| 0 |
Subject: 2021 G24 PRESEASON
Posted by: slizz
- [64323014] Sun, May 30, 2021, 15:32
G24 preseason discussion.
State your team's name and if you're in or out for the 2021 season. |
| 1 | slizz
ID: 64323014
Sun, May 30, 2021, 15:36
|
Happy Memorial Day Weekend from the rain-soaked NJ Tri-State Area!
As you know, we are in search of a commissioner with Judy stepping down from the position. I would be willing to throw my hat into the ring...but I can't do it alone. My style of commissioning would more resemble a corporation / CEO. A G24 board of directors would be formed, with clear roles, to spread out responsibilities. I'd gladly serve as the point of contact and would delegate/assist a "board member" for review (i.e. treasury, scheduling, rules, trade review, etc.) The process will be streamlined and the league should run smoothly.
Obviously, I would like for all teams to return, but there is a large elephant in the room that needs to be addressed. Two (2) teams blatantly ignored Judy's (& others emails/texts), which was which ultimately affected playoff and draft seeding:
In short, the Indianapolis Colts undermined the overall integrity of G24 on multiple occasions - not starting people or fielding a valid roster, ignoring QB's on the waiver wire, and overall apathy towards the league. What's the reward for this? Top odds in the draft lottery. Cleveland was almost cost a playoff spot due to it. This was after multiple reminders from Judy as well as other league members. To a lesser extent, the same thing was done by the LAC. While not as blatant, it also helped him secure a higher draft spot...which's not fair, at all.
* Indy - It's gone beyond warnings with both teams and something needs to be done. I've floated in private stripping Indy of their 1st rd pick...but that hurts the league more than it helps it as the team will stink from that sanction. A compromise is that they pick 14th (last pick before the playoff teams) and maintain that spot the entire draft.
* LAC - Forefit lottery odds for sure...but doesn't deserve the same punishment as Indy. Open to discussion.
After addressing that, we then need to confirm who is coming back. The hope is to retain all 24 teams.
I would then solicit for G24 Board participation...Next, IDP / sacks get a bump to 6 points. No other stat will be adjusted for the 2021 season. While INT's should get an adjustment, it's not as egregious as our current sack scoring due to the randomness of them.
Once all teams are confirmed, we run the lottery so that way teams can get to scouting/scripting their draft or dealing with their draft picks....but I don't want to get ahead of myself. Just looking forward to football and figured this was a good place to kick off the discussion.
Oh...& Buffalo Bills - IN
|
| 2 | ttucowboy
ID: 556503022
Sun, May 30, 2021, 18:29
|
Dallas Cowboys are in!
|
| 3 | Tree
ID: 161118314
Sun, May 30, 2021, 20:38
|
Fort Worth Broncos are in!
regarding the Colts franchise - I could not stress more how I feel that the absolute lack of management - and note that this wasn't mis-management, this was an abdication of management - affected the integrity in this league, both in terms of playoff teams as well as lottery teams.
This situation was made worse by the seeming DGAF attitude by the team owner.
And I get it - don't think for a minute i don't grasp that 2020 was a trying year for most of us in our lives outside of this tiny bubble caleld Fantasy sports. But when you make a commitment to a league, there's a bare minimum of standards you need to be held to, and this franchise didn't even sniff those standards.
Personally, I believe that barring some sort of extenuating circumstances, removing the owner would be good for the league, with the aforementioned penalty suggested by slizz. And regardless of whether the owner stays or goes, the penalty is fair and just, and will remain with the franchise regardless of who is running the team (tell us how you REALLY feel Tree!).
I also believe that if were removed from the league, he might not even notice.
His disinterest in this league goes back to the summer of 2019, when he posted in June and then seemed to drop off the face of the earth, literally never even posting his keepers in the keeper thread. He also didn't bother in 2020.
As for LAC franchise, I don't believe the issues were as egregious, but that does not mean we can overlook, and there does need to be some sort of penalty.
Anyway, off my soapbox, but I believe fantasy sports should be fun, and this sort of stuff takes the joy away.
|
| 4 | Nerfherders
ID: 56261418
Sun, May 30, 2021, 20:48
|
Lions are in.
I agree with most of the above. In a H2H league, there needs to be a basic minimum required to uphold the integrity of the league. If that can't be maintained, that manager should be asked to leave.
I would throw in for being a member of the council. I was thinking of something similar - someone to run pre-season, another to run regular season, and another to run post-season. But it can be any which way we deem best, collectively.
|
| 5 | Toral
ID: 9541311
Mon, May 31, 2021, 09:42
|
New Orleans Saints are OUT.
Always thot I might retire when Brees did. Happy that after many false starts, eventually drafted someone (Kyler Murray) to succeed him.
FWIW, as a departing member, I endorse Slizz for commissioner.
Whenever you get things settled, playoff monies from last year can be sent to indicated e-address.
Good luck to the league, and thank you all for many years of entertainment and competition.
|
| 6 | GO
ID: 17527111
Tue, Jun 01, 2021, 12:27
|
Looking forward to next season and will try and help where I can. It should not be all on Slizz, we most definitely need a G24 cabinet. Minister of Scheduling, Draftmeister, Treasurer etc.
Teams definitely need to earn the right to keep playing in this league, so if there is an egregious lack of attention, then they certainly should be up for review. We shouldn't have anyone who is complacent to coast.
|
| 7 | Judy
ID: 39540117
Tue, Jun 01, 2021, 18:49
|
In judy and AZ.
Can help where needed.
|
| 8 | R-Money
ID: 31128257
Wed, Jun 02, 2021, 21:29
|
Panthers in
Was also going to throw my hat in for Commish if needed - with my main goal to straighten up the rules regarding rules in general, and inactivity.
I want to make sure rules, structure, etc. are presented to the league and acknowledged at minimum or voted on to be accepted if needed.
Also want IDP123 to be our standard IDP scoring.
Also want to institute a "US open" mid season tournament involving all of the teams (hopefully still 24) - perhaps for a side pot, or Lottery chances?
That being said I dont have any real disagreemnts with Slizz running things and delegating where its needed.
As for team punishment - Ideally we should vote but I think we give everyone a hard date to check in by and if they are in they are in. Granted the teams listed above should be let know they are on the thinnest of thin ice. If they can check in late June - that shows intent and then the league can vote if we still should cut them based on the complaints.
Perhaps a late June meeting to review and vote on rule changes/other proposals?
|
| 9 | R-Money
ID: 31128257
Wed, Jun 02, 2021, 21:32
|
Also - @slizz I have a Decent sized list of people that would be willing to join when we do get a final count.
We should probably make a 2021 Season Calendar/List of dates
|
| 10 | Judy
ID: 39540117
Wed, Jun 02, 2021, 22:05
|
The calendar automatically rolls over from 2020, so you just need to make adjustments, not start over.
The inactivity and lack of attention needs to be addressed. I do agree that I “babied” too many.
If we have folks waiting to join, then set deadlines and remove those who don’t follow up. For example, one guy checked in in June and then nothing until we almost had to choose his keepers for him. That is unacceptable, but we let it slide...I have called people on vacation to get them to do stuff because otherwise the rest of us get frustrated. Time to get tough, although my sense was that no one really wanted to.
Invites should be sent out with a clear IN/OUT deadline AND a pledge to be engaged in league business (polls, ideas, comments, suggestions) with the caveat that one or two (public) warnings about failure to participate might drop you right out.
Also, I don’t know how many current owners know that this thread is even up and running.
|
| 11 | WG
ID: 89402220
Wed, Jun 02, 2021, 22:58
|
KC Chiefs are in. Also open to helping where I can. Agree with much of what Jay and Tree posted above. I would just add that I think we should make dues due prior to the season starting, perhaps concurrent with declaring keepers or something.
|
| 12 | youngroman
ID: 515013
Thu, Jun 03, 2021, 03:37
|
Bengals are in.
|
| 13 | Tree
ID: 161118314
Thu, Jun 03, 2021, 09:07
|
so far, ten teams have responded, with 9 of the ten announcing an intent to return, which is pretty awesome.
I'm also interested in helping this league - it's my favorite football league.
As for a hard date to check in, personally I don't believe July 1, or maybe July 15, are too soon. We'll need to make sure we have a balanced roster of teams and recruit if necessary, and hash out various rules that were discussed before we finalize our keeper roster.
the sooner we have replacement owners (if necessary), the sooner we can begin our hot stove league. And if we need contraction because of the number of owners dropping, we have a reasonable amount of time to determine how to handle that.
There's also a way to email the league through the MFL app, but it's asking me to set up some nonsense, so if anyone already has that set up, maybe an email to the entire league for those that don't visit this board frequently (or, ever, in the case of some of our league owners..ahem)
|
| 14 | Tree
ID: 161118314
Thu, Jun 03, 2021, 09:43
|
Bengals are in.
this is probably a d*ck move of me, but i'm ok with that - are you going to be more active of an owner, and respond to trade offers, even if they're bad trade offers?
More than one person in G20 baseball have made comments privately that you don't respond to trade offers, and part of being in a league like this is being an active owner. Which means responding to offers.
Hopefully, it's something as simple as you having the wrong email address posted on Yahoo, and if so, that's an easy fix.
|
| 15 | Jim
ID: 465239
Thu, Jun 03, 2021, 10:02
|
Philadelphia Eagles are IN
I'd be happy to help in any way I can, having only been in the league a year, I'm not sure I'm 100% savvy on the particulars of the league and this platform yet, but I'm a quick study too, so would be happy to help in any way needed.
The Colts need a new owner in my opinion, and I think the 14th slot punishment is fair as well, and just explain the situation to the new owner.
|
| 16 | skinneej
Leader
ID: 040625911
Thu, Jun 03, 2021, 10:04
|
GB Packers are in. I'm willing to help out as needed in any areas.
|
| 17 | promize
ID: 25439
Thu, Jun 03, 2021, 10:13
|
Seattle Seahawks have officially announced their return
2020 Champion
2019 Champion
2018 Champion
|
| 18 | R-Money
ID: 31128257
Thu, Jun 03, 2021, 10:48
|
@tree
I hope your message is only taken as a friendly heads up, but it reeks of backhandedness and based on last year we should probably move away from that.
If you want this league to consider not responding to trade offers an act of inactivity - we should set hard rules on what consists of that and reporting it to the league. This could co-inside with what Judy was suggesting with public warnings, strikes or demerits. Either way low level complaints from a separate league should not count towards someone's reputation or standing in this League - especially from ANONs
|
| 19 | GO
ID: 17527111
Thu, Jun 03, 2021, 12:06
|
@WG - how bout you can't make your first pick til dues are paid?
|
| 20 | Doug
ID: 32546312
Thu, Jun 03, 2021, 13:46
|
Raiders are in.
I assume the Colts are getting a new owner based on what's described above? I haven't looked at the state of their team but I'd assume it's in poor shape... maybe bump them down to #13 and let the new owner participate in the lottery still, even if it's slim odds? I'm presuming they'd have been a lottery team even without the abdication of management.
I disagree that owners should be expected to respond to bad trade offers... bad trade offers are like harassment... you're putting the onus on the other person to have to respond to that dreck? No thanks.
|
| 21 | Doug
ID: 32546312
Thu, Jun 03, 2021, 13:51
|
I guess let me clarify that by bad offers I mean the egregious stuff like "this random player just had a good game, let me offer him to you for your perennial WR1 who is on bye this week" type of nonsense. I don't know the particulars of that case above, but just saying that not all offers merit responses.
Also LAC maybe a similar punishment of demoting to the end of the lottery (#12?). I don't think IND's draft punishment needs to be much more severe if you consider replacement of the owner to have been part of the punishment as well.
|
| 22 | Doug
ID: 32546312
Thu, Jun 03, 2021, 13:54
|
Also do we have these draft slot numbers right? Aren't there 16 non-playoff teams? Are only 14 of them in the lottery?
|
| 23 | Bobo
ID: 8231213
Thu, Jun 03, 2021, 14:36
|
Minnesota Vikings are in.
|
| 24 | Tree
ID: 161118314
Thu, Jun 03, 2021, 15:49
|
I hope your message is only taken as a friendly heads up, but it reeks of backhandedness and based on last year we should probably move away from that.
my message was matter of fact. there's nothing backhanded about it. it was straight, and to the point.
I disagree that owners should be expected to respond to bad trade offers... bad trade offers are like harassment... you're putting the onus on the other person to have to respond to that dreck? No thanks....
I guess let me clarify that by bad offers I mean the egregious stuff like "this random player just had a good game, let me offer him to you for your perennial WR1 who is on bye this week" type of nonsense. I don't know the particulars of that case above, but just saying that not all offers merit responses.
Good point about discerning between bad trades and nonsensical trades. Bad trades are in the eye of the beholder. Nonsensical trades are as you described.
In this particular case, the owner has a reputation across more than one league of not responding at all to multiple trades from multiple owners.
I'm optimistic its just a bad email address thing....
|
| 25 | ttucowboy
ID: 556503022
Fri, Jun 04, 2021, 08:40
|
22: You are correct. All non-playoff teams are part of the lottery. 16 teams total.
|
| 26 | Slizz
ID: 15511411
Fri, Jun 04, 2021, 12:11
|
Tree had a great point when considering punishments in a separate message:
“...if a college team gets penalized, and a new coach takes over, the penalties don't go away. if a pro team gets penalized and a new owner buys the team, the penalties don't go away. penalizing a franchise is about league integrity.”
He’s 100% right.
|
| 27 | WG
ID: 89402220
Fri, Jun 04, 2021, 13:21
|
I agree with Slizz. While we don't want to hurt a new manager coming in, we also don't want to hurt the existing managers who were screwed by the issues last year, and I think its more important to make them whole first.
|
| 28 | TD
ID: 2751815
Sat, Jun 05, 2021, 10:21
|
NY Giants are out.
|
| 29 | R-Money
ID: 31128257
Sat, Jun 05, 2021, 11:41
|
I think its an interesting conversation to be had on what is or isnt fair punishment to a "franchise" while these are less franchises and more or less sole proprietorships, when some end we recruit new ones - just happen to have the shared name and assets left over. Just my opinion on what might be a fun debate.
Anyway - Rule Section 11 states If any owners are removed, their replacement "will be recruited to take over the vacated team in its exact state"
So in black and white right there - in the case of the colts (since its all but a forgone conclusion theyre being removed) They were not penalized for inactivity last season so whomever takes up that team should not have a penalty tacked on as it would violate rule 11 "exact state"
I also agree with WG that if there were or ever are unfair competitive advantages, those who suffered should be made whole. Specific examples should be presented so proper ruling on compensation can be done.
Ultimately however I think were a few steps before that. We should determine who is coming back and who is getting kicked first. Then if we are filling or shrinking, and if shrinking how we disperse and change the draft lotto and any other rules or divisions etc. And once all that is set THEN we should address any penalties to any remaining teams/owners.
|
| 30 | GO
ID: 28544510
Sat, Jun 05, 2021, 11:44
|
to Tree + Slizz. Exactly. And the exact state is that Colts were going to be penalized.
