| 0 |
Subject: Gurupie 24 2006 Regular Season Discussion III
Posted by: Ref
- Donor [539581218] Fri, Nov 17, 2006, 09:50
Last thread
Time for a new thread. |
| Only the 50 most recent replies are currently shown. Click on this text to display hidden posts as well. |
| 54 | Ref
Donor
ID: 539581218
Wed, Nov 29, 2006, 12:41
|
RE: 50
TB, I'm not saying that we should snake the supp draft, quite the opposite. I'm just saying that instead of just that, we've added several other things in recent year(s) to also help the weaker teams.
|
| 55 | TB
ID: 72253110
Wed, Nov 29, 2006, 12:57
|
I am formally proposing a rule that the waiver priority carries on from season to season and does not ever get reset.
This gives every team equal opportunity to grab a player of value depending on how long they want to hold on to their top priority. I do not suggest it has to be immediate, but that the vote be done prior to the beginning of next season and implemented (if approved) at the end of next season so that every team can use next season to implement the strategy they feel is best with this new change.
|
| 56 | TB
ID: 72253110
Wed, Nov 29, 2006, 13:26
|
Myboyjack #52 - I am formally proposing a rule that any major rule change (deemed major in the discretion of the commissioners) that is subject to a league vote be passed only upon a favorable vote by 2/3 of the league managers.
I have been chewing on this since last night. I think if it is approved, it should be applied to every rule change. I can't think of an issue that we've voted on that isn't major. If it isn't a major issue, it should just be decided by a commish decision.
I would also like to see voting results, whether it's by voting in the thread, or the final results by owner. I am having a hard time remembering if the NFL has any votes by secret ballot because it seems like we always get to read which teams supported or opposed rule changes.
|
| 57 | Ref
Donor
ID: 539581218
Wed, Nov 29, 2006, 13:44
|
I am going to have to start writing down every request we need to consider!
Others: WW moved from 2 days on players to one full day. To examine the FGs again to determine if they need to be tweaked (came after Bryant's long FG). The IDPs. The schedule. I know there were three or four other things that has been suggested privately.
Personally, the WW thing needs to be done. It's that way in all of our sports and the only reason we put it at 2 days here originally as we had to do it that way for CBS in order for waivers not to be run on Mon night. Now in commish setup, it runs on the days you tell it to. In a deep league, it'd tough when a guy makes a drop close to the deadline and no one else can get that player for another week. It would still be the same if you drop him on say a Sat. But I dropped Utecht yesterday. He's the starting TE for Indy now and no one can get him because of the Thurs. game. One day is plenty and I don't expect any resistence to that when we are ready to make rules changes. If there is, then we can have the vote and see.
I also like mbj's proposal of 2/3 for a major rule change, but last time he brought that up, only him cards and I agreed publicly and I felt that wasn't enough for a vote. LOL it would take a simple majority for the 2/3 majority vote to go through. Doesn't really matter at this point as I don't plan on having any voting going on during the season as far as next year goes unless it affects something right now.
TB's proposal. I will have to think about that. Interesting idea. May support that as well, but want to think it through first. These are the kinds of ideas that we need.
Here is my thinking on IDPs. I think they add a new dimension to our league as far as franchises having more value in terms of trading and ways you can still win even if you have a stud or two on bye weeks. It's hard when your killed b yguys on bye like I was one week and we've all been there sometime or another. Same thing goes for injuries. But point is that IDPs have a few studs, but they are not all consistent and after the top few, they are a literal crap shoot. If you have a bye week, you may even be able to drop your guy and get someone else as easy as you can finding a IDP that plays and drop an Offensive player. The thought even occurred to me that if you want two extra bench players for the IDPs, then perhaps we should make the starters go DL, LB, DB and two IDP flexes. RIFC for example uses 3 IDP flexes but with 16 teams instead of 24 and there is more than enough. Problem is that we'd have then 120 IDP starters instead of 96 like they do in RIFC. And by the time you add the bench player or two, it's going to be very thin. But then again, maybe that is for the best. Like I said, we want all of the input so we can frame things to the league's likes and dislikes and not just say here it is and vote on it take it or leave it.
