RMF: RIFC 2005: Regular season discussion #1 [RotoGuru Football Forum]

RotoGuru Football Forum View the Forum Registry XML Get RSS Feed for this thread	Self-edit this thread

0	Subject: RIFC 2005: Regular season discussion #1 Posted by: Guru - [330592710] Wed, Sep 07, 2005, 11:09 Let the games begin! We'll start with this thread for regular season discussion.
1	Guru ID: 330592710 Wed, Sep 07, 2005, 11:10	I should probably comment on the rites of succession for next year. I believe (correct me if I'm wrong) that there are two AAA leagues and one AA League this season. If so, I'm leaning to the following tentative plan: Teams to be invited to the 2006 RIFC: 1. me 2. The top 4 playoff seeds in the RIFC 3. The RIFC Playoff winner 4. The top 2 playoff seeds in each AAA league 5. The playoff winner in each AAA league 6. The playoff winner in the AA league This list will provide anywhere from 9-13 teams, and these teams will receive an invitation next year as long as there are no "issues" related to this season's performance (attempted collusion, behavioral problems, etc.) Additional teams will be selected from among the remaining playoff teams in the RIFC, the remaining playoff teams in the AAA leagues, and the top regular season team in AA. Selection from among those teams will be determined by me, based upon a variety of factors. Priority list of teams which will qualify for a AAA league in 2006: 1. RIFC teams not invited to be in the 2006 RIFC 2. AAA playoff teams not invited to be in the 2006 RIFC 3. AA playoff teams not invited to be in the 2006 RIFC Qualification for additional AAA slots, if any, will be determined next summer.
2	Doug *Leader* ID: 02730280 Wed, Sep 07, 2005, 15:52	Looks like we have a free pick 'em contest included with our site (picking our games, not real NFL games). I went ahead and submitted some... anyone else planning on participating? You have until 9EST tomorrow evening to post your picks.
3	Athletics Guy ID: 184715 Wed, Sep 07, 2005, 16:04	Does it keep track of our picks throughout the season?
4	Doug *Leader* ID: 02730280 Wed, Sep 07, 2005, 16:05	Dunno but I would assume it keeps track of aggregate results over the season (not just each week).
5	Guru ID: 330592710 Thu, Sep 08, 2005, 10:50	Challenger - I note that Ware is listed as a LB, yet you somehow seem to have him in a DL slot. Did they drop the DL option for him since you set your starting lineup? Or are they allowing him to be used as either a DL or LB? I didn't think the system would allow you to set a lineup with the incorrect position configuration. If there is a brewing issue here, we need to head it off before the season starts.
6	Doug *Leader* ID: 02730280 Thu, Sep 08, 2005, 11:06	I'm pretty sure Challenger set his lineup, and since then Fanball has changed Ware's position designation to be LB (more detail including email quotes from fanball in a prior thread, I forget which... draft discussion maybe?). Basically they said there is no dual eligibility... but that they would continue to review individual player eligibility to make sure they had their players properly assigned. Guys like T Suggs and D Ware and Adalius Thomas are all hybrid players and thus tough to designate, but they were going to review before the season to try to make sure they had them in the right slots... sort of a "buyer beware" situation (IIRC, Challenger didn't know they might be shifting eligibility when he drafted... but he also didn't know that they wouldn't be).
7	Guru ID: 330592710 Thu, Sep 08, 2005, 11:19	What do others think of this? I've never played in a game where a player could lose eligibility at a listed position after the draft. I have sent in a ticket to Fanball to find out our options, although I suspect they will confirm Doug's story. That leaves us with several options. 1. We can stick with Fanball's LB position designation for Ware, and force Challenger to adjust. 2. We can figure out some way to allow the league to continue to treat Ware as a DL. 3. We can figure a way to allow Challenger to treat Ware as a DL, but if he is ever dropped, Ware reverts to the Fanball position designation. There may not be an efficient way to make the override, but one approach would be to code the roster criteria to allow an extra flex IDP and remove the DL requirement. We would then have to enforce the DL requirement manually - i.e., Challenger would be allowed to treat Ware as a DL, but every other team would be required to have a listed DL in one of the flex spots. Feedback?
8	Bandos *Sustainer* ID: 279492419 Thu, Sep 08, 2005, 12:03	I am leaning toward 1 AFTER week 1. He was drafted in good faith as a DL, the game changes his designation, we need to allow for Challenger to make adjustments. I dont think he will be allowed to put him at DL after week 1.
9	I_AM_CANADIAN ID: 41713300 Thu, Sep 08, 2005, 12:22	Hmmm... So his lineup would currently be "invalid", and he doesn't have an extra DL on his bench. On top of this, he set his lineup on the 29th of Aug, so we have no guarrantees that he'll see this problem before this evening. No matter what, I think we got to let it slide this week (Unless he's willing to correct his lineup himself before hand). Correct the points and standings manually for his team. Personally, I think I'd go with option 1. ie... if Troy Brown starts starting at WR, the he shouldn't be listed as DB anymore, thus a roster move would be needed.
10	leggestand *Leader* ID: 451036518 Thu, Sep 08, 2005, 12:25	Easiest solution is 1. Fairest solution is probably 3. I assume Challenger picked Ware knowing that he was a LB listed on Fanball as a DL, so, he used a draft pick that he may not have used on Ware at the time without this knowledge. I think we can trust each other enough to ensure that everyone has a DL for as long as Challenger has Ware. So, my vote is for 3 (as of right now).