“...if a college team gets penalized, and a new coach takes over, the penalties don't go away. if a pro team gets penalized and a new owner buys the team, the penalties don't go away. penalizing a franchise is about league integrity.”
He’s 100% right.
|
| 31 | R-Money
ID: 31128257
Sat, Jun 05, 2021, 11:50
|
As of Midday June 5th:
IN
Bills
Cowboys
Broncos
Lions
Jets
Cardinals
Panthers
Chiefs
Bengals
Eagles
Packers
Seahawks
Raiders
Vikings
To Respond
Ravens
Jaguars
Browns
Texans
Bears
49Ers
Under Review
Colts
Chargers?
Out
Giants
Saints
Correct if I am wrong.
|
| 32 | R-Money
ID: 31128257
Sat, Jun 05, 2021, 13:04
|
Back to the rules - the only punishment listed under the inactivity section is removal.
I still strongly oppose penalizing new owners but if the league is going that way I would suggest any draft or other punishment levied against a team with NEW ownership be minimized. So we can set penalties as if colts and Chargers are coming back full course, but if they dont and we have to find new owners then we lessen.
Colts old owner - every round pick at 14, New Owner - First round pick at 14, then slotted where finished the remaining rounds
Chargers old owner - First round pick at 13, then slotted where finish, New owner - Lottery odds changed so they can only draw their slotted position or worse in the lottery round, then slotted where finished the remaining rounds
|
| 33 | CT/CLEV
ID: 42556618
Sun, Jun 06, 2021, 19:57
|
CLEV - IN
|
| 34 | SwinganaMiss
ID: 48531621
Sun, Jun 06, 2021, 22:32
|
Ravens are in.
I oppose punishing replacement owners...any punishment is very subjectively levied, even against the actual offending owner. Agree that removal itself is the punishment, and its the only thing written into the rules.
If you are set to punish, then maybe give a first year price break to the new owner---Judy keeps saying the league is flush with funds.
In favor of any changes to scoring being minor, gradual, and/or delayed to take effect a year after the change is approved (so teams can have time to prep, similar to the change from TeamD to IDP). Don't like drastic changes to player value in dynasty/keeper leagues.
|
| 35 | Taxman
ID: 16554621
Sun, Jun 06, 2021, 22:54
|
Houston Texans are in
I am adamantly against penalizing a new owner. Are you going to shoot your new wife because your ex-wife slept with your best friend?? WTF??
|
| 36 | ttucowboy
ID: 56521622
Sun, Jun 06, 2021, 23:22
|
I’m opposed to penalizing a new owner for stuff they had nothing to do with. Sends a poor message right off the bat. New owner should be afforded the opportunity of wherever that pick lands regardless of how it got there. Fresh start.
Reminder, 16 teams will be part of the lottery process (all non-playoff teams).
Happy to assist wherever is needed. Great to see all of the discussion so early on. Also encouraging to see that nearly 80% of the league has already checked in.
I’m ready for some football!
|
| 37 | Judy
ID: 39540117
Sun, Jun 06, 2021, 23:30
|
2021 Dues are $20.00
These teams are paid already with prior winnings:
Cincy
Baltimore
Buffalo
Arizona. (Paid for league website)
KC
Minnesota
Seattle
Cleveland
These people only owe $15 due to mini wins:
Chicago
Houston
Philadelphia
Jacksonville
These teams owe the full $20:
Dallas
NOLA
Las Vegas
Chargers
NY Giants
Indy
Carolina
SF
Ny Jets
Detroit
Denver
Green Bay
These people have a small (less than $20) credit carryover even after the 2021 dues are accounted for:
Buffalo
Carolina
We have about $600 in the PayPal account.
|
| 38 | skinneej
Leader
ID: 040625911
Mon, Jun 07, 2021, 17:39
|
Judy, I should have $25 in funds from last year's 8th place finish per your previous message, so I believe I'm covered for this season. (GB Packers)
|
| 39 | Judy
ID: 39540117
Mon, Jun 07, 2021, 21:56
|
I’ll check Tuesday.
|
| 40 | Judy
ID: 39540117
Tue, Jun 08, 2021, 13:04
|
Skinner/ Green Bay
You are correct.2021 Dues paid, $5 credit for future.
Anyone else?
|
| 41 | Judy
ID: 39540117
Tue, Jun 08, 2021, 13:04
|
Obviously an autocorrect ther
Skinneej
|
| 42 | skinneej
Leader
ID: 040625911
Tue, Jun 08, 2021, 13:39
|
Ok thanks!
|
| 43 | R-Money
ID: 31128257
Thu, Jun 10, 2021, 19:48
|
@Judy, can you let me know my credit and ill just pay to break even this year. I dont really recall the details around me paying last year so that would be a great help.
I did a fresh reach out to those not responded yet.. but as of the evening of June 10 Everyone is returning except the below
To Respond
Jaguars
Bears
49Ers
Colts
Chargers
Out
Giants
Saints
|
| 44 | R-Money
ID: 31128257
Fri, Jun 11, 2021, 07:50
|
Got word last night via text that the Bears are in.
|
| 45 | judy
ID: 445321311
Sun, Jun 13, 2021, 12:32
|
R money which team are you?
|
| 46 | R-Money
ID: 31128257
Sun, Jun 13, 2021, 12:50
|
@Judy - Panthers.
|
| 47 | twolves
ID: 75381317
Sun, Jun 13, 2021, 18:38
|
SF 49erw are. in.
sorry about not responding but been tied up with other things.
|
| 48 | judy
ID: 445321311
Sun, Jun 13, 2021, 23:29
|
R. Money
You are paid for 2021, with a small credit towards 2022.
My wording was not too clear.
Same for buffaloes, paid for 2012, credit for 2022.
|
| 49 | R-Money
ID: 31128257
Fri, Jun 18, 2021, 12:17
|
June 18 check in status
Pending
Jaguars
Colts
Chargers
Out
Giants
Saints
Since we may be looking at some type of dispersal draft should we say by July 4 deadline then search for replacements?
|
| 50 | Tree
ID: 161118314
Sat, Jun 19, 2021, 10:52
|
Chargers
Cliff hasn't checked into his baseball teams since 5/21, but has been a bit more active on Facebook, posting a few days ago.
Colts
Kyle is active on facebook. don't care. to me, this team is in the "out" status. not even sure why we're trying to be so welcoming to a team that didn't care about this league at all.
Not sure on the Jags, but they were a very strong team last year. be surprising if they don't return.
|
| 51 | R-Money
ID: 31128257
Sat, Jun 19, 2021, 12:37
|
@Tree does he ignore you on FB like he does me on twitter?
|
| 52 | judy
ID: 445321311
Sat, Jun 19, 2021, 14:02
|
Are we working on replacements for NYG and NOLA?
And possibly any others?
|
| 53 | R-Money
ID: 31128257
Sun, Jun 20, 2021, 00:39
|
@Judy - I can start getting people in. As I see it we need 4 possibly 5.
@ALL We still have a laundry list of things to clear up.
High priority:
- Leadership method/council - the Who and what of it
- Inactivity clarification/standard.
- If the new comers will just be offered teams or Dispersal draft
- If we are knocking any picks off from Colts/Chargers franchises, which we should probably decided on before getting new owners
Medium priority:
- IDP scoring change vote: A) Slizz sacks to 6 pts. B) R-money full IDP 123 C) Stay the same - If a change then vote on when change goes into effect
- Rules around Tanking
- Finish Check in (Jaguars) and select new owners
Low Priority:
- Set Keeper date, Draft Date
- Run Draft Lottery
- Collect dues
- Any other rule change suggestions
|
| 54 | Doug
ID: 11740813
Sun, Jun 20, 2021, 02:25
|
Re: 26 he’s right about college football. This isn’t college football.
|
| 55 | Tree
ID: 161118314
Sun, Jun 20, 2021, 10:19
|
Re: 26 he’s right about college football. This isn’t college football.
correct.
it's fantasy football. it's where an inactive franchise can have big repercussions, and teams that feel the effect of an inactive franchise shouldn't be the ones being punished.
@Judy - I can start getting people in. As I see it we need 4 possibly 5.
i would advocate strongly for replacing one owner only.
I believe this league would benefit greatly from a bit of attrition, and dropping to 20 teams from 24.
The QB position is very tricky. minus some luck, if you lose your starting QB, there's a good chance your season is done. with 20 teams, we've got a dozen starting QBs available as backups, and that can only strengthen this league.
|
| 56 | R-Money
ID: 31128257
Sun, Jun 20, 2021, 12:40
|
Make a topic for the vote then. Include options on how to handle the freed up player pool. 11 would be the majority needed. 48 hour window to vote.
If not then we replace. Ive solicited several places for people to come check the league out and post under the new members thread if they want to apply.
We need to progress.
|
| 57 | Judy
ID: 105462014
Sun, Jun 20, 2021, 15:46
|
What I have learned about polls
1). Wording must be very specific so that the answer can be:
A). Yes/no
B). Agree/disagree
Can also have :
B). Yes/no/abstain/no opinion
C). Agree/ disagree/ abstain/ no opinion
2) you WILL need to chase, remind, cajole people to vote.
3). Construct poll so people can see who has not voted. (See below).
4). If there is a 2 step poll, run the first one to see if you need to run the second one.
|
| 58 | Judy
ID: 105462014
Sun, Jun 20, 2021, 15:49
|
No drafting until dues paid in full is already a Rule:
From 2020:
FOR 2021. NO MANAGER MAY MAKE A DRAFT PICK UNTIL ALL DUES ARE PAID IN FULL. PICKS WILL BE SKIPPED.
Agree: 15
Disagree: 4
Total Votes: 19
By Commissioner - Private - Closed Tue Dec 15 9:00:00 p.m. ET 2020
Franchises Who Have Not Yet Voted In This Poll:
New York Jets
Baltimore Ravens
Jacksonville Jaguars
Carolina Panthers
Seattle Seahawks
Note that 5 teams did not bother to vote. Unacceptable. Yes, we did get the quota for the vote to count, but everyone must participate…
|
| 59 | Judy
ID: 105462014
Sun, Jun 20, 2021, 16:19
|
I would support reducing the teams to 24 if there are 4 vacancies.
If you lose your QB, you are screwed. As it is now, even the QB bye week costs you points, If you lose Saquan or another high producer like that, you will suffer.
I think increasing the player pool by 80 (4x20) would really help folks stay in the games to the end.
There might need to be two drafts:
1/2 rounds for released players
Remaining rounds for the rest (= normal 1, 2, 3,)
Could also reduce the number of keepers to open up the player pool.
Once your lineup is decimated it really is hard to recover.
We would just rearrange the divisions although NOLA and NYG are in already different NFC divisions. The other iffy ones are in the AFC.
This would affect the weekly schedule as it is predicated on the 2020 results. Someone would need to write a new program I think.
|
| 60 | Judy
ID: 105462014
Sun, Jun 20, 2021, 16:19
|
Should we transfer rosters over from 2020 to 2021?
Minus those picked up during playoffs…
|
| 61 | Taxman
ID: 525152020
Sun, Jun 20, 2021, 21:23
|
repeating my post from #35
"I am adamantly against penalizing a new owner. Are you going to shoot your new wife because your ex-wife slept with your best friend?? WTF??"
|
| 62 | WG
ID: 89402220
Sun, Jun 20, 2021, 21:58
|
I think not enforcing a penalty just because its a new owner is basically penalizing multiple existing owners, and I don't see how that is appropriate. Like if one of the departing manager franchises lucked into a 1.01 they didn't earn, that passes on to the new owner at everyone else's detriment. Of course, I can understand if people don't think its fair to apply penalties to last year, as I'm not sure we've ever done such a thing. But if we do decide to, I think that penalty should apply to the team regardless of whether its the old or a new owner. The new owner isn't really losing a high pick (being penalized) because that franchise never legitimately had it in the first place (because penalties).
If we contract, I like Judy's idea of 2 separate drafts. What about something like tallying points based on last 3-5 years standings and just awarding dispersal draft picks based on that?
|
| 63 | R-Money
ID: 31128257
Sun, Jun 20, 2021, 22:48
|
We need a check-in cut off first. Ill send the Email for the next 5 days just in case then we call it?
@Judy - Tom.Douris@verizon.net is still showing up when I click "send Email to league" but he sent me an Email separate that he will not be returning and to remove him from E-mails. I don't see his Email on a team currently so I am not sure what the issue is, can you look into it please?
|
| 64 | Judy
ID: 105462014
Sun, Jun 20, 2021, 22:55
|
Done. I forgot to remove his phone contact. He is now “removed” as an owner.
If you have small questions you can email me directly since I do understand the MFL website especially the Commish stuff. I can go quickly to the spot to “fix” stuff.
|
| 65 | Tree
ID: 161118314
Mon, Jun 21, 2021, 12:45
|
"I am adamantly against penalizing a new owner. Are you going to shoot your new wife because your ex-wife slept with your best friend?? WTF??"
no, but you probably shot your best friend, so there was a price paid.
|
| 66 | GO
ID: 33543812
Mon, Jun 21, 2021, 12:55
|
In F101 we've had new owners take over the old team and they inherited all the bad trades, picks and penalties that came with it. We've also offered a 1 year waiver from having to pay any entry (and are ineligible to win $ of course if they chose to do this).
|
| 67 | Nerfherders
ID: 56261418
Mon, Jun 21, 2021, 13:01
|
We could drop them to 4-5-6 in the lottery. Still a good chance, but less of one. Any new owner would be happy with that situation.
|
| 68 | Tree
ID: 161118314
Mon, Jun 21, 2021, 13:18
|
Any new owner would be happy with that situation.
but any veteran owner screwed over by the actions of teams like the Colts might not be.
|
| 69 | R-Money
ID: 31128257
Mon, Jun 21, 2021, 13:42
|
@Tree
Could you please elaborate on the actions taken by Colts, which owner was screwed and how it went down.
I only ask because depending on details we could award things like additional draft picks, or lottery chances to those affected instead of punishing new management who technically didn't do anything. That said it wont matter if we shrink - maybe that ends up being the easiest way forward but there are at least two people interested in joining.
|
| 70 | Nerfherders
ID: 56261418
Mon, Jun 21, 2021, 15:40
|
Right now the first 7 of the lottery looks like this:
1. Jets
2. Giants
3. Colts
4. Eagles
5. Chargers
6. Broncos
7. Panthers
If we moved them back to 6-7, it could look like this:
1. Jets
2. Giants
3. Eagles
4. Broncos
5. Panthers
6. Colts
7. Chargers
I'm not sure what else we could do to recompense opponents or playoff outcomes. That ship has basically sailed, if those two owners are gone.
|
| 71 | Nerfherders
ID: 56261418
Mon, Jun 21, 2021, 15:50
|
I guess another thing we need to bring up is the schedule. This will probably need to be adjusted for 2021 because there's now 18 weeks of games. I'm assuming we go to a 14 week schedule with weeks 15-17 the playoffs. This actually works out well for us if we stay at 24, because we can play our division opponents twice, and everyone else in the league once.
|
| 72 | Tree
ID: 161118314
Mon, Jun 21, 2021, 17:39
|
Could you please elaborate on the actions taken by Colts, which owner was screwed and how it went down.
he tanked. he intentionally tanked. it was discussed endlessly in last year's thread... .
some of the posts that discuss it:
283
295
297
298
302
304
and many more.
