Priority will be in reverse standings order, playoff teams first then non-playoff teams behind them. As teams are eliminated they move into the non-playoff part of the priority list. I can do it . . . just remind me if the order looks hinky during the week. Fine w/ me. |
|
|
|
Post by Gregg(Seal Fuckers) on Nov 23, 2008 13:18:33 GMT -6
i disagree completely, locking teams out of waiver priority because they dont make the playoffs is stupid. it should be the same way for everyone. YOU HAVE CRAZY AMOUNT OF ROSTER SPOTS PREPARE FOR IT NOW. if you dont its your own fault people shouldnt have to hold your hand threw everything and help you out, you all have brains prepare pick the players up you might need if you dont its your fault. This will become an annoying topic for me if it works the way all the playoff teams want it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Gregg(Seal Fuckers) on Nov 23, 2008 13:31:08 GMT -6
im a boarder team i have no idea if ill make it or not. And my opnion will not be different if im in the playoffs or not. To get an advantage over a weaker team because your in the playoffs or not is not fair. What if the injury replacement for kerry collins is chris simms, who the titans have said they want to resign that has long term future should a team like undertow get that advantage for future seasons because they had a better season nope.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 23, 2008 18:17:32 GMT -6
3 votes yes, 1 vote no, for the waiver priority deal.
So what about the trade deadline. If it does change, is it effective next season, or this week?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 23, 2008 19:17:32 GMT -6
So what about the trade deadline. If it does change, is it effective next season, or this week? The trade deadline has already been eliminated. There is no deadline during the season. As for the great debate... as much as it kills me to admit this... I have to agree with the general.  If you are playing for this year/you are in it... prepare for your playoff run now. Start dropping players for your backup QB's and WR's. And please... make your roster cuts good ones. I've still got dead weight on my team! ;D But seriously... I don't understand why we are having this "issue" with 30 man rosters. |
|
|
|
Post by Gregg(Seal Fuckers) on Nov 23, 2008 21:29:41 GMT -6
As for the great debate... as much as it kills me to admit this... I have to agree with the general. But seriously... I don't understand why we are having this "issue" with 30 man rosters. trust me it sucks agreeing with you. and the 30 man roster is why im so confused too ive got so many players ive done nothing with that are just usless spots being filled |
|