11	Guru ID: 330592710 Thu, Sep 08, 2005, 12:34	I don't think this evening has any lineup implications. He can still make lineup changes after tonight. By Commissioner fiat, I'm going to rule that he is able to use Ware as a DL for week 1. I assume I'll have to adjust the league roster specs to permit that. The bigger question is how to treat the rest of the season. I'm leaning toward 2 or 3.
12	BoNkA ID: 1687813 Thu, Sep 08, 2005, 14:07	I like option 1 because he isn't the only guy who plays on the line and drops back to play LB as well. Now the only thing is he was drafted as a DL. The other thing is I'm sure almost everyone had in the back of their minds that this guy might get switched to LB at any point in the season. This to me is a somewhat risky pick that should not have been relied upon. Now despite what I just said, I would also be ok with 3 since that is more fair and I wouldn't want to be in that position.
13	Doug *Leader* ID: 02730280 Thu, Sep 08, 2005, 14:35	I totally agree on allowing him as a DL for week 1. I think going forward, this should be standard practice. If a player (such as Troy Brown) has his position designation changed... the affected manager can continue using that player at their former position for 1 week (or maybe 2)... but after that must have made appropriate moves to accomodate the change in position. This issue was brought up at the time Ware was drafted, and I agree with BoNkA's assessment... I actually assumed Ware was a LB and didn't even consider him on my cheatsheets accordingly. The DL designation was unusual IMHO (the other 2 IDP sites I use have him listed as LB as well). I think if a player switches positions, we should be required to play him at that new position, with a reasonable grace period allowed. Option 3 allows a manager to capitalize on a misdesignation for a full season. Even if the manager didn't expect the misdesignation (such as Troy Brown being converted to a receiver, Randle El or Ward to a QB, or any other such situation which might arise)... there still should be a limit. I think 1 or 2 weeks should be sufficient. Another reason I don't like option 3 is it opens a can of worms... so if I have a LB who gets converted to DL by Fanball... do I have to leave him as an LB? Or can I elect to use the new designation. At what point do I need to make this decision? Can I change my mind later on down the road? Etc. etc. Same questions apply for option 2 actually. Option 3 seems wildly unfair to me. In short, mine is a strong vote for option 1 with a 1 or 2 week grace period to make the change. Option 2 is a distant second... option 3 shows favoritism to a manager who happened to have a player on their roster at the time of the switch. If he has the option of retaining the old position, we all should.
14	Doug *Leader* ID: 02730280 Thu, Sep 08, 2005, 14:37	Ugh... sorry for the linebreaks in prior post... it's a friggin' IE on a Mac issue! I forgot to add in a bunch of BR tags and push the ignore line feed button. Sorry! =-p
15	Guru ID: 330592710 Thu, Sep 08, 2005, 15:11	I don't view Option 3 as a "favoritism" issue. If you pick up (or draft) a player, you should be able to use him at the position you drafted him under. If his position changes after that, and you release him into the F/A pool for any reason, anyone picking him up at that time knows what the current position eligibility is. Similarly, under option 3, I would argue that Challenger should not have the ability to use Ware as a LB unless he first drops him and then picks him up again (after waiver processing). Everyone had an initial chance to draft him as a DL. Everyone should have a similar chance to add him as a LB. I know that the issue was raised shortly after Ware was drafted. However, it was not raised before he was drafted. If Challenger took care to look up the position eligibilty before the draft, and if that position was not an obvious error (since either position could have been justified), it seems unfair to me to lose that eligibility.
16	I_AM_CANADIAN ID: 41713300 Thu, Sep 08, 2005, 16:13	I think we need to set precedence now for how we'll deal with other potential issues in the future. I think option 1 covers this with less dispute. Of course as stated, I think their should be some leniance, or a grace period for the manager to properly adjust/substitute that position.
17	Ender ID: 406351010 Thu, Sep 08, 2005, 18:12	I have thought about this off and on all day. My knee-jerk reaction was of the tough luck, sucks to be Challenger variety. He knew it was possible when he drafted him and now he needs to deal with it. I'll confess that the pre-lunch part of my day was below average. 6th graders can put you in that mood especially when you are an 8th grad teacher forced to deal with them. Anyway, at this point, I think he definitely gets a pass for the weekend. I also think he drafted him in good faith planning to play him at DL and take advantage (not in a bad way) of the greater potential for tackles when he dropped back to LB in some sets. If it's not cumbersome to keep him at DL then I say we do it. This is one more issue where the grunt work won't fall on us, but on Guru so I'll default to him as to what's "too much trouble." I guess I'm saying I'm voting for option 3.
18	Ender ID: 406351010 Thu, Sep 08, 2005, 18:13	Defer not default :P
19	Taxman ID: 029463114 Thu, Sep 08, 2005, 18:44	#1
20	StLCards ID: 31010716 Thu, Sep 08, 2005, 19:13	What I find interesting is what their rules are going to be moving forward. What if a DB is moved up to LB during the year due to an injury or vise versa? Maybe a TE becomes a FB? Is fanball going to change the designation mid-season or once the season starts are positions fixed?
21	Guru ID: 330592710 Thu, Sep 08, 2005, 20:19	I haven't heard back from Fanball yet, but I would be really surprised if they would make any changes after the start of the season. They probably figured that a change before the start of the season wasn't disruptive. But maybe I give them too much credit. Manual administration really isn't a problem, since I would simply code the system to accept more flexibility than we really allow. We'd only need to ensure each week that every team had at least one DL (except for the Ware exception).