I don't want to rehash old wounds, but in nearly any other league the owner would have been immediately kicked out (barring extenuating circumstances) and the league managed the rest of his games.
You'll notice that he didn't even bother to respond to ANY of the allegations. Heck, i don't even think he posted once last year.
there were games won and lost because of his actions - the butterfly effect of that is impossible to tell, but there were definitely changes in wins and losses.
not to mention it moved him into a better lottery position, screwing every other lottery team behind him that actually fielded full rosters and tried to win games, even though tanking would have certainly benefited them.
The Chargers franchise also committed some serious tomfoolery, as discussed in 296.
|
| 73 | R-Money
ID: 31128257
Mon, Jun 21, 2021, 20:51
|
@tree
Appreciate the review/rehash.
Since I dont want to continue to go back and forth on this - the only outlined punishment for abuse and or inactivity is removal from league or punishment at commissioners discretion.
As theres no punishment currently levied, no official commissioner and removal/abandonment of owners is all but a foregone conclusion - we should vote for league size first and then actions that need to be taken for the allegations.
I still think awarding things to those wronged is the better way. Supp. draft picks at the End of the first, increased lottery odds, a one time free waiver pass, money off of dues, etc. etc. depending on how much a team was hurt. None of the owners you say were affected have layed it out how and how much, and even you didnt lay it out - at least slizz named specific things that could have been affected potentially changing playoff qualifiers (Cleveland) playoff matchups and potentially playoff results. I would rather reward loyalty to the league in the face of difficulties than punish air
I am adding another Email starting tomorrow for the next 7 days. It will be a league size vote. Options will be 24, 22, 20, write in. VOTE BY RESPONDING TO THE EMAIL
Majority at the end of 7 days gets it - it will be noted which managers did not vote as this is a MUST VOTE.
|
| 74 | GoatLocker
ID: 29723299
Mon, Jun 21, 2021, 22:05
|
LAC will need a new owner. I will not be back.
|
| 75 | slizz
ID: 64323014
Mon, Jun 21, 2021, 23:06
|
At least we are making progress coming into the new season, and getting ahead of issues that would plague the league. Rick / R-Money...thanks for keeping the tallies.
That said...I am for contraction and have privately discussed with WG, Pete, and Tree. I think it is in the best interest of the league to focus on "quality" rather than "quantity" to remain with 24. With the emergence of DFS as an alternative to Dynasty Leagues, it is my opinion that we would be presented with annual challenges to fill vacancies to maintain 24 teams. Right now, we have 4 outs and awaiting a response from Yokel (an OG). I figure Yokel will be back with a competitive Jaguars squad.
Why pro contraction?
#1 - we don't have to worry about punishing a new owner. All of the punishment talks can be tabled if we move towards contraction. Re: posts 35 & 61 - that is just a bad example to use because there are, presumably, 22 other owners who got screwed as a result of the actions of the Colts. That team should be held accountable, just like every business (NCAA, Corporate America, Politics, etc.)
#2 - we don't have to worry about recruiting new blood into the league. focus on quality over quantity.
#3 - The QB is no longer a position one would need to hoard and scramble to cover the byes. Rosters will be deep enough where you'll have options.
#4 - We would need to re-align the divisions (shouldn't be too hard) to 4 divisions of 5 teams.
#5 - possible option/path to Yahoo hahaha (I like everything all in one on MFL believe it or not...)
NEXT STEPS
We need to vote on a board of governors or appoint a commissioner once everyone has returned. For me, since Judy is staying on in the league, I think keeping her in a Treasurer capacity would be a tremendous asset. GO's NY Mafia has mentioned he would help with collections...
CONTRACTION VOTE
-I say waste no time and get the vote out there now;
-We have 19 confirmed owners back, 3 No's, Indy (who I am fine giving the boot), and Yokel/Jags (who I believe will be back given he has a solid squad);
-I can make a separate thread for the votes/tallies.
ONCE CONTRACTION VOTE IS DONE, WE VOTE ON A DISPERSAL DRAFT
-Simple YES OR NO, majority rules;
-I want it to be on the record I am a NO for the dispersal draft, but obviously will defer to the league majority;
-I don't believe it is in the league's best interest to award a premium castoff like Kyler Murray or Tyreek Hill and a top rookie pick to the same franchise...especially if we retained all 24 teams they would not even be in that position. As a result, it would throw competitive balance completely off. I would rather just toss all of the players into the pool along with the rookies. The teams picking at the top would have a premium pick in round 2 as well and, possibly, round 3.
ONCE DISPERSAL DRAFT VOTE IS DONE, DEPENDING ON THE RESULTS, WE WOULD NEED A VOTE ON HOW TO STRUCTURE IT
-As stated above, I am a NO, but obviously, there is momentum for a dispersal draft, so it would be foolish to not have a contingency plan should the NO vote not prevail:
-Three (3) year aggregate record
-Five (5) year aggregate record
My vote would be for three (3) seasons as most teams are completely overhauled in three (3) seasons. For example, I only have Carson Wentz dating back to 2018 as a 2021 keeper. I imagine most G20* owners would be in the same boat. Fantasy football windows open and close much quicker than other leagues.
Just food for thought...let me know what you guys think...
SLIZZ OUTSIDE THE BOX PROPOSAL
With the expansion of the NFL Regular Season, I think it's only fair we expand the league by a week as well. More fantasy football = more fun!
-We schedule weeks 1-10 as doubleheaders as per normal;
-By week 10, you will have played every team in G20*. You would then run it back a 2nd time with a divisional opponent;
-Weeks 11-13 would be single matchups, playing only divisional opponents, making the importance of winning your division paramount to making the playoffs;
-Week 14, still single matchups, but the schedule would have to be manually adjusted (like the playoffs) to playing your counterpart in the conference. Would make for a hell of an interesting playoff/draft run. 1st in the AFC East plays 1st in the AFC West, 2nd vs 2nd, 3rd vs 3rd, and so on...
|
| 76 | slizz
ID: 64323014
Mon, Jun 21, 2021, 23:16
|
Disregard the outside-the-box proposal. It made sense as I was typing it...but after re-reading my post and trying to create a sample schedule in Excel, it wouldn't be feasible given the # of teams in each division.
::FACEPALM::
|
| 77 | slizz
ID: 64323014
Mon, Jun 21, 2021, 23:25
|
RE: Post 73. Love the email reminder that you'll be sending in 7 days...I think having a separate thread in the forum would be much easier to track over a lengthy email thread.
Here is the link to the vote:
G24 Contraction Vote
|
| 78 | R-Money
ID: 31128257
Tue, Jun 22, 2021, 01:24
|
@judy, if you have not already when you can please remove chargers owner from the league.
And second what slizz says - youve been a godsend.
Ill Email the contraction vote link out for 7 days then, or until we get a majority.
I have an different opinion than yours on DFS vs Fantasy. FF is more popular than ever and because of that I still think 22 is a viable option with the two new owners waiting patiently to be brought into the fold and 24 is still very achievable. I dont think the size is the problem. I think the platform and message board we use limit the communication, and community trust and entertainment that can be built in a league.
RE: the remaining check in - the fact that its an "og" makes it worse. Obviously we shortened the check in window, and are being more aggressive about getting everyone to respond - but that's because we need people back and more importantly we need people to know they are expected to participate. That said, if you are checking in for them via proxy - then its done.
If we do shrink and dispersal, can we do auction instead of a convoluted way to determine pick order? If we dont, can we keep the rookie draft separate and do a one year switch to faab for the eventual free agent skirmish after the rookie draft? I am 100 percent for moving off MFL to yahoo or sleeper, but I think that would limit our scheduling and playoff options - not to mention axe the history.
Outside the box schedule yadda yadda - (if its 20):
4 divis of 5. play everyone in your conference and a yearly-rotating divison from the other conference = 14 games. Swap the double headers for a Game vs. the league average so the records are still 2 "games" a week.
|
| 79 | Tree
ID: 161118314
Tue, Jun 22, 2021, 09:02
|
I still think 22 is a viable option
22 teams would create unbalanced divisions, which presents a different set of problems.
i do agree that 24 teams is achievable, but don't agree that it's in the best interest of the league to have 24 teams.
As Slizz pointed out, there are many benefits of a 20-team league.
|
| 80 | Judy
ID: 105462014
Tue, Jun 22, 2021, 10:01
|
Chargers removed.
|
| 81 | Nerfherders
ID: 56261418
Tue, Jun 22, 2021, 12:44
|
Not sure if anyone read/ saw #71, but its very easy to do the 14 week schedule at 24 or 20 teams.
24: Division twice (5 x 2 = 10), and everyone else once (18).
20: Conference twice (9 x 2 = 18), other conference once (10).
As far as specific scheduling, I would prefer to spread out the division opponents as much as possible so a team is not caught without a key player for a run of critical games.
|
| 82 | Judy
ID: 105462014
Tue, Jun 22, 2021, 21:08
|
The spreadsheet for the schedule is programmed to take into account results from last year. This will need to be rewritten by a computer person. I do not know the formulas/coding used, but it did account for bye weeks etc. Not sure if it did divisions also, never looked that closely at it..
After the spreadsheet is created, each game is individually hand scheduled into MFL. That is an option MFL provides; you just have to put it in yourself since it is customized by outsiders/us.
It is not that hard to do but it takes time and care.
|
| 84 | Doug
ID: 32546312
Wed, Jun 23, 2021, 15:04
|
I'm happy to revise the spreadsheet once we land on a new structure of teams and weeks.
|
| 85 | ttucowboy
ID: 40582212
Wed, Jun 23, 2021, 17:17
|
Does anyone voting “no” have any suggestions for replacement owners? I think we’re going to have a tough time finding 4 solid replacements...unless gurupies aren’t in football mode yet and just haven’t noticed the thread. I’d prefer the replacements at least have a connection of some sort (i.e. played in a league previously) with more than one person in the league (don’t need a G20 baseball secret squirrel repeat).
|
| 86 | Judy
ID: 105462014
Thu, Jun 24, 2021, 10:56
|
In the past we asked potential managers to sign in with their fantasy history etc. Current managers usually contacted friends and encouraged them to “apply” and wrote emails in support. If we had more than we needed, we voted. Recent years, however, it has been hard to even fill vacancies.
One of the reasons I think contraction is in order. This is a tough league and you have to be “devoted “ to it.
|
| 87 | R-Money
ID: 31128257
Thu, Jun 24, 2021, 14:25
|
@TTU
Three are in the new owner thread, and honestly thats enough for me. They could easily click one button and join ANY other league ever and they came to this one. Full trust always has to be earned but opening up a bit is probably the only real way we stay at 24.
|
| 88 | Tree
ID: 161118314
Thu, Jun 24, 2021, 14:59
|
I would rather have 20 good owners we know than 20 good owners we know and 4 owners we don't know.
last season sucked having to deal with one owner who quit on the league - i'd hate to repeat that with even one, much less four.
|
| 90 | WG
ID: 89402220
Thu, Jun 24, 2021, 15:21
|
I strongly agree with 88.
Judy, you said you sent out invites for the 2021 league? I haven't gotten one yet.
|
| 91 | R-Money
ID: 31128257
Thu, Jun 24, 2021, 16:22
|
Except the reason it sucked was more so on the league being forgiving, in both its listed rules and its nature, than it was because someone vanished. Once we get the size thing settled I hope we can get more serious and specific things on the books when it comes to inactivity to prevent things like that from happening.
If the 20 remaining members are your standard of good owners, I think its more likely that someone from the outside meets those standards rather than someone becomes the next Colts or harassers lobs back handed insults at other owners. Those came from people "we know"
|
| 92 | Tree
ID: 161118314
Thu, Jun 24, 2021, 17:04
|
I think its more likely that someone from the outside meets those standards rather than someone becomes the next Colts or harassers lobs back handed insults at other owners.
i think i'm going to win the lottery tomorrow... ...without actually buying a ticket.
but that doesn't mean it's going to happen.
There's absolutely no evidence either direction that unknown owners would suck, or wouldn't suck.
i just prefer to err on the side of caution.
and while we're on the topic of back handed insults, you'll notice THREE WEEKS have gone by since you backhandedly accused me of a back handed comment when i questioned another owner's commitment to this league...and that owner still hasn't bothered to respond.
That's a whole lot like last year when we questioned some other owner's on their commitment, and they too, didn't bother to respond. Both of those owners are now gone from the league.
If someone questioned my commitment to this league, I'd come back with a ball of fire.
|
| 93 | R-Money
ID: 31128257
Thu, Jun 24, 2021, 19:21
|
You're helping my point.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion, and my opinion is that to err on the side of caution using "no outsiders because they are a risk" seems misguided since insiders seem to cause the most ruckus:
The two teams that wanted to leave this season, Insiders.
The Two teams we are kicking for inactivity - insiders
The Team that harassed the commissioner - Insider
and the Bengals - who you are currently accusing of inactivity - also Insider.
The Guy I replaced because he had lost interest - insider.
Me and Green Bay - outsiders. Still here. Checked in. Voted. Still active.
Anyway we are what.. one YES vote away from having 19 members so there wont even be a need to find replacements. Huzzah!
|
| 94 | Tree
ID: 161118314
Thu, Jun 24, 2021, 22:08
|
Me and Green Bay - outsiders.
when you joined g24 football, you were in G20 basketball and F101 football, meaning people in this league knew you already.
skinneej has been in this league since at least 2013. I stopped looking to see when he joined the league.
The Eagles and Vikings franchise owners are relatively new here - but I've known both those guys for nearly 20 years now, so I can vouch for them.
The bots that posted their interest? nobody knows them from Adam - that's the difference.
|
| 95 | R-money
ID: 518492722
Fri, Jun 25, 2021, 04:45
|
Meant Eagles. Not packers.
And calling them bots. That’s just rude man. You’ve already dug in and won the argument.
|
| 96 | Tree
ID: 571142323
Fri, Jun 25, 2021, 08:35
|
Yep. The Eagles. Who came into the league at the recommendation on another long time owner.
That's the difference. Neither of you were unknowns.