In baseball we added prospects. I am not much of a fan of them and voted against them. They passed by a single vote. I do love the way they add another dimension fo our teams to improve or have value to trade. This year we added more power to prospects and even though my personal prospects stink and it will hurt my team now and next year, I voted for both of the proposals because I see how it can help the league. Hopefully, it will eventually help me as well.
What I do want to change about out G24 league though is the general feeling of doom that some people feel about their teams. When you start going south they give up or don't put much effort it--even early on. But more alarmngly was the past few weeks in trying to move Tiki to a contender. There were a few playoff teams--even this week--who said that they had no chance to win it anyway so why give up anything for a guy that's retiring. WOW!!! That is so against my way of thinking. I try and do everything I can and will overpay at times to try and shore up my team and take as much chance or luck out of the equation as I can. You never know what can happen. Look at bmd last year who managed to get into the playoffs after taking over a so-so team. If he had started the right player, he'd have won the championship over the dominating 49ers. There were several teams that had better records that bmd that didn't even make the playoffs, yet he was >< this close of winning it all. How outstanding is that! In H2H , weird things can happen. I'd rather take a risk and it not work out than find out later if I'd have done it, I would have won it all. After all, you don't know when the next time you will be in position to win it again. But that's just me and to each their own. There were some good back and forths and I had a great time--even with teams who weren't good fits. It's hard as Im usually the buyer and it was much easier than to try and sell players. I should have contracted out with Species!!! LOL
So if we can add a new facet to our game that will give people hope and promise that they have a chance to do something now or later with some of these changes then I'm all for it. Change is hard at times, but ultimately if the leagues wants to make a change, I'm going to figure out a way to embrace it and make it function to as well as possible for us. Not sure if some of these ideas will help us or not, but if there is a chance they might, then we need to do our due-diligence to investigate them before deciding.
|
| 58 | Ref
Donor
ID: 539581218
Wed, Nov 29, 2006, 13:50
|
Re: 56
I know that Guru's invitational leagues are posted in the thread and it works well, but I guarantee you no more than 1/2 to 2/3 of our league will cast their vote in a timely manner if we do that. Email vote usually gets 3/4 of the vote back immediately and the stragglers usually within a day. I have no issue with posting who voted for what (and I keep all emails for a couple days in case someone questions a certain vote), but when I did that in baseball, there were objections to that and they wanted it done in secret. I'd rather they be posted and held accountable for their vote ( I did that here after TB and someone else requested it and no one objected), but email is the way to go to get it done efficiently.
|
| 59 | StLCards
Leader
ID: 31010716
Wed, Nov 29, 2006, 14:29
|
I'm still looking for a flex player.
|
| 60 | Ref
Donor
ID: 539581218
Wed, Nov 29, 2006, 14:38
|
From CBS:
Why did Donald Driver's and Ahman Green's stats change?
Answer
The Elias Sports Bureau has made a statistical correction in the Green Bay/Seattle Monday Night Game. Ahman Green was incorrectly credited with a 7 yard reception just prior to the 2 minute warning in the second half. The reception should have been credited to Donald Driver. We have corrected the stats for both players. Ahman Green had a reception and 7 receiving yards deducted from his stat line. Donald Driver had a reception and 7 yards added to his stat line.
CBS has automatically adjusted this so there is nothing the commishs have to do (except change the record book for PD's game and adjust the overall records--which can wait until they fix themselves next week ;)) The scoring change gave PD (Driver) .7 more and took away that amount from TB (Green).
|
| 61 | TB
ID: 72253110
Wed, Nov 29, 2006, 14:50
|
After reading your thoughts, Ref, regarding the 2/3 vote I would like to see it get 2/3 of the vote to be approved. If we are going to ask that all major decision be approved by 16 owners, I would like to see 16 owners who agree with the decision. I know that MBJ and myself are two and if Cards feels the same way, then we just need 13 more.