22	GoatLocker ID: 060151121 Thu, Sep 08, 2005, 23:35	Thought about it all day, and 3 works for me. Cliff
23	Athletics Guy ID: 184715 Fri, Sep 09, 2005, 02:10	I vote for option #1.
24	kev ID: 043111845 Fri, Sep 09, 2005, 10:37	#1 after week 1, which I think he got a bit screwed on. For this week, I think he should be able to use Ware as a DL, as it wasn't noticed until right before gametime.
25	I_AM_CANADIAN ID: 41713300 Fri, Sep 09, 2005, 10:47	So far voting basically looks like: Votes for 1: 6 Votes for 3: 4 No Doubt Challenger will vote for 3 also, only leaving: Undecided: Bonka
26	Guru ID: 330592710 Fri, Sep 09, 2005, 10:56	I wasn't necessarily putting this to a vote. I think this only calls for a commissioner ruling. I did ask for feedback, to help me decide. I'll rule later today. I did get an email from Challenger on this issue. I think he's understandably steaming on this, but I thought his comments were useful perspective: "As I already stated in the other thread at the time of drafting Ware, I verified Fanball and Yahoo had Ware listed as a DL before selecting him on Kafenatid. I only visited those two sites as I didn't expect anyone to run to Fanball and get it changed. Would anyone else??? A day or two after I drafted Ware, checking to see if I would need to draft another DL on the possibility of a position change, I went and checked to see how other popular sites had him listed. Rotoworld, Rototimes, ESPN, CBS Sportsline, and NFL.com all had him listed as DE or DL. With 5 more sites confirming each other, and since I do not backup this position except for the bye week due to the short bench, I chose to follow through with my original plans and not draft a another DL starter or backup even though I still had ample opportunity to draft a quality DL. Also, after I drafted my last required starting position, DB at 18.12, I set my lineup and at that time I had no red glaring lines indicating my starting lineup was out of whack. Ware is a defensive player which plays multiple positions as the Cowboys defensive scheme calls for. He is not a LB misdesignated as a DL. He plays both positions, as a matter of fact he even plays DB when Dallas is in the 3-4 defense and the offensive team has a slot receiver. Ware's job is then to cover the slot. When the Texans play Dallas in the preseason, the Texans went into a hurry up offense their 2nd series with 3 wideouts against Dallas's 3-4 defnese and put Andre Johnson in the slot whom Ware was forced to cover until Dallas finally was able to get into their 4-3 nickel package at which Ware then went to DE."
27	Ref ID: 539581218 Fri, Sep 09, 2005, 11:06	Sorry to butt in, but as an outsider and not playing in any RIFC games, I'd say to be totally fair to Challenger, he'd get to use him at DL. But, I think if Fanball is like most lineups, once he changes his designation (i.e. bench him for his bye week) he won't be able to put him back at DL. So then if he is permitted to keep him there he still has to keep him in his lineup for the bye week and receive 0 points or he can switch him out and lose his eligibility there. I think it's absurd, that they change a player's position after the draft and not allow for multiple positions. Challenger shouldn't be penalized for this. He drafted him in good faith and should be allowed to keep his guy at that position if the site allows it. I'll butt out now. ;)
28	Guru ID: 330592710 Fri, Sep 09, 2005, 13:18	Commissioner ruling: I’ve given this quite a lot of thought. My original inclination was to go with option 3, which would have grandfathered Ware’s DL status for Challenger, but forced a reversion to the current LB designation for any subsequent manager. This had the advantages of allowing Challenger to use him in the way he had every right to expect, and would not disadvantage others to the extent that they would know his status if/when they picked him up. It also meant that if Ware was ever dropped, we would no longer need to manage the discrepancy. But, assuming that fairness dictates that Challenger should get continued use of the DL eligibility, even this isn’t quite fair to Challenger. That’s because it would diminish any trade value that Ware might have. If a potential trading partner could not use Ware as a DL, then Challenger still has damaged goods. As I discussed above [post 15], I don’t see option 3 as a favoritism issue. If anything, it still penalizes Challenger somewhat, given the trade issue I just described. If Fanball had simply left Ware as a DL, there would be no issue. And, as Challenger has discussed, the DL designation is not a clear error. Either DL or LB eligibility could be justified. Fanball’s ultimate classification as LB may be the best alternative in a vacuum, but their decision to make the change after the draft has been completed is simply unacceptable, in my opinion. I have never played in a game where a player can be drafted under one eligibility criteria, and then subsequently had that eligibility eliminated. That might be justified if the original eligibility was clearly an error, but that is not the case here. It’s been interesting to see the various viewpoints expressed above. It’s particularly interesting to see that the preferences seem to favor either option 1 or option 3, split fairly evenly. But I’m going to rule option 2. I think we all would prefer that Fanball had simply left things well enough alone. Option 2 puts us back in that position. Option 1 is unfair to Challenger, and option 3 creates artificial asymmetries that just don’t seem necessary. Therefore, for this entire season, Ware will be eligible as a DL only, regardless of the team that he is on. No team will be allowed to use him as a LB. Although I have yet to hear back from Fanball on this issue, I assume that this will require a manual workaround. Thus, here is how we will accommodate this adjustment: 1. The Fanball system will coded to enable a team to hold 0 DLs and up to 3 LBs. This will allow Challenger to keep Ware in a DL capacity. 2. We are not changing the general league rules, however. We are only doing this to trick the system into allowing a team to place Ware into what should be a DL slot. Thus, barring any other position changes (which I don’t expect), every roster without Ware must still have at least one listed DL in the starting lineup. We will need to monitor this manually. I’ll try to review starting lineups each weekend, but I would ask your help in notifying me ASAP if you see a lineup that does not comply with the DL requirement. 3. If a team inadvertently has a non-conforming lineup after the freeze, I will use my Commissioner powers to change the lineup to bring it into compliance. I will not enforce an invalid week unless that team has no DL on its entire roster – in which case the breach would not seem to be inadvertent. Thanks for your thoughtful feedback on this.