And if I won the argument,it's because I showed the difference between your examples of managers who came into this league on a recommendation, as opposed to managers that nobody knows.
|
| 97 | Tree
ID: 161118314
Fri, Jun 25, 2021, 09:10
|
now see, Perm Dude, he'd get a ringing endorsement to join this league. plus he's a real life former small town mayor, and even wore white powdered wigs and swung around a gavel and stuff when he presided (ok, maybe not the powdered wig stuff, but the mayor stuff is legit.)
if we do need a new owner, he shoots to the top of the list.
|
| 98 | ttucowboy
ID: 40582212
Fri, Jun 25, 2021, 09:36
|
I agree with Tree and also endorse PD.
|
| 99 | R-Money
ID: 31128257
Fri, Jun 25, 2021, 10:09
|
I don't think anyone will have the issue of welcoming PD. So lets just call it that then.
That brings the G24 down to the G18
|
| 100 | skinneej
Leader
ID: 040625911
Fri, Jun 25, 2021, 12:54
|
Funny I didn't realize I was an outsider, but then saw it was meant for the Eagles so no worries. I am one of the few remaining original owners in G24 and also was an original in G20 Hoops as well.
My main reason for voting no on contraction is mostly for historical purposes and I love being in a 24 team league. This league from the outset has always been the one I take the most pride in even though I'm much more of an NBA guy and probably why I have more consistent higher finishes in Hoops than Football. The original league creators Ref and RFS wanted this to be a true "Replica" league and initially were trying to do 32 teams, but found that 24 was the right balance for many reasons.
This league has evolved over nearly 20 years to we now have added multiple IDP while phasing out Team D/ST and added larger rosters to manage all the positions while not having too large a bench so WW would be completely useless. I want it to be hard to handle some positions and bye weeks, that's the point of this league in my mind. For all those that want to do contraction just so more players are available at certain positions that goes against what I believe the league was built as and makes it much easier to manage as a casual observer which we don't want. Now finding quality committed managers is an issue, so it may be that contraction has to happen, but if we do have 2-3 good potentials to take over already I'd like to see us stay at 24 personally.
|
| 101 | skinneej
Leader
ID: 040625911
Fri, Jun 25, 2021, 12:56
|
Also, If PD comes back to G24 as the original owner of the Cleveland Browns, does he get that team back or he gets to "move" and become the Baltimore Ravens haha!
|
| 102 | Judy
ID: 105462014
Fri, Jun 25, 2021, 13:30
|
If you had already signed into MFL — maybe because an email came from rick, you were “ checked in” and probably did not get the invite.
WG you are “checked in”
These teams ARE signed in to MFL:
Baltimore
Cincy
Cleveland
Fort Worth
PHL
AZ
KC
Carolina
Seattle
Chicago
GB
Minny
LVR
Houston
|
| 103 | skinneej
Leader
ID: 040625911
Fri, Jun 25, 2021, 15:12
|
BTW here is the link to the original webpage that was created for this league...you know it's old when you see "Angelfire.com". The list of original managers plus all the changes over the years are there and was probably last updated around 2012.
G24 Replica League
|
| 104 | R-Money
ID: 31128257
Fri, Jun 25, 2021, 15:31
|
Skin - thats wild. Wonder if the jump back to single games/week would fit the 20 team size better. Seemed so simple seeing best record of all time being 14-2
|
| 105 | Perm Dude
ID: 3310302519
Fri, Jun 25, 2021, 18:20
|
Re: #101. Grrrr!
|
| 106 | Judy
ID: 105462014
Sat, Jun 26, 2021, 20:32
|
Single games?
Noooooooooooooooo!
|
| 107 | Doug
ID: 15547288
Mon, Jun 28, 2021, 09:51
|
It looks like contraction may be inevitable, regardless of the vote. I reached out to another group of fantasy players (another league that's been running about the same duration as this one to see if I find anyone intrested). If we do end up contracting, I think that will strengthen the case for adding a flex IDP roster spot, which I would prefer over a major increase to IDP scoring.
Re: #53 both full IDP123 and sacks=6 are pretty major changes to IDP value. In particular, the sacks=6 is a challenge because it enhances the value of certain players significantly and others not-at-all (vs. IDP123 which at least increases IDP importance as a whole more evenly), and selectively increasing player value raises major fairness concerns in a keeper league.
Regardless of what other proposals we might have (e.g., maybe a milder approach where we just raise sacks to 3 or 4 points if we think DL is undervalued), I do think we'd be better off with a ranked choice vote on IDP scoring options, rather than trying to condense these down to individual yes/no votes. Happy to help run that if need be.
|
| 108 | skinneej
Leader
ID: 040625911
Mon, Jun 28, 2021, 12:23
|
I agree with Doug (whose also one of the last few OGs in this league) that I prefer the minimal change approach vs large scale changes. I'd be agreeable to a Sack increase from 3 to 4 pts this season, but 6 is too much and not as keen to just changing to the IDP123 scoring without a plan to do that in future seasons. In the past almost all changes to scoring were tweaks and not wholesale changes. Even when we finally agreed to replace Team D/ST with an extra IDP slot there was discussion on it for at least 3 years before we finally put in a good solution that worked for most everyone.
Since all major changes in this league require greater than a simple majority, it helps when proposals take the minimal change approach. I think contraction falls in the major change boat, but also see that it may be inevitable too with lack of potential replacements. If we have to contract to 20 teams, then that helps by adding 80 more players to the pool for teams to acquire, so I believe we could finally get the keeper level to 10 players from the 9 we have been at since the beginning.
To be a Keeper/Dynasty league, I'd prefer to have at least 50% of our roster as keepers so I think this could be the right time to do it along with contraction. As far as a dispersal draft if contraction happens, I see it as either those 80 players get thrown into the pool for the normal 11 round draft as has been mentioned, or we have to do a 2 round snake draft for those players. So 40 of the 80 players would be taken in dispersal draft, then teams would decide on their final keepers and if we go to 10 keepers that makes sense to do it that way. We can then amend the supplemental draft to be 10 rounds instead of 11.
|
| 109 | R-Money
ID: 31128257
Mon, Jun 28, 2021, 14:02
|
Id argue that shrinking the league to 20 (or less) counts as a soft reset as it upends whatever balance the league had previously and any roster/points changes should be considered minor or left to commissioners discretion as they are key to re-establishing balance - and super majority is too high of a bar to obtain with current voting participation.
IDP123 is designed to make both sides of the ball even. Its also designed so that a good IDP player makes a noticeable difference over an average or bad IDP player. Im not going to pull up the lengthy math but basically the IDP portion of this league is for visual aesthetics only until the points are balanced.
I do like expanding keepers. I do like expanding the roster on the defensive side. I really do like the idea of ranked choice voting for items with multiple solutions
|
| 110 | Tree
ID: 161118314
Mon, Jun 28, 2021, 16:51
|
i would not be opposed to upping the number of keepers, but i believe it should be gradual.
deals may have been made last season based on the anticipated number of keepers, so any change in that should begin in the 2022 season, with a gradual ramping up over that season and the following, depending on how many/if any we decided to add.
|
| 111 | skinneej
Leader
ID: 040625911
Tue, Jun 29, 2021, 11:34
|
I agree all changes should be gradual so teams can plan for them. That's why I would be opposed to implementing a IDP123 system this season without any chance for teams to plan. This is what caused many proposal in the past to fail that not enough thought was put into implementation and timing.
I would only be interesting in adding the 10th keeper this year if a 2 round snake dispersal draft was done as I mentioned above, then teams would all have 2 more players to potentially keep as their 10th keeper. If we don't plan to do a dispersal draft, which I am perfectly ok with, then we wait until next year to potentially add a 10th keeper.
For any new votes forthcoming, I see these as potentials:
1. Increase Sacks from 3 to 4 pts (simple tweak only needs majority) For 2021 season
2. Change Sacks from 3 to 6 pts (probably major change needs 2/3rds) For 2021 season
3. Change defensive scoring to IDP123 (major change needs 2/3rds) for 2022 season
4. Should we have a Dispersal draft? - not clearly defined currently, probably simple majority for 2021 season if contraction is needed
5. Increase Keepers from 9 to 10 (major change needs 2/3rds) For 2022 season
We still have to determine realignment if contraction happens as well as do we stay with double headers or go back to single games per week. I like the DHers personally, but am not opposed to a change there. There was a lot of discussion of pros/cons back when we added DHers, but I don't remember all the details and it's fun to watch the scores of 2 games vs just 1.
|
| 112 | Doug
ID: 32546312
Tue, Jun 29, 2021, 14:40
|
The other thing about going to 4 points on sacks is that it gives you a chance to assess the impact and whether you want to keep going to 5 or 6 points in future seasons while giving teams time to adjust strategically/gradually in terms of roster construction.
I want defense to be weighted a shade more, but definitely don't want to "make both sides of the ball even" as R-Money suggests is the design of IDP123... that framing makes me support it less than I might have otherwise. Definitely would prefer maybe just adding an IDP spot... moving us from 144 (6x24) to 140 (7x20) starters at IDP. Basically, we'd be contracting on offense to give teams more options there, without simultaneously contracting defense.
For dispersal, adding them all to the pool for this year's draft is the simplest approach. However, an alternative I'd propose:
1) Conduct a dispersal draft lottery. If you get one of the top 4 picks, you are ineligible to participate in the rookie draft lottery. Teams can opt-out of the dispersal draft lottery if they want to ensure they have a chance for a top 4 pick the rookie lottery instead.
2) Conduct a 2-round snake dispersal draft.
3) Combine your dispersal players with your existing roster and declare 10 keepers. Basically almost everyone will likely keep the 1st of your dispersal players for "free", and possibly also keep their 2nd dispersal player if their 2nd player is better than their "otherwise 9th keeper" player would have been.
4) Conduct the standard draft lottery, excluding the pick #1-4 winners of the dispersal lottery.
This approach keeps things balanced and ensure top teams aren't snagging top picks, but also makes sure the bottom teams aren't "double-dipping" with two top-4 picks (unless due to trades).
|
| 113 | Nerfherders
ID: 56261418
Tue, Jun 29, 2021, 14:58
|
If we are going to 20 teams, which is seems like we are, we definitely need to do something with those players. This league is so deep, even getting a top rookie can take you from last to first, so teams getting two of those players just because they happen to be bad the year before, doesn't quite seem fair.
I kinda like Doug's idea of getting to choose what lottery you want to try for. Do you want a top tier rookie or a proven vet? It depends where your team is at and how close you think you are.
My recommendation would be, instead of a dispersal draft, is to do a one-round rookie draft first. If you opt in to the rookie lottery, you can't opt in to the veteran draft lottery, which would include everyone else (including the removed teams' players and all remaining rookies).
|
| 114 | ttucowboy
ID: 165172915
Tue, Jun 29, 2021, 16:18
|
I prefer K.I.S.S. (Keep it Simple Stupid). Two drafts.
1) Standard rookie / supplemental lottery with contracted teams removed. Nothing new.
2) Dispersal draft straight up and down 1 round, done BEFORE keepers are announced, with order determined by an aggregate result of the last 3-5 years (i.e. if you have been the worst team overall in the last 3-5 years, you get the 1st pick). So on and so forth. Dispersal drafts should really be about strengthening the league as a whole and not some cutesy two back flip one cartwheel, wink two times and honk one time if you’re feeling lucky.
|
| 115 | ttucowboy
ID: 165172915
Tue, Jun 29, 2021, 16:22
|
Add to post above - Any players not selected in the 1 Round Dispersal Draft and / or selected but not kept would go into the Rookie / Supplemental draft pool.
|
| 116 | slizz
ID: 295272316
Tue, Jun 29, 2021, 17:08
|
Nerf I think just rip the band aid off quickly and it’s 1 really loaded draft. Will be significantly deeper and good rookies will be available rd 2 along with some good vets. Everyone wins.
And it’s the very simple under the KISS method. But democracy / majority should rule on that.
|
| 117 | R-Money
ID: 31128257
Tue, Jun 29, 2021, 21:19
|
@nerf @doug or anyone else. If you could Email me your preferred dispersal plan. Will be doing a vote with a few ideas attached. Rickmahan@yahoo.com
|
| 118 | Judy
ID: 92552311
Tue, Jun 29, 2021, 23:40
|
So 114/115
Round 1 must select from dispersed players.
Round 2 anything goes: dispersed, rookie, other
Round 3-end…as usual.
Do I read that right?
Seems pretty KISS?
Lottery? How?
|
| 119 | ttucowboy
ID: 165172915
Wed, Jun 30, 2021, 08:23
|
118: I envisioned two separate drafts but could combine into one as well I suppose.
Round 1 - Dispersal players only. Draft Order based on an aggregate of the last 3-5 years of results (i.e. worst team in the last 3-5 years, based on results, gets 1st pick and so on)
*** Announce Keepers after Dispersal Draft Round 1 ***
Round 2 - Player Pool opens to include rookies and any other players not kept. Draft Order determined by lottery, with lottery odds based on last year’s results, as we’ve always done.
Round 3 and on - As usual.
Another idea would be to announce keepers before Dispersal Draft with the idea of increasing the total keeper number in 2022 going forward.
|
| 120 | skinneej
Leader
ID: 040625911
Wed, Jun 30, 2021, 13:37
|
In general, having the dispersal draft done first, then keepers selected after that is definitely the way to go in my mind before we start the normal supplemental draft. In keeping with the sentiment that the dispersal draft and draft order should help balance the league based on the aggregate team records over the last several years, I support that and also why I think the 2 round snake draft is better than just 1 round.
Of the 80 players in the dispersal draft, 36 of those would normally be keepers and we would be selecting 40 of the 80 in a 2 round snake draft. So most teams will have 2 additional players that are keeper quality, and the teams that win the lottery picks in round 1 will likely only get 1 top end player. Then by adding the 10th keeper as Doug and I suggested, every team has a chance to be as solid as they possibly can as a bit of a "reset" of the league that was mentioned.
|
| 121 | skinneej
Leader
ID: 040625911
Wed, Jun 30, 2021, 13:41
|
Winning Pct by teams over the last 3 years Regular season:
Colts 26.9%
Chargers 29.5%
Eagles 37.2%
Bears 41.0%
Texans 42.3%
Giants 42.3%
Panthers 42.3%
Vikings 43.6%
49ers 44.9%
Broncos 46.2%
Cardinals 46.2%
Lions 47.4%
Jets 48.7%
Cowboys 48.7%
Saints 52.6%
Bengals 53.8%
Packers 53.8%
Raiders 55.1%
Bills 59.0%
Ravens 64.1%
Browns 64.1%
Jaguars 66.7%
Chiefs 71.8%
Seahawks 71.8%
|
| 122 | SwinganaMiss
ID: 48531621
Thu, Jul 01, 2021, 10:27
|
I agree w/ Nerf in post 113. Getting top dispersal and top rook is too much based on the unprecedented availability of top players in dispersal. I don't really want to see any team coming away with Tyreek Hill and Najee Harris while another team starts off with Ronald Jones and Amon-Ra St Brown.