As far as my proposal for the waiver priority to carry on from season to season, here are my thoughts. It doesn't hurt any team. Everyone has the opportunity to get a high waiver priority by being patient and waiting for the right player. Other owners, like me, will use their priority again and again when they want a player not worrying about getting the top spot. They way it is set up right now, if you start the season with the 15th priority, you might not get the top spot all year and then it starts over again next year. Really, I don't feel that strongly that it has to change, but if there are teams that feel like they always miss out on the top free agents before week 6 ever comes around because they are always fielding a competitive team, this is an opportunity to put teams on equal ground.
|
| 62 | StLCards
Leader
ID: 31010716
Wed, Nov 29, 2006, 15:00
|
Reminder:
Note that all players used in the playoffs must be on your team for the last game of the regular season. Therefore there are no acquisitions once the deadline before the first game starts for the last week of our regular season. i.e. No add/drops during the playoffs. Waivers/Add/Drops will be turned off at the freeze of Week 13.
|
| 63 | Great One
ID: 539581613
Wed, Nov 29, 2006, 15:52
|
I can't believe I won the Pick Em last week - I literally made those walking out the door for Thanksgiving vacation - didn't even look at the matchups and just took all the teams in the left hand column (I think it was left) and I put up high score lol...
Maybe I should have done that all season instead of using rational thought and analyzing the matchups! :)
|
| 64 | Ref
Donor
ID: 539581218
Wed, Nov 29, 2006, 15:53
|
Re 61 as I said before I WANT the 2/3 vote on major rules. Tweaks--simple majority is fine IMM. If you are in agreement with that, then that makes 4 and we are about to the point where that can be voted on. As far as 2/3 to get 2/3, I like the concept but that would need to be in the proposal as well I think. Seems fair though. I hate when rules just barely get passed (i.e our keeper rule--one vote 13-11, baseball japanese player rule 11-9). But there are going to be those that vote no, simply because they don't like change it seems. Still if there are enough of those, then maybe it's not good enough to be enacted. Albeit, IDPs, scheduling change and even the WW change would be major rules IMM.
|
| 65 | THK
ID: 810422114
Wed, Nov 29, 2006, 18:46
|
I reluctantly just made a deal with GO. I'll post my thoughts on it tonight...
|
| 66 | Great One
Sustainer
ID: 053272014
Wed, Nov 29, 2006, 18:54
|
Is the deadline to pick up a free agent for the rest of this entire season tomorrow night 11/30 then?
If so, will there be a way to push that trade through after its reviewed? Cause I'll be one player short after the unbalanced trade and don't want to just leave an empty spot all the way into the offseason.
|
| 67 | Great One
Sustainer
ID: 053272014
Wed, Nov 29, 2006, 18:56
|
And I just flew in from Indiana (where I had a gun to THK's head forcing him to negotiate!) and boy are my arms tired :)
|
| 68 | Peter N.
ID: 581018320
Wed, Nov 29, 2006, 18:57
|
bj21 - offer on the table...I think it is what you are looking for. Let me know when you get a chance. Thanks!
|
| 69 | blackjackis21
Dude
ID: 034837521
Wed, Nov 29, 2006, 19:06
|
Done and done, Pete. Thanks.
|
| 70 | Peter N.
ID: 581018320
Wed, Nov 29, 2006, 19:15
|
bj21, thanks for the quick response. Figured that was what you were looking for. I like this trade for both of us. Now I just need McNabb to have a healthy recovery and for Moss to get traded. Enjoy Reggie Wayne. He was one of my favorite original draftees.
|
| 71 | Ref
Donor
ID: 539581218
Wed, Nov 29, 2006, 19:37
|
I just got home and glanced at the trades. One looks to be no issue, but I have a question about the other one and I want to ask one of the traders personally to make sure first. If that person can get back to me, I can prob approve it right then.