29	Guru ID: 330592710 Fri, Sep 09, 2005, 14:45	Changing the topic... Since one game is in the books, please review the Fanball scoring for last night's game and let me know if you notice any discrepancies. Occasionally, the live scoring results don't get corrected until the scores are finally posted, but I'd like to be aware as early as possible about any potential scoring issues.
30	StLCards ID: 31010716 Fri, Sep 09, 2005, 15:00	I have a general scoring question, sorry if I missed it somewhere, but how are negative rush/pass yds handled? I see Brady had -1 rushing yds, but his score of 20.28 (in aol anyway) does not reflect a -.1 rushing yds. Do negative rush/pass/KR/PR yds just count as 0 then?
31	Guru ID: 330592710 Fri, Sep 09, 2005, 15:18	Negative yards count as negatives. In our league, Brady shows up properly as 20.18. There is a setting in the scoring rules that specifies how negatives are handled. Perhaps this isn't correctly set in your league.
32	StLCards ID: 31010716 Fri, Sep 09, 2005, 16:12	Another question. Is a blocked extra point scored the same as a blocked kick (+2) for a Team Def? I show in AOL the Oak D with +1.0pts (+2 blk punt, -1 30pts allw). Should it be +3? I can't seem to find the player L. Walker on Oak to see if he got credit or not.
33	Guru ID: 330592710 Fri, Sep 09, 2005, 16:21	For team defense, a blocked XP counts as a blocked kick. At Fanball, Oakland's defense correctly shows 3 points. IDPs do not earn points for blocked kicks of any kind.
34	StLCards ID: 31010716 Fri, Sep 09, 2005, 16:28	I just looked again and now Oak. shows +3 for TeamD and Brady's score is changed, although still not right (20.14 now), not yet anyway. Maybe AOL is making some adjustments or something.
35	Guru ID: 330592710 Fri, Sep 09, 2005, 16:33	For comparative purposes, here is the fanball listing of points for the Pats/Raiders game. Curiously, I see that it now shows Brady with 20.14 points, which seems correct. I thought I had seen 20.18 about an hour ago (post 31). Maybe they took away a passing yard in the meantime.
36	Guru ID: 330592710 Fri, Sep 09, 2005, 16:35	Brady: 2 passing TD = 8 306 passing yards = 12.24 -1 rushing yards = -.1 Total = 12.14 The stats agree with the NFL gamebook.
37	StLCards ID: 31010716 Fri, Sep 09, 2005, 16:37	That seems to be it for Brady. Earlier they showed him with 307 yds.
38	StLCards ID: 31010716 Fri, Sep 09, 2005, 16:45	Thanks for that listing Guru. There seems to be a few discrepancies that we need to investigate, of course it could just be that it is in an update phase and hasn't yet rippled over to AOL.
39	leggestand ID: 451036518 Fri, Sep 09, 2005, 17:02	My points for LaMont Jordan and Danny Clark were updated about an hour ago, as were my opponent's points for Kerry Collins.
40	kev ID: 043111845 Fri, Sep 09, 2005, 19:35	That opponent who almost started Kyle Boller, and is glad he didn't.
41	Guru ID: 330592710 Fri, Sep 09, 2005, 19:41	How do you know? Boller might go nuts!
42	kev ID: 043111845 Fri, Sep 09, 2005, 19:45	I know, I am still happy with Collin's results though. At the brief time when I considered starting Boller, I thought, Collins could throw 4 INT's in this game. He didn't and he threw 3 TD's, so I'm happy. And it's Kyle Boller. Even against the Colts D, I don't trust him.
43	Doug ID: 02730280 Fri, Sep 09, 2005, 22:57	Re: 21... I asked this question to Fanball as part of the discussion after Ware was drafted and they indicated that a player's designation could change mid-season, just like in real life.
44	Guru ID: 330592710 Sat, Sep 10, 2005, 16:55	I finally got the following reponse from Fanball regarding Ware: The player data updates with the official NFL stats. His position has been changed. There is no option to edit his position. If you have any further questions, please ask. That's a bit puzzling, since I just pulled up Ware's player page at NFL.com and see that he is listed there as a defensive end.
45	youngroman ID: 50818914 Sat, Sep 10, 2005, 17:35	on the official Cowboys website, Ware is listed as LB.
46	Doug ID: 02730280 Sat, Sep 10, 2005, 22:03	He's also listed as an LB on NFL.com's depth chart page (that's not a recent change though).
47	Sludge ID: 14411118 Sun, Sep 11, 2005, 01:30	Boller might go nuts! And what? Shoot someone the night before the game? :)
48	Ender ID: 406351010 Sun, Sep 11, 2005, 11:06	You heard it here first: Boller will have 20+ TD passes this season. Write it down ;) Maybe I'm the one going nuts...
49	Guru ID: 330592710 Sun, Sep 11, 2005, 13:34	Anyone able to get to Fanball's live scoring? All I've been able to get thus far is "Server too busy". As I recall, they had similar capacity problems for the first week last year. With the addition of the AOL platform, they may have bitten off more than they can handle.
50	TB ID: 031811922 Sun, Sep 11, 2005, 13:42	I was thinking the same thing. The live scoring for Exit 42 is now trying to open a pop-up window, verus just being a normal page, and it is doing the same thing.
51	Guru ID: 330592710 Sun, Sep 11, 2005, 13:45	I finally got as far as the pop up window, but it is stalling while trying to load.