Keeping everybody in a single draft will prevent this from happening. It gives the lottery teams their normal draft advantage just like any other year. Dispersal draft should not be about creating parity or balance. We should just be trying to achieve the fairest distribution of players--we already have our "fairest distribution" method, which is our normal supplemental draft. This year, the pool of players will just be better as a whole.
|
| 123 | Tree
ID: 161118314
Thu, Jul 01, 2021, 14:49
|
It gives the lottery teams their normal draft advantage just like any other year.
disagree. The draft is watered down, and top picks become less valuable if the pool is deep.
Dispersal draft should not be about creating parity or balance.
if we're trying to keep interesting a league that losing owners and unable to replace them, creating some level of parity is critical.
|
| 124 | SwinganaMiss
ID: 31632118
Thu, Jul 01, 2021, 19:50
|
Team getting 1 and 21 is still getting a significant advantage over team getting 20 and 40, no matter how deep the pool is. If you are upset that #20 is a great player, then be happy that #21 is also pretty great.
Really isn't necessary to manufacture some new rule to make the reward even bigger. Nobody should feel entitled to more than the normal advantage. Contraction/dispersal shouldnt punish or reward any team, IMHO.
I guess next year someone will propose that playoff teams don't get a first rd pick at all. That's basically what the dispersal would do this year.
|
| 125 | ttucowboy
ID: 4664120
Thu, Jul 01, 2021, 21:06
|
I guess next year someone will propose that playoff teams don't get a first rd pick at all. That's basically what the dispersal would do this year.
That’s not even close to an apples to apples comparison. Keeper / dynasty leagues don’t contract on a yearly basis. If you want to be opposed to a dispersal draft for self-centered reasons instead of looking out for the health of the league as a whole, that’s fine but call it what it is. Don’t try to put lipstick on a pig.
|
| 126 | Tree
ID: 161118314
Thu, Jul 01, 2021, 23:06
|
I guess next year someone will propose that playoff teams don't get a first rd pick at all. That's basically what the dispersal would do this year.
oh, good lord.
no one is taking away a first round pick.
eally isn't necessary to manufacture some new rule to make the reward even bigger. Nobody should feel entitled to more than the normal advantage. Contraction/dispersal shouldnt punish or reward any team, IMHO.
no one is manufacturing a new rule to reward even bigger.
we literally have an unprecedented situation where we are having to contract by four teams.
if we do two drafts, EVERY SINGLE TEAM IN THE SUPPLEMENTAL DRAFT WILL HAVE *EXACTLY* THE SAME OPPORTUNITY TO DRAFT WHATEVER COLLEGIATE OR NON-KEEPER PLAYER THEY WOULD HAVE DRAFTED IF WE WEREN'T CONTRACTING and, in fact, will be drafting four spots higher than they normally would have been.
allowing for a dispersal draft due to contraction to let weaker teams improve their opportunities is absolutely in the best interest of the league.
|
| 127 | R-Money
ID: 31128257
Fri, Jul 02, 2021, 09:55
|
IMO the dispersal should be something you opt in to. You have to dump some or all of your team to participate, depending on how much you dump determines which round you get to start picking. This way those with bad teams can start from scratch, those that only want to try to improve 1-2 keepers can roll the dice on that, and the good teams that are already good - stay that way.
But there seems to be a limitless string of ideas on combining, using past history, using the lottery etc. Probably easiest for participation if we make it one draft.
|
| 128 | Tree
ID: 161118314
Fri, Jul 02, 2021, 12:11
|
the simplest is two drafts, with the dispersal being one, at most two rounds.
why make it complicated?
|
| 129 | SwinganaMiss
ID: 48531621
Fri, Jul 02, 2021, 12:21
|
OK I need to throw an example out there...
Here is a projected start for a dispersal and supplemental draft for teams #1, #10, and #20 in the league.
I used FBG rankings for this, with all supplemental players and all players from the 4 likely contracted teams.
I am showing rank/pick within each draft, then overall [dynasty rank] of player, and then their name.
Of course #1 in dispersal may not be #1 in supplemental, but this is simplest. I didn't include IDP just to keep it relatively simple.
Dispersal
1) [4] Tyreek Hill
10) [95] Robby Anderson
20) [202] Jamison Crowder
21) [207] John Brown
30) Not in top 315 rankings
40) Not in top 315 rankings
Supp
1) [19] Najee Harris
10) [58] Trey Sermon
20) [131] Chuba Hubbard
21) [139] Amon-Ra St Brown
30) [173] Rhamondre Stevenson
40) [217] Tommy Tremble
Resulting picks from this are.....
Team #1
1) [4] Tyreek Hill
1) [19] Najee Harris
21) [139] Amon-Ra St Brown
21) [207] John Brown
Team #10
10) [58] Trey Sermon
10) [95] Robby Anderson
30) [173] Rhamondre Stevenson
30) Not in top 315 rankings
Team #20
20) [131] Chuba Hubbard
20) [202] Jamison Crowder
40) [217] Tommy Tremble
40) Not in top 315 rankings
Notes:
Team #1 gets 2 top 20 dynasty assets.
Team #2 gets 2 top 100 dynasty assets.
Team #1 and Team #10 both get 2 assets ranked better than any asset that Team #20 can pull ( nothing inside top [130] )
Team #20 is unlikely to keep their 20th pick from dispersal(roughly top 140 Offensive players will be kept at most, and there are only 13 players in dispersal that are better than rank 140).
Even if you snake the dispersal, it just gives team #20 John Brown (not a big prize and also not keeper-worthy).
This should explain why I say that the dispersal will basically eliminate Team #20's first round pick.
If you believe this to be fair then I wouldn't put it past you to vote to take away 1st rd picks for playoff teams next year.
If you want to use dispersal to do an extra fix to help bottom teams, you are entitled to that opinion. Sorry, I don't share in the opinion that we should take the opportunity to screw over the better teams.
I am actually trying to keep it so no team gets extra advantage from dispersal/contraction. Any other motivation is selfish, IMHO.
So, let's look at what happens if we throw everybody into a single draft...it would look something like this:
1) [4] Tyreek Hill
10) [37] Travis Etienne
20) [65] Rondale Moore
21) [67] Devonta Smith
30) [116] Mike Gesicki
40) [157] Amari Rodgers
41) [162] Anthony Schwartz
50) [185] Gio Bernard
60) [217] Tommy Tremble
Resulting in:
Team 1
1) [4] Tyreek Hill
21) [67] Devonta Smith
41) [162] Anthony Schwartz
Team 10
10) [37] Travis Etienne
30) [116] Mike Gesicki
50) [185] Gio Bernard
Team 20
20) [65] Rondale Moore
40) [157] Amari Rodgers
60) [217] Tommy Tremble
Still a clear advantage to the teams drafting earlier. Looks completely reasonable to me from all perspectives.I'm not sure why we should be looking to do anything beyond this.
|
| 130 | R-Money
ID: 31128257
Fri, Jul 02, 2021, 14:15
|
Swing - does your math favor fairness towards one combined draft IF we add additonal teams to the mix. Say 2 more?
|
| 131 | Slizz
ID: 32646214
Fri, Jul 02, 2021, 15:46
|
Swing - I wholeheartedly agree with you. You articulated it much better than I ever could. Thank you and bravo.
|
| 132 | WG
ID: 89402220
Fri, Jul 02, 2021, 16:12
|
I also think Swing did a great job of presenting his viewpoint and certainly has me thinking a bit differently too. Only thing is its near certain it wouldn't be the same 1, 10, 20 pickers across drafts, right? Probably a decent correlation between bad in 2020 and bad from 2018-2020, but its not a 1:1. Change things greatly?
|
| 133 | Slizz
ID: 32646214
Fri, Jul 02, 2021, 16:38
|
We have passionate opinions regarding the direction of the league. I’m for the single draft because it’s one season where we take a lump with a larger than usual player pool and then things move forward as per normal.
Now we need to vote for it…as I stated in my original contraction post.
Talking in private we are a ship without a captain and there is no clear direction at the moment…I agree with that sentiment as there lot of groveling towards the contraction / dispersal. I appreciate R Money moving things along in the emails to ensure it’s properly communicated but I don’t even know if we are officially contracting 4 teams or not. We still have 1 team not checking in or 3 teams not voting in the contraction proposal. Shoot, I don’t even know who is the leader of the league…
I don’t want to put it to vote until we are moving forward with a confirmed contraction ruling…as we didn’t get 11 yes votes. I’m just spitballing because I know people are frustrated.
|
| 134 | R-Money
ID: 31128257
Fri, Jul 02, 2021, 17:35
|
RE: dispersal draft - the math of fairness seems to point to the single draft, the simplicity points to it - but it should still be put to vote.
RE: Contraction - If we had to start the league today its 20 teams. Colts, Chargers, Saints, Giants - are PENDING Deletion. Jags are a no show.
Bears and Niners were a no vote - despite having checked in in some way.
The reason none of this is officialy official is several reasons. First as its said - we are a ship w/o a Capitan. That said, Inactivity is grounds for removal and since we arent able to replace any owners The Bears and Niners recent inactivity make them subject to be deleted as well. Being deleted for missing one vote shouldnt happen - but these people also missed Multiple Emails with out any communication back and as some pointed out they never (or almost never) post to roto. The two New polls, while important, were also to serve as a way to see if the same people were still no-showing votes - in which they should be removed and changes things significantly moving forward.
We Need to determine that first so then Perm dude can select which franchise he will be taking over - Unless its decided and the options of bears/niners dont change his decision.
Regardless of your feelings for it - we need a hard line to cross in place ASAP on who is in or who isnt. Do we vote on removing them? Should we set a hard deadline? do we wait for them to no show the draft then dump their teams then? do we judge today and move forward? - I dont know the best answer.
|
| 135 | Judy
ID: 1562310
Sat, Jul 03, 2021, 11:23
|
I see the idea of one draft.
There is a nice mixed of rookies and “proven”veterans (from dispersal) to provide a long list of quality players for at least two rounds,
So whom do you pick?
A rookie or a “proven” guy?
I think one draft is the simplest.
I have not looked at any draft player rankings, by SI, ESPN or fftoday, etc, but it might be interesting to compare the ADP of both the rookies and the “provens”?
That (ADP) might give a truer picture of value for a draft.
I like what swing did, but can someone do it using ADP from some reliable source ranking the rookie and provens in the same list?
|
| 136 | Judy
ID: 1562310
Sat, Jul 03, 2021, 11:36
|
Here is the fftoday list.
I powered it to our current scoring system.
So here is their pre season ranking.
Check it out:
https://www.fftoday.com/mflpower/playerrank.php?MFL=35231&Year=2021&Pos=Offense
It would be easy to print and highlight the dispersals so you know who is/might be available.
I am am on vacation without access to a printer, so someone would need to do it, it would be pretty visual.and easy to see.
|
| 137 | SwinganaMiss
ID: 48531621
Sun, Jul 04, 2021, 09:25
|
[130] R-Money, It doesn't matter how many teams are in the league or how big the player pool is, IMHO. #1 team will always get a distinct advantage over the last team. The #1 team's 2nd rd pick will always be "almost as good" as the last team's 1st rd pick, and so on. That's why I don't believe we need to create any special rule for this "unprecedented situation".
[132] WG, It will change a little. I can't predict the lottery, so didn't try to work that in. Bad teams from 2019 and 2018 have already gotten their advantage by picking early in the year following.
[134] Anybody suggesting dispersal because it is fair, is either biased or uninformed.
Anybody suggesting dispersal because we need to create parity is missing the point of dynasty/keeper leagues.
[136] Judy, that's what I did to create the example. If you synch the league to footballguys then you can highlight Free Agents in one color and specific teams in another. So, I highlighted the 4 contracted teams in a second color. Then I did a dispersal, and supplemental, and a mix of both to get to the example I shared. FBG is not perfect, but was the best I could do to create something relatively quickly. The only real liberty I took was with the QBs--1)Their value goes up some in 20 team league, and 2) I moved off of the QBs in the example to keep that from influencing the comparison.
Here is the dataset, with D for dispersal and S for Supplemental.
4 D WR Tyreek Hill, KC
6 D WR Justin Jefferson, MIN
8 D QB Kyler Murray, ARI
73 S QB Trevor Lawrence, JAX
15 D RB J.K. Dobbins, BAL
19 S RB Najee Harris, PIT
25 S WR Ja'Marr Chase, CIN
31 D RB D'Andre Swift, DET
136 S QB Justin Fields, CHI
137 S QB Trey Lance, SF
37 S RB Travis Etienne, JAX
42 S RB Javonte Williams, DEN
47 D TE Mark Andrews, BAL
51 S WR Jaylen Waddle, MIA
56 S TE Kyle Pitts, ATL
161 S QB Zach Wilson, NYJ
58 S RB Trey Sermon, SF
60 S WR Terrace Marshall Jr, CAR
201 S QB Mac Jones, NE
65 S WR Rondale Moore, ARI
67 S WR DeVonta Smith, PHI
73 D RB Ronald Jones II, TB
83 D RB Kenyan Drake, LV
84 S WR Rashod Bateman, BAL
90 D WR Julio Jones, TEN
94 S WR Elijah Moore, NYJ
95 D WR Robby Anderson, CAR
104 S RB Michael Carter, NYJ
109 S WR Kadarius Toney, NYG
116 D TE Mike Gesicki, MIA
124 D WR Marquise Brown, BAL
126 D WR Brandin Cooks, HOU
130 S TE Adam Trautman, NO
131 S RB Chuba Hubbard, CAR
139 S WR Amon-Ra St. Brown, DET
142 S WR D'Wayne Eskridge, SEA
148 S TE Harrison Bryant, CLE
149 D RB Phillip Lindsay, HOU
152 D TE Austin Hooper, CLE
155 S WR Tre'Quan Smith, NO
157 S WR Amari Rodgers, GB
162 S WR Anthony Schwartz, CLE
165 D RB James White, NE
168 S WR Tylan Wallace, BAL
171 S WR Seth Williams, DEN
173 S RB Rhamondre Stevenson, NE
176 D WR Darius Slayton, NYG
177 S TE Mo Alie-Cox, IND
177 S WR Donovan Peoples-Jones, CLE
182 S RB Kenneth Gainwell, PHI
185 D RB Giovani Bernard, TB
191 D TE Zach Ertz, PHI
202 D WR Jamison Crowder, NYJ
205 S WR Josh Palmer, LAC
207 D WR John Brown, LV
208 S WR Tutu Atwell, LAR
209 S WR Tyrell Williams, DET
210 S TE Pat Freiermuth, PIT
212 S TE Chris Herndon, NYJ
215 S TE Kylen Granson, IND
217 S TE Tommy Tremble, CAR
|
| 138 | Judy
ID: 1562310
Sun, Jul 04, 2021, 20:08
|
Thanks swing. I was on family vac w/o printer and then along drive home today.
|
| 139 | taxman
ID: 276710
Sun, Jul 04, 2021, 20:59
|
No surprise if you are in Keeper 14.