GO, in this league, the commishs review the trade when they get it and can approve it immediately. The league can vote to overturn the commishs decision. We don't approve our own trades unless it is unavoidable (one is out of town w/o access for instance) or it is a trade between the two of us. Still, the league can overturn those as well. So to answer your question, if your trade is approved tonight then you can pick up another player immediately. All transactions will turn off for the season at this week's freeze tomorrow. (5 mins before game time).
|
| 72 | Ref
Donor
ID: 539581218
Wed, Nov 29, 2006, 19:53
|
Two more trades I just approved:
Dallas Cowboys
·Martin, Ruvell WR GB
·Wayne, Reggie WR IND
St Louis Rams
·McNabb, Donovan QB PHI
·Moss, Randy WR OAK
Minnesota Vikings
·Barber, Marion RB DAL
·Bironas, Rob K TEN
New York Jets
·Chambers, Chris WR MIA
·Texans, DST DST HOU
·Vinatieri, Adam K IND
Offer: deal also includes GO's 2nd round pick in 07 aquired from TB
|
| 73 | Great One
Sustainer
ID: 053272014
Wed, Nov 29, 2006, 20:01
|
On a side note, I'd be willing to trade my #1 pick next year for a starting RB or top WR (or possibly a top TE). Shoot me an offer or email, I'll be at work all day tomorrow to field any offers.
|
| 74 | StLCards
Leader
ID: 31010716
Wed, Nov 29, 2006, 20:08
|
GO, maybe we should talk.
|
| 75 | THK
ID: 810422114
Wed, Nov 29, 2006, 20:18
|
StL believes in Romo!
|
| 76 | THK
ID: 810422114
Wed, Nov 29, 2006, 20:45
|
Ok my thoughts on the deal:
Barber is a young very productice player, yet the weakest part of my lineup. Right now though he relies on TDs alone. A 3DRB and GL guy isn't normally starting worthy. Barber is just having a blessed year in regard to TDs. I tried to trade him pre-season, even though I liked him. Now his value was about as high as it would go unless he actually gained a starting job. Jones has been productive and Barber has 4 yrs more on his contract in Big D. Sure if Jones gets hurt again Barber steps in, but right now was the best value I could get.
Chambers is having a terrible year of course. However, Chambers is on pace for 184 targets (39.8% catch rate). Last year he had just 166 (43% catch rate) targets but a better catch rate and more TDs. So clearly he is still being looked towards but Harrington is having some problems getting him the football and the yards he gained last year. In the end I viewed Chambers is high risk - high reward. Being that Barbers value is so high I felt it was worth the risk because of Chambers immense potential.
Not to mention I add a stud K for a great offense - so I don't have to worry about that. Also get a 2nd rounder to hopefully pick up a role guy for next year. Then I was able to get him to add the Texans who play Oakland and Tennessee in consecutive weeks which could help me put up more pts next wk and in the first round if I make it.
Hopefully it works out for both GO and I - meaning Chambers can live up to his potential down the stretch and next year while Barber keeps getting in the EZ.
I am still skeptical that I will score more points than AtL next week --- assuming I can even beat SF with my matchups. It is going to be a fun finish though...
THK
|
| 77 | Myboyjack
Dude
ID: 014826271
Wed, Nov 29, 2006, 20:52
|
Rain and thunder in Cinci tomorrow night, THK. I just bought my big orange poncho. The rain might actually help your Palmer/CJ combo.
|
| 78 | Ref
Donor
ID: 539581218
Wed, Nov 29, 2006, 21:08
|
RE: 48
Another problem with having room to stash players is that we have 24 teams and there are only 32 NFL teams. So that means at most 8 teams can have a 2nd QB, TE, K or DST. Obviously with bye weeks trades need to be made so teams don't have to go w/o one of those players. If some teams can stash 2 or more of them then less trading and it is more often that some teams have to go without players on a given week.
|
| 79 | blackjackis21
Dude
ID: 034837521
Wed, Nov 29, 2006, 22:08
|
Re: 75 - yeah, I figure if he's good enough for Jessica...
Who knows, but looks like he can be at least mediocre. I love Reggie Wayne, and frankly am sick of Mr. headcase and Mr. season-ending-injury. Both those guys could be great next year, or they could both stink. I didn't feel like gambling on them and am happy to have Wayne. I hope for Pete's sake (pete's sake! - never hear that, I bet) they work out.