52	Guru ID: 330592710 Sun, Sep 11, 2005, 14:00	Now the whole site seems to have vaporized.
53	Guru ID: 330592710 Sun, Sep 11, 2005, 15:26	And now it's working. Will wonders never cease! Maybe enough people gave up, thereby relieving the server stress.
54	Trip ID: 13961611 Sun, Sep 11, 2005, 18:29	Norm Cwho?
55	Sludge ID: 14411118 Sun, Sep 11, 2005, 19:59	When my tight end is the 2nd highest scorer on my team, I believe I'm in a spot of trouble.
56	Athletics Guy ID: 184715 Sun, Sep 11, 2005, 20:07	What a week for Doug! He barely gets a point from his QB and is still likely to wind up with a 140+ pt week.
57	Guru ID: 330592710 Sun, Sep 11, 2005, 20:09	Sludge - A negative from your QB certainly hurts. But, you could be Motley Crue, looking at Mike Anderson in your starting lineup, and Willie Parker on your bench! ;-} (Of course, he still has a good chance to go 2-0 for the day!)
58	kev ID: 043111845 Sun, Sep 11, 2005, 23:02	Unbelievable. Keenan McCardell sits on my bench, while I had Rod Gardner starting. Great move kev! Great move! I should still be able to steal a 1-1 for a pitiful lineup week. Or, if Brooking can be Dansbyesque, I might win 2.
59	I_AM_CANADIAN ID: 41713300 Mon, Sep 12, 2005, 01:28	Will be watching MNF with a lot of interest. I'm behind by ~30 Points in both my games. In one matchup, my opponents players are done, and the other he stills have Crumpler to go. I got to hope that McNabb/Trotter put up some really nice #s. If not 0-2 looks like a big possibility this week. Oddly enough, I went up against oponents that had Darren Sharper and Cato June this week. Nothing like having those IDPs going the extra mile for the team. Not that I'm complaining... my IDPs avg'd almost 11 points each so far.
60	kev ID: 043111845 Mon, Sep 12, 2005, 01:31	My last round pick, Julian Peterson, had himself a good game, also on my bench. I'm really upset about the Gardner thing- I didn't read anything on him being hurt, found him in no injury report, and there is Keenan McCardell, on my bench, with his 2 TD's. Oh, and Kyle Boller really does suck. A lot.
61	Doug ID: 02730280 Mon, Sep 12, 2005, 03:43	Re: 54 - Norm Chow knows that this is a team game, and that success does not hinge on the performance of any individual. As such, with the rest of my fantasy team providing solid performances, it would have been foolish to have McNair and the TEN offense put up gaudy numbers this week. Better to save those stats for next week and beyond, when they might really be needed. Norm Chow is a mastermind. You may not understand his ways, but this does not mean you ought to question his wisdom. Left, right... left, right... left and... Chow-Chow-Chow.
62	holt ID: 498451119 Mon, Sep 12, 2005, 06:49	fanball confuses me. do you have to wait til after monday night's game to put in waiver requests? I just tried to put in a waiver claim but I got that "players lock 5 minutes before kickoff" message. I know they're locked - I just want to make a claim. why does it give you an error message instead of a pending waiver claim? I don't get it. I'm used to yahoo. anyway, I'm commish of AAA2 so I need to make sure that this is normal.
63	Guru ID: 33856128 Mon, Sep 12, 2005, 09:57	holt - I don't recall whether that's the case every week, but there is a separate page for claiming players, and I can't even find that page yet. Fanball doesn't activate the claiming system until the start of week 2, presumably since priorities are based on week 1 results. So, I'd expect that ability to be available tomorrow.
64	Guru ID: 33856128 Mon, Sep 12, 2005, 09:59	... and even when the claiming system is up, it's still somewhat confusing. I know it took awhile last year before I had it all figured out. I'll try to remember how it works once it is up, and post some instructions.
65	BoNkA ID: 46744319 Mon, Sep 12, 2005, 10:11	Taking trade offers for Javon Walker. My already sub-par WR core is quickly going down the tubes and may make for a long season.
66	Ender ID: 285713 Mon, Sep 12, 2005, 11:33	Someone hijacked my handle and made that ridiculous Boller post. Yeah, that's it... It looks like I'm 0 - 2 as well this week, Yikes. My WR crew left a lot to be desired, though Ahman Green and the GB offense didn't help me any. Hopefully that will get better :(
67	BoNkA ID: 4085130 Tue, Sep 13, 2005, 01:05	When do we have til to submit waiver requests? I need to figure out what I'm doing tomorrow and want to make sure I have stuff in on time.
68	kev *Donor* ID: 043111845 Tue, Sep 13, 2005, 04:47	Even with Keenan McCardell, the #4 player this week riding the pine on both my rosters, and starting Rod Gardner on one team, I came out 2-0. That's a big sigh of relief.
69	Guru ID: 330592710 Tue, Sep 13, 2005, 09:51	Free agent claims are processed at noon Wednesday, so you must submit any claims before then. To submit a claim, go to the "Claims" link under the Transaction menu. You can submit multiple requests, and you can prioritize them, and you can rank order each claim. Hopefully, the instructions at the site are self explanatory. Do not use the "Waiver Wire" link for this weekly free agent claiming process. The only players who go on waivers are dropped players. Although the mechanics of the free agent claiming process are similar to waivers, these players are technically not on waivers, and you can be easily confused if you do not remember that distinction. Commissioners - if you are using Fanball or a related system, be aware that the claim priority lists for free agent claims and for waivers are not automatically synchronized. If a team is awarded a free agent claim, he moves to the back of that priority list, but his waiver priority is not correspondingly reordered. However, we want both claim priority lists to be in synch. Therefore, after free agent claims are processed on Wednesday, you will need to adjust the waiver priority list to correspond to the adjusted priorities coiming out of the free agent claiming process. It's a simple exercise, but one that you need to remember to do weekly. And, when we get to the point of the season that free agent claim priorities are not reset weekly (after week 6), then we'll have to "work backwards" prior to Wednesday each week, copying over the adjusted waiver priorities to the free agent claim priorities (if there have been any waiver claims in the past week). Fortunately, the free agent claim process occurs only once per week, at noon on Wednesday (or whenever you have specified it to occur). Other than that, the waiver process is the operative one. Clear as mud?