I disagree whole heartedly with Swinginamiss. Purpose of all fantasy games are to have fun, be it redraft or dynasty period..end of story.
Further more, Miss calls this not an unusual year with the contraction and glosses over distinction between our normal draft and having a dispersal draft.
Difference between haves and have-nots in this league is striking. Can continue with the imbalance of talent and more teams will drop by the wayside (and ignored by owner) because they can't compete. Combining the drafts continues the imbalance of talent.
Contraction to 20 teams is a reset. New day. New league.
ttucowboy @ posts 113 and 114 is best/easiest option offered
also see Judy @ 118.
|
| 140 | Jim
ID: 465239
Sun, Jul 04, 2021, 21:59
|
Good discussion and strong points on both sides...I think I know which way I'm leaning on one vs. two drafts, but need to think a bit more and will register my vote in the thread for it sometime soon.
|
| 141 | Tree
ID: 571142323
Mon, Jul 05, 2021, 01:33
|
Agree with 114 and 139.
If we're going to keep this league fun, the opportunity for the have nots to close the gap is one we should not overlook.
The long term health of this league is at stake, and if the rich get richer, I fear we'll be down to 16 teams next season.
A single draft only helps the rich teams. Two drafts help the poor teams.
The entire point of a draft is the opportunity for weaker teams to get stronger.
Why are we watering down that opportunity with a single draft?
|
| 142 | SwinganaMiss
ID: 48531621
Mon, Jul 05, 2021, 12:27
|
I have my answer. These arguments--they are biased against "good teams". They are informed. They see the data, they just don't care for a fair distribution of players. Gross if you ask me.
No team should ever get 2 players that are decidedly better than the first player that another team gets. The whole supplemental draft is setup with this in mind. I can't believe you guys are begrudging #20 from getting the 20th best player available.
With two drafts the #20 team is going to get ~ the 34th best player available while 4 teams will likely get 2 top 10 players and up to 13 teams will get 2 players that are better than anything #20 can get.
This goes completely against the spirit of the league. It completely eradicates the work done by good teams. These guys made it sound my claim to "remove first rd pick of playoff teams" was so outlandish, but that is exactly what they are advocating for here.
|
| 143 | SwinganaMiss
ID: 48531621
Mon, Jul 05, 2021, 12:51
|
The have-nots have the opportunity to close the gap every year with supplemental draft.
With a single draft, have-nots will get 2 great players while the haves will get 1.
In a normal year, it's just 1 great and 0 great.
Saying that "rich teams will get richer" is total BS. If you think #20 is getting richer in this setup, you are fooling yourself.
Team 1
1) [4] Tyreek Hill
21) [67] Devonta Smith
41) [162] Anthony Schwartz
Team 5
5) [15] JK Dobbins
25) [90] Julio Jones
45) [171] Seth Williams
Team 10
10) [37] Travis Etienne
30) [116] Mike Gesicki
50) [185] Gio Bernard
Team 15
15) [56] Kyle Pitts
35) [139] Amon-Ra St Brown
55) [207] John Brown
Team 20
20) [65] Rondale Moore
40) [157] Amari Rodgers
60) [217] Tommy Tremble
Bravo using doomsday scare tactics to promote your agenda.
|
| 144 | SwinganaMiss
ID: 48531621
Mon, Jul 05, 2021, 13:02
|
Surely this is true, right?
Difference between haves and have-nots in this league is striking.
Hmmm...Look at some of these win total changes within 1 year! None of these teams needed gifted picks to make these jumps up or down.
Jets: 18 to 6
Bengals: 9 to 21
Giants: 17 to 6
Packers: 5 to 17
Eagles: 16 to 6
San Fran: 7 to 14
|
| 145 | Judy
ID: 1562310
Mon, Jul 05, 2021, 14:14
|
#137
Only 21 Dispersal players on that list…
Yikes.
|
| 146 | Judy
ID: 1562310
Mon, Jul 05, 2021, 14:23
|
Summary (?) of draft options:
A).
Round one - rookies only (don’t want one, then pass)
Round 2-11 - everyone else
B)
Round one - no rookies (dispersal)
Round 2-11 everyone, including rookies
C)
One draft, anyone can be drafted
(Will be very curious to see how managers see this in choosing either a rookie or a vet. It will probably depend on who is available..)
Looking at swings ADP list it has 21 D players and 39 rookies down to ADP 217. Unbalanced in terms of talent towards rookie. Last pick in a dispersal only round, not really getting a good guy,would probably want to have a rookie…)
Also need to decide order…
Also need to decide keepers. They are normally required before the draft begins.
|
| 147 | Judy
ID: 1562310
Mon, Jul 05, 2021, 14:27
|
Here is the current draft order:
Draft/Lottery order:
NYG, LAC, Colts, NOLA removed.
1. NY Jets
2.
3.
4. Philly
5.
6. Denver
7. Carolina
8. Houston
9. Arizona
10. Buffalo
11. Las Vegas
12. Detroit
13. Chicago
14. San Francisco
15. Dallas
16. Jacksonville
17. Green Bay
18. Minnesota
19. Cleveland
20. Kansas City
21.
22. Baltimore
23. Cincy
24. Seattle
|
| 148 | Judy
ID: 1562310
Mon, Jul 05, 2021, 14:28
|
What’s with the weird numbers in the left column?
What did you do swinG? 😬🤪
|
| 149 | SwinganaMiss
ID: 48531621
Mon, Jul 05, 2021, 15:40
|
Judy, the messed up numbering was there before I posted today. The thread title has been changed somehow.
FYI, there are only 21 dispersal players inside the top 60 available players right now. There are only 13 offensive players that are likely keepable from dispersal--going by top 140 overall offensive players.
Heaven forbid if I am able to get Terence Marshall at 18! Some would rather one team gets Kyler Murray and Najee Harris and someone else gets JK Dobbins and Jamar Chase and someone else gets Trevor Lawrence and Tyreek Hill. Clearly I am the bad guy!
|
| 150 | Judy
ID: 1562310
Mon, Jul 05, 2021, 21:49
|
Sent screen shot of weird numbers to Guru.
|
| 151 | Judy
ID: 1562310
Mon, Jul 05, 2021, 21:51
|
So swing, you support my C option?
It is the one I like as well. At least guarantees everyone should get a good guy in round one…
|
| 152 | R-Money
ID: 31128257
Tue, Jul 06, 2021, 03:01
|
RE: 137
Why do we play IDP if not one IDP on 4 teams or in the rookie draft is better ranked than Tommy Freaking Tremble.
|
| 153 | Tree
ID: 571142323
Tue, Jul 06, 2021, 08:31
|
At least guarantees everyone should get a good guy in round one…
that's why I'm opposed to one draft. I don't believe a draft is there to get everyone at least one good player, I believe it's there to help weaker teams balance the playing field.
|
| 154 | GO
ID: 33543812
Tue, Jul 06, 2021, 11:09
|
2 round snake dispersal; order based on 3 year record. Worst 3 year record gets first choice of draft slot (not the first pick).
Everyone not selected or kept at keeper deadline throw back into the our regular standard draft, mixed with rookies etc.
|
| 155 | Slizz
ID: 32646214
Tue, Jul 06, 2021, 12:16
|
I’m for single draft for the reasons swing put sans “selfish” comment. There is no real fair way to do this for the good teams and unfortunate teams…A quick glance of the contracted teams rosters, here are the elite players / keeper assets:
INDY - Tyreek, JK Dobbins, Jefferson
LAC - Swift
NYG - N/A
NOLA - Kyler
Depth / Keeper Quality:
INDY - Robby Anderson, Hooper
LAC - Drake 🤮, John Brown
NYG - Daniel Jones, 33 year old Julio Jones, Philip Lindsay, and Marquise Brown. Ertz is toast as I live in Philly…y’all can draft him 🤣
NOLA - Crowder, Cooks, Andrews, Gesicki
Aka guys you draft in the dregs rounds of your 10-12 team redrafts.
It’s hard to not have self-interest when voting. You want it to be fair across the board…Using the Panthers as an example, why would they want anything else but 2 drafts when they stand to be top 4 in the dispersal and top 4 odds in the rookie?
Using Denver as an example, he’d have top 10 pick in the dispersal and top 3 odds in the rookie.
As a friend said in private, it’s a equity vs equality debate. 2 drafts is straight equity for the Panthers at the expense of the other 14 teams drafting after the elite players go.
That’s why I’m for the single draft…teams at the top get an elite stud and a solid depth piece or upside rookie rd 2 as the rookie draft is still 10 or so players deep:
Lawrence
Harris
Chase
Pitts
Etienne
Fields
Zach Wilson
Javonte Williams
Elijah Moore
Devonta Smith (judy dibs 🤣)
Waddle
So the teams at the top would get their pick of one of those 5 studs, and still get a shot at some quality depth or even a upside rookie round 2. That’s why I’m for 1 draft. It’s fair across the board and not towards the guys who are now suddenly gifted with great players.
|
| 156 | Bobo
ID: 8231213
Tue, Jul 06, 2021, 12:18
|
Thank you for the e-mails to get back here and get caught up. Holiday and whatnot had me outdoors and away from devices.
I appreciate all of the dialogue and thought going towards the direction we will land.
|
| 157 | GO
ID: 33543812
Tue, Jul 06, 2021, 13:00
|
Perhaps we can get an unbiased council of gurupie-elders who aren't in the league to decide for us the fairest way.
|
| 158 | CT/CLEV
ID: 455222211
Tue, Jul 06, 2021, 13:00
|
Hi all- I'm on vacation ntil 7/12, but will carve some time out to consider the thread items and get a more detailed response this week. Thanks.
CLEV
|
| 159 | WG
ID: 89402220
Tue, Jul 06, 2021, 16:26
|
My thoughts, for what they're worth:
I was for 2 drafts initially but didn't really have a good sense of the caliber of players that would be available in the dispersal draft. From what Swing and Jay posted, it appears there are a few top notch players and then a big dropoff (Crowder 20th?)... so much so that those picking at the back of round 1 would make a meaningless selection. I can definitely see why some managers would think this approach of rewarding some teams while not rewarding others isn't an optimal solution.
I'm still not certain on timing in relation to keepers. If dispersal was pre-keepers, the above holds true more; Jamison Crowder wouldn't crack team 20s keepers so the dispersal draft was meaningless to him. If dispersal was post-keepers, Crowder, though not keeper worthy, would at least be a bench piece.
I think one draft does do what is intended... benefit the lower teams still. The 1.01 may remain unchanged (Lawrence?) but the 2.01, 3.01, etc are now a better player given more options for picking in between.
Those contracted players were never entitled to the low finishers in the first place, so not sure NOT doing two drafts is like taking away from them and giving to the good teams; there just doesn't seem to be one default or fair or proper solution.
I do think the one draft is less about rewarding the good teams and more about not double rewarding the lower teams. Again, NOT choosing the 2 draft options isn't a push for 'rewarding' top teams, but given that the dispersal draft may prove meaningless for good teams, the 1 draft solution avoids that while still giving the lower teams an advantage of better players to pick with their early picks.
Lastly, the one draft solution is still not putting these top rookies or contracted players on the good teams. Per Swing's example its a matter of upgrading Chubba Hubbard to Rondale Moore... I don't think this is an improvement that is so unfair and imbalanced toward team 20 that a better solution is the 1 team getting Lawrence and Tyreke Hill to the 20th's Chubba and throwaway Crowder.
Think we all want what's best for the league so we don't have to constantly implement anti-tanking rules and look for new owners, I just think each person is entitled to their own opinion of what move is best to accomplish that.
|
| 160 | SwinganaMiss
ID: 48531621
Wed, Jul 07, 2021, 00:13
|
[Tree--in the other thread]
2. That a draft should be "fair" and that weaker teams should not have the ability to improve.
When I say "fair", I don't mean equal. The normal supplemental draft, where every team gets one pick of the top 20(24) players available, is "fair" as deemed by the rules of the league. That is the rule I signed up for when I joined the league. This fair rule is what allows weaker teams to improve.
I am not asking for equal. I don't expect everybody to get equal picks. I do expect every team to get a top 20 pick of the available players.
[Tree]
3. That four teams folding is a normal thing, and any attempt to redistribute players that does not benefit his team are "backhanded rules created to redistribute power at every opportune moment," making the presumption that a once in league history occasion is "everyone opportune moment."
I certainly never said 4 teams folding was normal. Do you guys think that the four teams quit because of the insurmountable advantage held by a few teams? Wow, I guess I missed the memo. NYG was in the playoffs in 2019. NO was in the playoffs in 2020. Indi was getting the boot anyway, and LAC was being threatened with draft sanctions. But go ahead and blame the powerhouses! {{ insert eyeroll }}
(I do give in to ttucowboy and Tree on the following point--->) I should reword my statement from "every opportune moment" to "the first opportune moment". That doesn't make it better though....it's still not something that should or needs to happen in a dynasty/keeper league.
|
| 161 | Tree
ID: 571142323
Wed, Jul 07, 2021, 08:00
|
Nobody said the four teams quit because of insurmountable odds.
You have implied that this isn't an extraordinary situation, and you've referred to those who are opposed to a single draft with a litany of unkind words.
As such, I am invoking the Freebird rule.
|
| 162 | Tree
ID: 571142323
Wed, Jul 07, 2021, 08:00
|
Nobody said the four teams quit because of insurmountable odds.
You have implied that this isn't an extraordinary situation, and you've referred to those who are opposed to a single draft with a litany of unkind words.
As such, I am invoking the Freebird rule.
|
| 163 | ttucowboy
ID: 4664120
Wed, Jul 07, 2021, 08:12
|
Wow, I guess I missed the memo.
You missed a memo that never existed. Plus, I wouldn’t call a team that currently has no playable QB and no championships to their name a powerhouse. Once again, concocting things in your head.
I think the horse has been beat dead at this point. I’ll accept the result of the voting either way. Unlike you, I won’t see a single draft (vote against what I voted for) as an F U. It will actually be more beneficial for me to have a single draft (have an extra 3rd that would
immediately have more value and also a better chance at landing an immediate impact player in the 1st round). I will say though that the idea of continuing to play in a league with you is an appalling thought. Something I will need to consider moving forward.
|
| 164 | R-Money
ID: 31128257
Wed, Jul 07, 2021, 08:20
|
@tree youre getting Michael Hayes to manage your team in your place?
|
| 165 | Tree
ID: 571142323
Wed, Jul 07, 2021, 08:28
|
@r-money - I am sure Jim and Bobo will get the reference, but I'm glad someone else did as well, but that's not exactly the portion of the rule I'm invoking.
|
| 166 | SwinganaMiss
ID: 48531621
Wed, Jul 07, 2021, 11:41
|
I guess you guys didn't get the sarcasm....I know darn well that my team is no powerhouse. I know I have no QB. I also know that the contracted teams didn't leave due to insurmountable advantage.