Also, for what it's worth, I like the 2/3 vote rule, I think I like the waiver priority carry-over rule (still thinking), I'm fine with one-day waiver wire, I like IDP's in general (still thinking about best # of keepers, draft, etc.), and I'm fine with disclosing who voted what.
Good ideas guys.
|
| 80 | Peter N.
ID: 581018320
Wed, Nov 29, 2006, 22:57
|
hahah very original with, "for Pete's sake" bj21. ;-) It is indeed a good deal for you and I love Wayne too. I didnt realize that he was only a year younger than Moss until I started researching the deal and that was a factor for me. With my QB situation as it was, I had to make a deal for McNabb(even know I am a Cowboys fan) We'll see how it works out, but I think it'll end up being a great deal for both of us. BJ21 gets a great WR for the stretch run and years to come and I upgrade my keepers without having to give up a pick. Good luck bj21, but not this week. ;-)
|
| 81 | THK
ID: 810422114
Thu, Nov 30, 2006, 00:31
|
Amen Pete - not this week! ;-) haha Too bad I don't think you have the fire power to pull it out this week.
No matter the finish - even though I think I will end up out of the playoffs - its been one hell of a finish.
|
| 82 | StLCards
Leader
ID: 31010716
Thu, Nov 30, 2006, 00:38
|
No one has a flex player or two they want to part with? I've still got a 1st round pick for an older keeper type that doesn't fit into someone's long term plans. Could package that pick with another player for the right type of deal. I just don't know who might be available and time is short.
|
| 83 | Ref
Donor
ID: 539581218
Thu, Nov 30, 2006, 13:55
|
There are certainly enough people now for the 2/3 rule and the IDPs to put them up for a vote. Will do so after the season/before next season. The more I think about it, the more I tend to agree with TB's amendment that we chould get 2/3 vote on the 2/3 rule to implement it.
Not ready for the offical IDP proposal yet. Still need a lot of discussion and input. Really need your assistance on this. Also, besides Doug's backing of the 26 games schedule and someone privately leaning against it, I've heard no discussion on it. I'm wishy-washy on it myself. The one day WW will simply be instituted unless there are objections.
I'd also like to open discussion again for the merits of total points scored counting against the D/ST or just the points scored when the D/ST is on the field. I have been of the opinion to leave it how it is, but one manager thinks we should discuss it again and I agree. I am not against changing it as much as I hate the fact that a turnover taken down to the 5 yd line for instance is then going to count against the D and the one taken in is not, but there are good arguments either way and I am open.
|
| 84 | THK
ID: 810422114
Thu, Nov 30, 2006, 19:16
|
I am opening against playing multiple games each week. I just like the idea of a single matchup per week...
|
| 85 | StLCards
Leader
ID: 31010716
Thu, Nov 30, 2006, 19:25
|
PD, if you're around check your email
|
| 86 | Ref
Donor
ID: 539581218
Thu, Nov 30, 2006, 19:59
|
Freeze is here. All players are officially locked for the rest of the year. Obviously, you are still free to change your lineup up until 5 mins of that player's game.
|
| 87 | THK
ID: 810422114
Thu, Nov 30, 2006, 21:34
|
If the Palmer/CJ duo can double their yards and hook up for a score or two in the second half that would be nice...
|
| 88 | THK
ID: 810422114
Thu, Nov 30, 2006, 21:50
|
Damn Housh!
|
| 89 | Ref
Donor
ID: 539581218
Fri, Dec 01, 2006, 14:21
|
That last drive by balt cost my cincy D like 14 points to finish with 12. OUCH
Also, I am so against the muffed punt rule. That's a fumble so let them advance it!
|
| 90 | THK
ID: 810422114
Sun, Dec 03, 2006, 14:14
|
just what I needed...scrub Furrey scoring points and LT going nuts in the first half
|
| 91 | Ref
Donor
ID: 539581218
Sun, Dec 03, 2006, 15:36
|
Falcons-Saints game is very close. Toral could knock AF out of the playoffs.
|
| 92 | THK
ID: 810422114
Sun, Dec 03, 2006, 16:06
|
Bulger with a TD from the 1 freaking yard line at the end of the game. If Toral doesn't knock off AtL...I am all but done.