70	leggestand *Leader* ID: 451036518 Tue, Sep 13, 2005, 10:04	Well, I have been looking for almost an hour; and since I haven't found what I am looking for, I am just going to ask the question: Do we not get INT return yards for IDP's? I wasn't sure if we did, and the rules don't show it as a "point giving" stat, but it would sure be nice to have 8.8 points for return yardage for Darren Sharper. I bet we are not counting it, but I wasn't sure if this was one of those "manual adjustments" we had talked about earlier.
71	Guru ID: 330592710 Tue, Sep 13, 2005, 10:36	Not counting it. Never have.
72	Guru ID: 330592710 Tue, Sep 13, 2005, 10:39	I just put up a new page with 2005 RIFC standings, rosters, links. You can get to it by clicking on the RIFC icon on the blurb page, or via this URL: http://rotoguru1.com/foot/RIFC.html I may try to get the standings displayed directly on that page, but for now, I simply linked to pdf copies of the Fanball standings and roster pages.
73	Guru ID: 330592710 Tue, Sep 13, 2005, 10:46	It should go without saying, but if anyone has any questions about any aspect of their first week scoring, now is the time to raise it. Post 189 deals with our guidelines for challenging any scoring results.
74	StLCards ID: 2881469 Tue, Sep 13, 2005, 11:11	Does Fanball have the Monday night results added in already? I see final scores on AOL, but when I look at the weekly results I don't see the Monday night game even added in yet. Just asking since AOL is a Fanball product.
75	Guru ID: 330592710 Tue, Sep 13, 2005, 12:18	Monday Night results are included at Fanball.
76	Doug *Leader* ID: 02730280 Tue, Sep 13, 2005, 13:00	How do I view a list of "claimable" players and their week 1 stats? I've tried looking under the waiver wire, free agents, and claims menus, but no luck yet...
77	BoNkA ID: 8841312 Tue, Sep 13, 2005, 13:05	Player listings and only show free agents.
78	Guru ID: 330592710 Tue, Sep 13, 2005, 13:10	All free agents are claimable, so you can use the regular player listings, and select to see only free agents.
79	Doug *Leader* ID: 02730280 Tue, Sep 13, 2005, 13:19	LOL, and then, if I understand correctly, I have to manually select the players who I saw on the player listings page from the box of all players listed on the claims page (as opposed to just clicking on the player I want), right? Intuitive. =-p
80	I_AM_CANADIAN ID: 41713300 Tue, Sep 13, 2005, 13:19	0-2 was a bitter pill to swallow last night, even considering that I managed to get Trotter out of my lineup last minute (yes I had another IDP I could use), but it certainly was an entertaining week. Learn't a lot I think from that 1st week... let's hope I can do something to improve my team now? And just to confirm... their are NO players on waivers right now? http://fbc4.fanball.com/commissioner.fbc?prg=waiver&action=list&47735 "Waiver Wire There are no players currently on waivers." So... correct me if I'm wrong... but those who need to, should only be putting in FA claim?
81	Guru ID: 330592710 Tue, Sep 13, 2005, 13:41	Doug - sounds like you understand correctly.
82	Guru ID: 330592710 Tue, Sep 13, 2005, 13:45	IAC - correct as well. Only dropped players go on waivers, and if any players are on waivers at the end of the week, they are rolled into the next week's FA claiming pool. So at the beginng of the week, there should be no player on waivers. Players will begin to populate the waiver pool coincident with any FA claims tomorrow. Waiver claims are processed 48 hours after a player goes on waivers, so that first waiver claim won't occur until at least Friday noon.
83	Guru ID: 330592710 Wed, Sep 14, 2005, 12:08	Free agent claims have been processed. Starting at 1pm, you may add free agents directly. All players dropped as part of the free agent claiming are now on waivers. You may claim any of them on the waiver wire page. I adjusted the waiver priority list to conform to the free agent priorities, adjusted for today's claims.
84	I_AM_CANADIAN ID: 3579513 Wed, Sep 14, 2005, 16:16	hehe... I just decided to get back the two players that I had originally drafted. Nothing like 2nd guessing myself eh?
85	I_AM_CANADIAN ID: 41713300 Sun, Sep 18, 2005, 14:35	Guru... I need help... The Giants vs Saints game is tomorrow night, and yet Fanball is claiming (based on the old schedule) that their kickoff, is at 1PM. I want to process this FA move: Ron Dayne -> Will Smith, DL, NO but it's giving me this error msg: 1. Based on your league's regular season free agency rules, players are locked 5 minutes before kickoff of their game. Will Smith was locked on Sun 09/18 12:55p ET. Since the Denver game doesn't start till 4:15, I should be able to process this move no?
86	I_AM_CANADIAN ID: 41713300 Sun, Sep 18, 2005, 14:44	FYI - Posted on Fanball and got this ticket #117031.
87	Athletics Guy ID: 148291615 Sun, Sep 18, 2005, 18:39	It looks like I'm going to go 0-2 this week. Thanks a lot Braylon!