But, you are justifying the gifting of a few elite players to "worse teams" because we need to balance the league, presumably because you don't think those teams can catch up via normal supplemental draft and you fear that they will quit because of that.
At the beginning of this, I produced a very realistic view of what a dispersal would look like and exactly why I think it's not right. I produced an example single-draft as well, and showed that "worse teams" will still have an advantage. I can make the same claim as ttucowboy.... Drafting at the beginning of single-draft and getting Kyler/Devonta or Tyreek/Bateman or Najee/Julio would all seem pretty good to me when I know the "better teams" are getting Rondale Moore and Amari Rodgers or Terrance Marshall and Trequan Smith. I don't think it's any worse than the advantage they would get in a normal year, but maybe I am misguided. I definitely don't see the rich getting richer in a single-draft, and I can't figure out who would get shafted in this scenario.
Honestly, I thought/hoped that the details above would be enough to convince people toward single-draft. I thought leveraging the current supplemental rule would be the easiest and fairest for all. I didn't expect a backlash for thinking every team should get a top 20 available player or for wanting the fairest distribution of all players.
My sincere apologies if you take offense to the term selfish. Obviously we have varying thoughts on what is good for the league. I am tired of defending my views, so will try to drop it from here on out.
On a side note, this post could mess up the thread again. Sorry! I am not pasting anything weird....but the page doesn't look right as I submit it.
|
| 167 | GO
ID: 33543812
Wed, Jul 07, 2021, 12:16
|
SwinganaMiss + WG thoughts converted me from 2 to 1... so thanks for the effort to promote the different sides of the argument.
|
| 168 | Tree
ID: 571142323
Wed, Jul 07, 2021, 13:23
|
guess you guys didn't get the sarcasm
I am my father's son, and he always taught me to call out horse$hit, and your claims of sarcasm, good sir, are horse$hit.
The posts had too much spite and animus to be viewed by any rational person as sarcasm.
|
| 169 | SwinganaMiss
ID: 48531621
Thu, Jul 08, 2021, 12:01
|
Shocking response from Tree there! {{insert eyeroll}} No surprise that Tree would respond with a personal attack!
The truth of it is Tree, after all the posts and messages I can't even figure out the basis for your argument to have a dispersal.
One day you say that you fear future teams will quit because of either lack of parity or lack of success (or ???); The next day you take exception to the idea that teams have quit due to insurmountable odds. So where does your fear come from?
There is no evidence(to my knowledge) that any team quit for any of these reasons , yet you promote taking this "extraordinary" step to level the field to avoid it happening in the future.
You throw out the opinion that a "single draft only helps the rich teams". What are you basing that off of? I have shared realistic data and examples. You've shared nothing of substance to support your opinion.
Your arguments have devolved to calling me spiteful, animus, spewing horse$shit, and "only interested in what is best for my team", etc. while claiming that I am the one using a "litany of unkind words".
|
| 170 | Tree
ID: 571142323
Thu, Jul 08, 2021, 15:40
|
Get over it, nugget.
You laid down a personal attack against everyone opposed to your position.
If you can't stand the heat, get out the kitchen.
|
| 171 | Perm Dude
ID: 3310302519
Thu, Jul 08, 2021, 21:02
|
Staaaahp!
Don't know why things have to devolve into calling others out for "personal attacks." It doesn't have to.
Responding to perceived slights with sharply-worded posts might not be below individual members but it should be below this league.
|
| 172 | R-Money
ID: 31128257
Thu, Jul 08, 2021, 21:20
|
Agreed with Perm
You guys have both stated your sides multiple times and Voted. Let it be unless new information is to be shared.
Personal attacks are below this league.
@Perm - let me know here or in the separate topic which team you want to take over and if you could also vote on the Draft issue and the Defensive scoring issue. Appreciate it.
|
| 173 | Judy
ID: 1562310
Fri, Jul 09, 2021, 20:10
|
Guys,
There is no place for these personal attacks. You got a beef? Do it in private emails back and forth and leave us out of it.
Thanks.
Judy
|
| 174 | Perm Dude
ID: 452112010
Sat, Jul 10, 2021, 20:00
|
I'm not seeing a resolution to the question of whether penalties travel with the teams or expire once an owner leaves. Could someone offer some clarity?
As a new owner I will only point out that teams with penalties attached are less attractive to a new owner, all things being equal. If this is the intent that's cool but it seems like slamming the barn door after the horse has left. Almost literally in this case.
|
| 175 | R-Money
ID: 31128257
Sat, Jul 10, 2021, 22:12
|
@Perm
Your new team will not face any punishment. As far as I am concerned that argument ended when we decided to shrink to 20.
If anyone feels wronged by the actions of former members and former teams they can present their case in detail and we will discuss compensation for them.
|
| 176 | Tree
ID: 571142323
Sat, Jul 10, 2021, 23:06
|
Whoa. So now we're making unilateral decisions?
|
| 177 | ttucowboy
ID: 256431022
Sat, Jul 10, 2021, 23:45
|
I’m confused. Wouldn’t potential penalties still apply depending on what franchise is picked? I don’t see how contracting from 24 to 20 would eliminate any potential penalties if the Colts or Chargers franchise was picked by PD. Now if PD picks the Jags, Giants or Saints then no potential penalties would need to be assessed. Maybe I’m missing something here but I don’t agree with R-Money on this one.
|
| 178 | Perm Dude
ID: 452112010
Sun, Jul 11, 2021, 11:53
|
"Wouldn’t potential penalties still apply depending on what franchise is picked?"
That's my question right there. I mean, I am not arguing one way or the other but the effect of the penalty should be considered.
If the intent is to get rid of a bad owner *and* to dissolve their team then the effect matches the intent of the league.
The more I look at the squads the better the Jacksonville team looks so its all a bit of a wash.
I didn't see any resolution to the penalty question is all, and wanted to see if I was overlooking something.
|
| 179 | R-Money
ID: 31128257
Sun, Jul 11, 2021, 12:23
|
Yeah Im good planting my flag here Simply based on the following:
Theres been no real vocal support despite attempts to select a commissioner OR leadership committee to reside over such a decision
There has been no attempt to bring any charges to a vote by anyone affronted - Nor a cohesive agreement on punishment (another vote perhaps)
Even if something WAS brought to a vote - the board was fairly split in initial discussion - and would probably lean against punishment against someone the league has deemed trustworthy.
The way I see it - the punishments were levied against the Colts by kicking them from the league. Chargers were perhaps a different story but lesser of an offense from my understanding.
Ive always stated if any franchises feel they deserve some compensation due to the actions of the colts or chargers they can present it and if its valid they should be rewarded SOMETHING. Guess how many franchises have come forward, none - another tip towards this not being as strong of an issue as needed to pass a vote.
We can still go through the process if someone insists but I personally think our best efforts should be concentrating on shaping the future by laying down specific lineup and inactivity rules and punishments in black and white to prevent future transgressions instead of focusing on the past - a past which the league has cut off.
|
| 180 | Jim
ID: 465239
Sun, Jul 11, 2021, 15:07
|
Why don't we have Perm make a decision on what he wants.
IF it's a case of "if there are no penalties I want the Colts, but if there are I want the Jags" or something, then we should do an up/down vote on if penalties would move forward, but give a short turn around time on the vote (24-48 hours) because we do need to get this league moving on and moving forward. Just my 2 cents
|
| 181 | Tree
ID: 571142323
Sun, Jul 11, 2021, 16:55
|
Jim nailed it.
If PD goes with the Jags, then we have no issues.
But if he goes with one of the teams facing penalties, these are things we discussed, and at no point was a decision made to just ignore the penalties, and to hell with the teams affected.
It would be completely unfair for a franchise that intentionally lost games to be rewarded with a high draft pick, regardless of ownership.
If we want to start planting flags, I'm also happy to do so, but not being a supporter of January 6 style insurrections, I'll prefer to let democracy and a completely fair election to happen - the most fair election in history, in fact.
|
| 182 | R-Money
ID: 31128257
Sun, Jul 11, 2021, 17:54
|
@Tree - I hope the votes prove me wrong then.
@Tree - please review the below and correct me where needed. I will post a Yes No vote with punishment suggestions for each as soon as you respond or within an hour.
Based on all accusations in this thread and the thread from the 2020 season levied by tree and Slizz
Colts - Accused by entire league of Inactivity for Multiple Weeks, Team abandonment. Commissioner had to take over team. Owner Removed in response.
Chargers - Accused by Slizz and possibly Tree? of Inactivity for several (2-3?) Weeks. Not clear which weeks. Roster mismanagement/tanking that affected Playoff qualifying and seeding.
Texans - Accused by Tree of Roster Mismanagement/Tanking for one week, unclear of which week, that MAY have affected playoff qualifying and seeding
Bengals - Accused by Tree of Inactivity for an unknown amount of times/Not responding to league communications(trade requests), unclear of which trade requests, timing of requests, and if they were allowed to expire or withdrawn by sender
Please note that current rules only have rules against having bye week/injured players starting over obvious possible starters on PURPOSE, but current rules do state it cannot happen as a result of inactivity.
Also note ignoring/not participating in league communication is currently required.
|
| 183 | Perm Dude
ID: 3310302519
Sun, Jul 11, 2021, 19:45
|
I'll see if I can speed this up this evening.
|
| 184 | Jim
ID: 416531119
Sun, Jul 11, 2021, 20:53
|
Perm says he may make a decision this evening. If he chooses a team that is not one of the four offenders I think this becomes a dead issue
|
| 185 | ttucowboy
ID: 556503022
Sun, Jul 11, 2021, 21:54
|
Agree with Jim. I don’t think we need to put the cart before the horse. Let’s see what team PD picks first. I have a feeling this will become a nonissue.
|
| 186 | R-Money
ID: 31128257
Sun, Jul 11, 2021, 22:11
|
Colts and Chargers accusations vanish if they aren't selected, but Tree is right nothing should just disappear as if it was decided. We should put as many outstanding issues to bed this offseason as we can.
I went through both threads and listed all accusations/complaints I could find against other squads. Tree is welcome to dismiss his previous comments on Bengals or Texans, but he's right - democratic process.
|
| 187 | Perm Dude
ID: 3310302519
Sun, Jul 11, 2021, 22:33
|
OK folks, with the #1 pick in the draft, Perm Dude selects....
Jacksonville Jaguars.
|
| 188 | Perm Dude
ID: 3310302519
Sun, Jul 11, 2021, 22:34
|
(this despite the bad QB situation. As I said elsewhere: Seriously--did Goff and Tannenhill have 20 total downfield balls between them last year?)
Good upside and decent rest of the roster. Now to go through old threads for rule changes, etc.
|
| 189 | R-Money
ID: 31128257
Sun, Jul 11, 2021, 22:43
|
Alright well thats settled. Colts, Giants, Saints, Chargers. Teams will be removed and players dispersed. Official welcome back party to start now.
|
| 190 | R-Money
ID: 31128257
Mon, Jul 12, 2021, 00:45
|
Recent Polls Closed. Results
Dispersal Draft - Single Draft.
Defensive Scoring - Increase Sacks to 4 points.
New Defensive Scoring as follows
Tackles 1
Assists 0.5
Sacks 4
Safety 4
Interception 4
Pass Defended 1
Forced Fumbles 2
Fumble Recoveries 2
Touchdown 6
|
| 191 | Doug
ID: 32546312
Mon, Jul 12, 2021, 13:42
|
When's the lottery, and when does the draft start?
|
| 192 | Tree
ID: 161118314
Mon, Jul 12, 2021, 14:43
|
When's the lottery, and when does the draft start?
amen! lets play some football!
|
| 193 | Bobo
ID: 36211018
Mon, Jul 12, 2021, 19:01
|
Happy to see the progress in this thread a little more than 24 hours later...progress is good and I am jazzed for the draft!
|
| 194 | skinneej
Leader
ID: 040625911
Tue, Jul 13, 2021, 02:49
|
So the other good thing with PD picking the Jags, each division lost 1 team each so we don't need to do any realignment right? We now have divisions of 5 teams instead of 6 and 10 teams total per conference. So the schedule format suggested in post 81 for 20 teams seems to work pretty well where we play each conference opponent twice and each team in the opposing conference once during the regular season. That's 28 games over 14 weeks which keeps the weekly doubleheaders that we are used to.
|
| 195 | ttucowboy
ID: 546431215
Tue, Jul 13, 2021, 10:36
|
2020 timeline:
7/14 - Lottery held
8/29 - Keepers due
8/30 - Draft started
9/10 - Season started
This year, NFL season starts 9/9. If we follow last year’s guide, that would give a 2021 timeline of the following:
7/13 (TODAY 😉) - Lottery announcement
8/28 - Keeper deadline
8/29 - Start draft
|
| 196 | R-Money
ID: 31128257
Tue, Jul 13, 2021, 11:16
|
Schedule suggestion and timeline suggestion seem reasonable. If there are no objections someone can reach out to Guru to have him run the balls. Just inform him its 14 lottery teams instead of 16 Per Judys list above.
|
| 197 | Slizz
ID: 556191311
Tue, Jul 13, 2021, 12:20
|
Back from vacation. Glad to see progress was made. I’ll take 4 for the IDP sacks as a start…
Could you delete the other threads regarding the Bengals and Texans?
I for one, had no idea there was even allegations against them. If we have some type of structured leadership / a leadership council, they can make those decisions for the benefit of the league. Also has the potential to create bad will amongst league members.
|
| 198 | Slizz
ID: 556191311
Tue, Jul 13, 2021, 12:31
|
Pete thanks for the timeline. Quantifying it shows we need to get started.
As for the lottery, I think we should take a page out of GO’s playbook. GO always has transparency in his leagues and cc’s outside members as well as members of the league for integrity purposes. Not saying secret squirrel stuff is going on here its just a layer of comfort knowing that safeguard is out there…
|
| 199 | WG
ID: 89402220
Tue, Jul 13, 2021, 13:08
|
Agree with Slizz. Can we get a post showing odds given to each team before the lottery is run?
|
| 200 | ttucowboy
ID: 546431215
Tue, Jul 13, 2021, 13:28
|
Judy has an order posted (147). Here is the order adjusted for contracted teams.