I would need a HUGE game from Smith and the Texans D.
I hate LT...
|
| 93 | THK
ID: 810422114
Sun, Dec 03, 2006, 16:13
|
Texans D TD! HAHA. This is one hell of a finish to the season no matter how it ends.
|
| 94 | Ref
Donor
ID: 539581218
Sun, Dec 03, 2006, 16:19
|
thk, right now you are down just two points if you both win. You have a 7.8 margin coming in IIRC. All of his guys will be done in the next couple mins, while you still ahve guys just starting and yet to play. Why so glum? You can lose points from the Texans DST, but still you have to like your chances right now.
|
| 95 | Ref
Donor
ID: 539581218
Sun, Dec 03, 2006, 16:21
|
Also Toral still has Stallworth and Foster leftto play yet and is down just 8 points ATM, so AF is up against the wall.
|
| 96 | Ref
Donor
ID: 539581218
Sun, Dec 03, 2006, 16:40
|
AF's week is over with an unofficial score of 75.86. THK has the exact same amount with players to go and Toral is 6.38 down and two players left. Obviously there may be scoring adjustments so it's not official but can't see how thk can miss the playoffs at this point. THK is also up 55 points or so as well.
Also, I just saw the Giants INT a Romo pass then he fumbled and Romo recovered. We do have a precedent for this and I believe it takes a manual adjustment. IIRC, The Giants DST loses two points for the fumble but Romo does NOT receive 2 points for recovering the fumble. Going to go back and search some of our past years' threads and see how CBS scores it.
|
| 97 | Ref
Donor
ID: 539581218
Sun, Dec 03, 2006, 19:37
|
Going to be interesting to see how many of the (would be) playoff teams would have made a difference in every week if they had Tiki. I already see one team which would have won this week with him. Other (non)deadline deals may also make or break teams.
|
| 98 | Action Figure
ID: 329282621
Mon, Dec 04, 2006, 02:14
|
AF's week is over with an unofficial score of 75.86.
AF's season is over.
GG THK. I'll need to regroup and give it a go next year.
This is a bitter pill to swallow. It's going to be a long plane ride home. We didn't get the job done. I tip my hat to them. The best team won today. My guys have nothing to be ashamed of. We didn't get the big breaks today. We shot ourselves in the foot. We lost our focus. I take full responsibility for this loss.
|
| 99 | Ref
Donor
ID: 539581218
Mon, Dec 04, 2006, 03:00
|
LOL AF!
I've been going over at least 3 games I should have won. Just one of them, I'd have knocked out bmd, but stuff happens. I also won a couple close games, so it goes both ways.
Don't think we will be adjusting any points for the defensive fumble as we don't know when else it has happened.
|
| 100 | Ref
Donor
ID: 539581218
Mon, Dec 04, 2006, 21:54
|
Actually AF has still a slim hope. Toral can't score any more points (stallworth or foster) and Stl cards has to outscore steve smith by almost 20 more points. Main problem is that he has two eagles facing his own panthers D.
|
| 101 | Action Figure
ID: 329282621
Mon, Dec 04, 2006, 23:31
|
So much for that...
|
| 102 | Ref
Donor
ID: 539581218
Tue, Dec 05, 2006, 00:20
|
Yeah when I saw that Foster was out--Stallworth had to get a touch and a yard to get it and he got one more touch and it was a TD pass. Didn't matter though as thk had more points.
|
| 103 | Ref
Donor
ID: 539581218
Tue, Dec 05, 2006, 11:06
|
New Thread
|
| Rate this thread: | If you wish, you may rate this thread on scale of 1-5. Ratings should indicate how valuable or interesting you believe this thread would be to other users of this forum. A '5' means that this thread is a 'must read'. A '1' means that this is a complete waste of time. If you have previously rated this thread, rating it again will delete your previous rating. If you do not want to rate this thread, but want to see how others have rated it, then click the button without entering a rating, or else click here. |
|
|
|
Post a reply to this message: (But first, how about checking out this sponsor?)
|