88	Athletics Guy ID: 148291615 Sun, Sep 18, 2005, 19:05	Ok, Ferguson's TD makes it a blowout. I never had a chance. I feel better now...I guess.
89	Guru ID: 330592710 Sun, Sep 18, 2005, 21:48	I_A_C[85] - I made the Dayne=>Smith swap for you. Do you want Smith or Strahan as your starting DL?
90	I_AM_CANADIAN ID: 41713300 Sun, Sep 18, 2005, 23:15	I'll make the matchup changes myself... for now... to be safe... just in case. Smith. Thx
91	Motley Crue ID: 33741217 Mon, Sep 19, 2005, 23:01	In case they aren't awarded tomorrow, I am missing some punt return and kick return yards for DB Darrent Williams DEN.
92	BoNkA ID: 198111923 Tue, Sep 20, 2005, 00:11	Man, why am I up against the top scoring team each week? I want new scheduling. I could have 2 or 3 wins :/
93	Sludge ID: 14411118 Tue, Sep 20, 2005, 00:43	Bonka - you weren't playing me. grin Sorry, I'm just rather happy with my team's performance this week. I just hope stat adjustments don't bring me down 7 points.
94	GoatLocker *Sustainer* ID: 060151121 Tue, Sep 20, 2005, 01:24	Doubt that. Would be nice though :) Cliff
95	Sludge ID: 14411118 Tue, Sep 20, 2005, 01:28	Well, I wouldn't go that far... Either way, the loser of our game can cry tough luck.
96	BoNkA ID: 11817208 Tue, Sep 20, 2005, 09:17	Ah, well, at the time of posting last night, Bandos was top score. But...close enough. I have the most points against so far anyways, haha.
97	holt ID: 50829194 Tue, Sep 20, 2005, 16:40	guru - is there a specific process in place for review of player stats for the week? I don't know when official stats are finalized each week, but I have a situation in AAA-2. I'm commish and it involves my team so I want to make sure it's handled correctly. I'm down in a game by 0.88 points. AOL is showing Roy Williams with 2 unassisted tackles last night. NFL.com shows him with 1, which is enough to change the outcome of the game. so I guess I need to know when NFL stats become official and finalized each week, and what website do you use as your source. also, I assume in a situation like this that all active players on both teams would have to have their stats reviewed, like a vote re-count? thanks.
98	Guru ID: 330592710 Tue, Sep 20, 2005, 20:30	My understanding is that the stats in the NFL gamebook are official. They show Williams with 2 tackles and 2 assists, plus a PD and a FF. This produces a total of 9 points. That agrees with what Fanball has. The stats on the "game stats" page at NFL.com are not as reliable.
99	holt ID: 50829194 Tue, Sep 20, 2005, 21:51	ok - thanks. I've never noticed gamebook before.
100	Guru ID: 330592710 Wed, Sep 21, 2005, 12:12	MC[91]: I adjusted your week 2 scores to add 9.16 points for the missing return yardage. They should be reflected in your totals later today. Your adjusted point total should be 130.70 for each of the two games.
101	Challenger *Donor* ID: 481126818 Wed, Sep 21, 2005, 12:32	Gur, Just sent you an email concerning the Waiver free agent claiming that was just processed.
102	Guru ID: 330592710 Wed, Sep 21, 2005, 12:39	Challenger has pointed out a glitch in claim processing. Until I sort it out, I have imposed a temporary moratorium on free agent pickups.
103	Guru ID: 330592710 Wed, Sep 21, 2005, 12:59	Ron Dayne should have been eligible for free agent claims. For some reason, the system treated him as ineligible. I assume the glitch resulted from fact that I had to use Commissioner powers to drop him after he was prematurely frozen. Several managers submitted claims for Dayne. If the process were done properly, Oaktown Raiders should receive Dayne as the 2nd overall claim. Oaktown would still get the Rossum=>Griffin claim in the second round of claims, as Griffin would not have been claimed by anyone else in the meantime. I believe that all other claim results should remain the same. Thus, I'll drop Curry and add Dayne to Oaktown's roster. Once that's done, I'll open up free agent add/drop capabilities.
104	Challenger *Donor* ID: 481126818 Wed, Sep 21, 2005, 13:11	Thanks Guru
105	Guru ID: 330592710 Wed, Sep 21, 2005, 13:15	I think everything is now fixed. Apparently, I was confused by one of the rule settings. There are two places to set up handling for dropped players. For the dropped player setting, I selected that dropped players cannot be picked up until 48 hours after they were dropped. For waivers, I said that dropped players must go on waivers for 48 hours. I also stipulated that any player who is on waivers at noon on Tuesday should immediately become a free agent. I dropped Dayne from IACs roster on Sunday evening. He went on waivers at that time, but dutifully converted to free agent status at 12:02 on Tuesday. However, that is apparently when his free agent clock kicked in, setting up a new 48 hour moratorium. I have now reset the settings to specify that dropped players can be added immediately. Of course, since we use a waiver system, the waiver period still kicks in, giving us the 48 hour waiver period we desired. Other Fanball/AOL commissioners should review their rule settings. I believe the correct dropped player setting is actually: "During the regular season, dropped player becomes available: Immediately" The Waivers setting should continue to say: "Players will immediately go to the waiver wire for 48 hours after player has been dropped."
106	Motley Crue *Dude* ID: 439372011 Wed, Sep 21, 2005, 13:59	Good to know that I would not have gotten Dayne no matter what. I thought about claiming him, and saw he was listed on the FA claiming list this morning. That was confusing because I checked his status all weekend and he was not on waivers either. Thanks for fixing the Darrent Williams score, Guru. If anyone needs a RB the Motley Crue Country Store is open for business. I will not laugh at any proposal, as long as you take a look at my roster and try to offer something that helps me.
107	Athletics Guy ID: 148291615 Wed, Sep 21, 2005, 15:30	Thanks Guru Glad to hear I have 3/4 of Denver's committee.
108	Athletics Guy ID: 148291615 Wed, Sep 21, 2005, 15:41	Heh, as it turns out, the Motley Crue Country Store has the one Bronco I need to complete my set. Do you guys have a return policy? :)
109	Motley Crue *Dude* ID: 439372011 Wed, Sep 21, 2005, 16:16	So you want Ventnor Avenue? Are you willing to part with North Carolina or a combination of Reading Railroad and Electric Factory?
110	kev *Donor* ID: 043111845 Sun, Sep 25, 2005, 18:19	At least no one can make fun of me picking up Adam "the pirate" Archuleta anymore!
111	Guru ID: 32802310 Sun, Sep 25, 2005, 18:22	I think I've been starting the wrong Manning!
112	kev *Donor* ID: 043111845 Sun, Sep 25, 2005, 23:13	Last week I go against McNabb in one game, and the Bears D in another. This week, I get Shaun Alexander in one game, and Steve Smith in the other. I need some luck!
113	I_AM_CANADIAN ID: 41713300 Sun, Sep 25, 2005, 23:32	Well... I don't think you've had Guru's luck in matchups so far... but I think teams like Bonka's have faced a pretty rough time of it so far.
114	BoNkA ID: 488492523 Mon, Sep 26, 2005, 01:49	Yeah, nothing like being 1st in PA. Not sure if I'll keep that or not, but it definitely looks like I'll be playing in one of those AAA leagues next year. My guys can't score points no matter what the team I play scores. I preferred last year's point leading :D
115	Sludge ID: 14411118 Tue, Sep 27, 2005, 02:10	Thank you LT, and thank you replay! Guru, when you posted the New England quote, were you aware of the extra 52 seconds added on the clock during the game? Either way, it's pretty funny in light of that.
116	Athletics Guy ID: 378572512 Tue, Sep 27, 2005, 03:41	I guess Ender wins the Bonka Award this week.
117	Doug *Leader* ID: 02730280 Tue, Sep 27, 2005, 06:14	He got an award named after him after Week 2!?!? Seems a bit premature... =-p Kev... the last 2 weeks he's been stellar... week 1 was more in line with my expectations... maybe 5-6 points tackles per week. Let's see what happens from here, I still think he'll wear down more heavily than most as the season progresses due to his back... but yeah, if he keeps playing the like the pirate of old, I'll respectfully admire your pick. =-)
118	Guru ID: 32802310 Tue, Sep 27, 2005, 08:30	Sludge[115] - wasn't aware at the time. That is pretty funny. For those who may not have seen the quote: “There always seems to be time for us to come back." -- Patriots receiver David Givens
119	Ender ID: 285713 Tue, Sep 27, 2005, 09:14	I thought I was going to pull it off last night. I'll take the split since I get to hang an L on Guru. I'd like to give special thanks to Larry Johnson for contributing to my cause :)
120	Guru ID: 32802310 Tue, Sep 27, 2005, 09:50	Yep, Larry was short of my needs by about 60 yards and 2 TDs. Close call!
121	BoNkA ID: 488532710 Tue, Sep 27, 2005, 12:53	So when will people start to feel bad an give me a head start against them? If my team were able to be bet on, my spreads would look something like: BoNkA +20.5 Oh well, what can you do. Someone has to stink and I guess it's my turn this year :D
122	GoatLocker *Sustainer* ID: 060151121 Tue, Sep 27, 2005, 13:08	Don't feel like the Lone Ranger. Cliff
123	kev *Donor* ID: 043111845 Tue, Sep 27, 2005, 21:00	And I guess I win the "who will play Guru when Peyton finally goes off sweepstakes" Sweet! And tell me how much I would rather have Brian Westbrook than Curtis Martin with Brooks freaking Bollinger as his QB.
124	Guru ID: 330592710 Wed, Sep 28, 2005, 11:03	I just looked up last year's RIFC standings after week 3. Three teams were tied at 5-1, and all of them made the playoffs. But then, Motley was 0-6, and he won it all. Suffice it to say, there's still plenty of time...
125	Sludge ID: 27751510 Wed, Sep 28, 2005, 11:25	Gee, thanks for reminding me that I was 5-1 with the second highest PF after three weeks last year, which is very similar to where I am now... If history repeats, I guess this is where I start scraping by with a sub 0.500 record... Don't let me down LT!
126	I_AM_CANADIAN ID: 41713300 Mon, Oct 03, 2005, 02:47	Well well... normally I'd end up cursing myself for making these "questionable" waiver moves... but picking up Rackers this week in order to start over (not a bye week cover) the #1 drafted PK in the game, ended up getting me an extra 16 points?! Man this game is crazy sometimes! Expecting 2W's outa my squad this week which was much needed. Even with that however, I'll still be sitting two games under .500 I'm open to trade talks right now, in case anyone is in the market to start considering some moves. My MSN Messenger: ben_sigmawave@hotmail.com
127	Guru ID: 330592710 Mon, Oct 03, 2005, 11:10	Without much thought in advance, I should probably entertain trade offers for one of my Mannings. It's nice to have a surprisingly strong QB on the bench, but if I could make a material upgrade to my RB or receiving corps, I would consider it.