Non playoff teams eligible for lottery:
1. NY Jets
2. Philly
3. Denver / Fort Worth
4. Carolina
5. Houston
6. Arizona
7. Buffalo
8. Las Vegas
9. Detroit
10. Chicago
11. San Francisco
12. Dallas
13. Jacksonville
Playoff teams not eligible:
14. Green Bay
15. Minnesota
16. Cleveland
17. Kansas City
18. Baltimore
19. Cincinnati
20. Seattle
It makes sense, to me, to remove contracted teams and everyone impacted moves up. Not sure why we would have empty slots in the lottery process.
|
| 201 | WG
Donor
ID: 35338278
Tue, Jul 13, 2021, 13:38
|
Post 200 seems like a no brainer to me. Not sure why odds would be assigned to a non existent team.
|
| 202 | R-Money
ID: 31128257
Tue, Jul 13, 2021, 13:44
|
The previous odds were as follows chances out of 1000:
1st - 250
2nd - 200
3rd - 147
4th - 108
5th - 80
6th - 59
7th - 43
8th - 32
9th - 23
10th - 17
11th - 13
12th - 9
13th - 7
14th - 5
15th - 4
16th - 3
|
| 203 | Tree
ID: 161118314
Tue, Jul 13, 2021, 14:03
|
via GIPHY
|
| 204 | Judy
ID: 76421022
Wed, Jul 14, 2021, 09:33
|
147/200
I just posted the draft order that nerf figured out last January, he asked someone to check his work.
Can we please have a double check before we do the lottery.
Here are the rules:
Draft Order
A. Round 1
Picks 1-4 are determined by a draft lottery of the prior year’s 16 non-playoff teams. Picks 5-16 are in reverse order of regular season record of the remaining non-playoff teams; Picks 17-24 are the playoff teams in reverse order of playoff finish.
B. Subsequent Rounds
Picks 1-16 are in reverse order of regular season record of non-playoff teams. Picks 17-24 are the playoff teams in reverse order of playoff finish. The draft will NOT snake.
|
| 205 | R-Money
ID: 31128257
Wed, Jul 14, 2021, 10:08
|
@judy
Order looks good except I have
14. Minnesota 14-12
15. Green Bay 17-9
I assume since they both lost round one worst record gets better pick
|
| 206 | Guru
ID: 330592710
Wed, Jul 14, 2021, 11:22
|
I just ran the lottery, per directions from R-Money. Odd were the same as before for teams 1-13. In the unlikely event that a team in the 14-16 slot were drawn (only a 0.12% chance), I would have treated it as a "do over". (It did not happen.)
Here are the results:
Pick #1: Philly
Pick #2: Arizona
Pick #3: Denver / Ft. Worth
Pick #4: NY Jets
I have the backup data if anyone wants to audit.
|
| 207 | Judy
ID: 92552311
Wed, Jul 14, 2021, 11:52
|
Thanks
Now thebig decision.
Somewhat desperate for a RB...
|
| 208 | GO
ID: 33543812
Wed, Jul 14, 2021, 12:15
|
Please keep the keeper thread to keepers only (and leftovers). It will be an uncontrollable mess if not. Talk here.
|
| 209 | ttucowboy
ID: 586481411
Wed, Jul 14, 2021, 12:49
|
Trades from last year involving draft picks:
Dallas Cowboys Trade:
Curtis Samuel
2021 R6
Cleveland Browns Trade:
Alex Smith
2021 R3
Also
Dallas Cowboys Trade:
Neville Hewitt
2021 R10
Cleveland Browns Trade:
2021 R7
These are documented on the league website, including the picks, but also posting here.
|
| 210 | GO
ID: 33543812
Wed, Jul 14, 2021, 13:02
|
One more...
Bills Trade:Mitchell Trubisky, 2020 Round 11.13; 2021 Round 11
Seahawks Trade: 2020 Round 3.24; 2021 Conditional Draft Pick based on playing time:
-4 games or less, 5th rd pick
-5-8 games, 4th rd pick
-9-12 games, 3rd rd pick
-13+ games, 2nd rd pick
|
| 211 | GO
ID: 33543812
Wed, Jul 14, 2021, 13:03
|
and Tribisky played 10 games...
|
| 212 | Tree
ID: 161118314
Wed, Jul 14, 2021, 13:23
|
I've got a draft pick excel grid to upload, if only i can remember how. :D
|
| 213 | GO
ID: 33543812
Wed, Jul 14, 2021, 14:29
|
Did we ever decide on adding half PPR at least to this league? I feel like we're still in the dark ages on that. Even if its in effect like 3 seasons from now... most default leagues are full PPR these days.
|
| 214 | Jim
ID: 416531119
Wed, Jul 14, 2021, 18:38
|
Sweet! #1...time to do some looking at what I decide to do!
|
| 215 | Judy
ID: 76421022
Wed, Jul 14, 2021, 22:24
|
I plan to input draft order by tomorrow evening.
The next move is to do this which I need to figure out:
NOTE: You cannot delete a franchise that has traded future draft picks in a league. In order to be able to delete the franchise you will first need to go to the Reports > League > Future Draft Picks and undo any picks that are traded to/from the team you wish to remove. This is done by checking the corresponding box next to the involved teams trade. Once you have removed all traded picks with the franchise you may then delete them from the league.
This option can NOT be undone. If you accidentally delete a wrong traded pick you will need to go to the For Owners > Trades and re-trade the picks between the two teams.
|
| 216 | Judy
ID: 76421022
Wed, Jul 14, 2021, 22:25
|
After I do the step above regarding future draft picks,
then how do we compensate teams who lost picks?
I need to study this one. Be patient.
|
| 217 | Judy
ID: 76421022
Wed, Jul 14, 2021, 22:27
|
209
Need to consider both to and from teams.
|
| 218 | Skinneej
ID: 11931511
Thu, Jul 15, 2021, 02:36
|
Re:205 the order for the playoff teams is reverse our final finish. My team Packers lost to Vikings In the 7th place game the final week, so I finished 8th and will have the 14th pick.
|
| 219 | Jim
ID: 465239
Thu, Jul 15, 2021, 08:44
|
Judy - I'm confused, in the trades that were posted above, I don't see any picks involving the four contracted teams? Or am I missing something (and I totally could be)?
|
| 220 | Nerfherders
ID: 56261418
Thu, Jul 15, 2021, 18:43
|
There seem to be two involving the Colts. They gave up a 10th to the Raiders and an 11th to the Packers.
I would say that the Raiders and Packers simply keep the picks they traded and we forget the two picks they get back.
|
| 221 | Tree
ID: 161118314
Thu, Jul 15, 2021, 18:55
|
indeed. There appear to be these two trades:
Green Bay Packers gave up Barrett, Shaq TBB LB; Year 2021 Round 6 Draft Pick from Green Bay Packers
Indianapolis Colts gave up Wagner, Bobby SEA LB; Year 2021 Round 11 Draft Pick from Indianapolis Colts
Las Vegas Raiders gave up Harry, N'Keal NEP WR; Hooper, Austin CLE TE; Bass, Tyler BUF PK; Evans, Rashaan TEN LB; Year 2021 Round 5 Draft Pick from Las Vegas Raiders
Indianapolis Colts gave up Jones, Marvin DET WR; Eifert, Tyler JAC TE; Hurst, Hayden ATL TE; Badgley, Mike LAC PK; Year 2021 Round 10
Pick from Indianapolis Colts
I believe Nerf's suggestion makes the most sense. The Packers and a the Raiders each get a "Win," keeping their picks.
|
| 222 | R-Money
ID: 31128257
Thu, Jul 15, 2021, 19:09
|
@Jim - if you're in the 2021 season you wont see transactions from the 2020 season - first go back to that season then review transactions
@Skin - Apologies - you are correct.
|
| 223 | Judy
ID: 76421022
Thu, Jul 15, 2021, 22:26
|
Skin
So
14. GB
15. Min
Correct?
|
| 224 | Judy
ID: 76421022
Thu, Jul 15, 2021, 22:28
|
220/221
Final answer:
GB keeps its own 6
LAV keeps its own 5
That right?
Makes my job a lot easier…
Anyone object?
|
| 225 | Judy
ID: 76421022
Thu, Jul 15, 2021, 22:35
|
These trade thing is always confuse me, so please confirm I don’t have these backwards.
Thanks.
#209
Cowboys get CLeveland 3
Cleveland gets cowboys 6
Dallas gets Cleveland 7
Cleveland gets Dallas 10
#211
Seattle gets bills 11
Bills get Seattle 3.
|
| 226 | Judy
ID: 76421022
Thu, Jul 15, 2021, 22:36
|
Is that it for 2021 trades?
Lemme know!
Gonna do “final” draft list this weekend. Always changeable so you look have time to review and get me to fix.
|
| 227 | ttucowboy
ID: 586481411
Thu, Jul 15, 2021, 23:52
|
225 is correct
|
| 228 | GO
ID: 33543812
Fri, Jul 16, 2021, 10:06
|
Whenever we open a new thread here to start the regular season can we please move it over to the Football Forum so its in the same place as RIFC and F101... G20 MLB is in the Baseball forum... G20 in the Hoops forum... with Toral gone lets get in line.
|
| 229 | Judy
ID: 76421022
Fri, Jul 16, 2021, 11:54
|
I will ask guru if it is ok.
|
| 230 | WG
ID: 89402220
Tue, Jul 20, 2021, 12:43
|
Not a big deal and maybe just a pet peeve of mine, but would kindly ask that when listing keepers we put full names or include positions instead of just last names. Avoids confusion and makes it easier to understand and track. Lots of Joneses, Johnsons, and Williamses in the league!
|
| 231 | Perm Dude
ID: 3310302519
Tue, Jul 20, 2021, 16:12
|
Judy: Am not sure in reading above whether I owe entry money this year or not (and if so, the amount--$15?).
Shoot me an email for the amount. I can't Paypal but I can Zelle or send a check.
|
| 232 | R-Money
ID: 31128257
Mon, Jul 26, 2021, 22:46
|
Our guy Doug or Stray Doug converted the old schedule formula to a 20 team format keeping everything as close as possible to how it was.
- Each team will play its own conference twice once during bye weeks, once not. (18 games)
- Each team will play every team in the opposite conference once (10 games)
- The best effort was made for weeks that you play a first place team (based on last years results) The second game of your double header will be a team that finished 3rd-5th in their division. No one is running into the CIN/SEA on the same week.
Will leave this open for any other suggestion but as this seems fair and as close as we can get to our current - if there are no objections we should go with it.
|
| 233 | Judy
ID: 106332814
Wed, Jul 28, 2021, 15:33
|
I’ll do the budget stuff this weekend.
|
| 234 | Judy
ID: 106332814
Wed, Jul 28, 2021, 15:50
|
Found some errors in dues owed post. Plan to fix this weekend.
|
| 235 | Nerfherders
ID: 56261418
Wed, Aug 11, 2021, 13:30
|
Trade made:
Lions (Nerfherders) trades Ryan Fitzpatrick.
Chiefs (WG) trades Devante Parker.
|
| 236 | WG
ID: 89402220
Wed, Aug 11, 2021, 13:51
|
confirmed
|
| 237 | Tree
ID: 571142323
Tue, Aug 17, 2021, 23:35
|
Rcvd this email today.
"Tree,
The group that has been pulling the strings and moving things along in MFL for the G20 want to see the team names uniform and mirroring the NFL. If you get a chance can you please pop into your settings/details and change "Fort Worth" to "Denver". If you are unavailable to do so let this be a notice that one of the people that currently have commissioner access will be changing it soon if you have not. Cheers.
Rich/Rmoney"
To be clear, you have GOT to be kidding me.
My team name changed early last season, and no one cared. The name of my team doesn't affect anyone's joy of the game. When my franchise relocated, no one made a peep, and the statute of limitations had expired.
I mean, if there was a statue of limitations. There isn't, because there isn't a rule preventing me from relocating my franchise.
It seems pretty clear here, based on this and all the other junk you pulled, you've got a clear bias against me.
As for people "who pull the strings," certainly a Putin supporter such as yourself understands that behind the people who publicly pull the strings, is another group of people allowing you to pull the strings, right?
Hi!
:: waves ::
Try to have some fun bro. Stop sweating the small stuff and squeezing the joy out of things that are fun and unimportant.
|
| 238 | R-Money
ID: 31128257
Wed, Aug 18, 2021, 00:52
|
Hey Rich, can you explain?
Hey Rich, I thought we were cool now why are you worried about my name? It feels like youre biased against me.
Hey Rich, who was complaining and why?
Hey Rich, lovely weather today, anyway I dont get the big deal on names maybe we should just all name our teams what we want anyway?
Hey Rich, you might have missed this but I was role playing like this was a real live team and relocated my team last year - why is this an issue?
These are examples of reasonable, non-problematic responses you could have sent me using the reply button located in your Email platform or even posts here.
Anyway.. go Cowboys
|
| 239 | R-Money
ID: 31128257
Wed, Aug 18, 2021, 01:17
|
Also, you took the phrase "pulling the strings" out of the actual phrase "pulling the strings and moving things along in MFL" CLEARLY referring to the people setting up the draft, tracking dues, deleting teams, etc.
And you assuming or even pretending to be or be part of a group of people with any type of authority or control over me or allowing me to do things is crossing a line.
Id appreciate an apology if that wasn't your intention.
|
| 240 | Tree
ID: 571142323
Wed, Aug 18, 2021, 01:25
|
If you hadn't created a problem, there wouldn't be a need for a non problematic answer. I'm not interested in your antagonistic behavior.
If you don't want your dirty laundry shared, don't share it.
|
| 241 | R-Money
ID: 31128257
Wed, Aug 18, 2021, 02:05
|
Youre shooting the messenger homie. But sure I guess shoot first and ask questions later.
|
| 242 | R-Money
ID: 31128257
Wed, Aug 18, 2021, 02:06
|
@all - tried to fix 4x now. over it. Hit up Guru I guess
|
| 243 | Judy
ID: 58791422
Wed, Aug 18, 2021, 07:14
|
Tree,
Just stop with all the chaos. Stop the accusations.
Change the name. Do what the rest of us do.
Move on.
|
| 244 | Guru
ID: 330592710
Wed, Aug 18, 2021, 08:15
|
test - (repairing thread data)
|
| 245 | Tree
ID: 161118314
Wed, Aug 18, 2021, 08:22
|
No Judy, I'm not going to "do what the rest of us do" in this case.
It was like pulling teeth to get this league to remove an owner who literally cheated, and this is the hill some people suddenly opt to fight on?
1. Explain to me how the name Fort Worth Broncos negatively affects anyone else's joy of the game.
2. Explain to me how we played an entire season last year, and no one cared, and now suddenly two of you do?
3. Did you send the same email to the half dozen teams who are using unofficial logos or helmets to represent their teams?
4. How about the presidents of the AFC and NFC for using the incorrect logo for the last 11 years? Did you contact them?
Pay more attention to owners who cheat or are unresponsive for most league activity. Don't worry about small things that don't matter or don't affect anyone else's joy of the game.
|
| 246 | R-Money
ID: 31128257
Wed, Aug 18, 2021, 08:51
|
@guru - thanks
@tree - I don't care about your team name. I was asked to communicate something to you as a favor and I did
You responded as you like to respond by among other things, insulting me personally. again. Like clockwork.
JFC nobody is trying to take away your rights.
|
| 247 | Tree
ID: 161118314
Wed, Aug 18, 2021, 09:13
|
You responded as you like to respond by among other things, insulting me personally. again. Like clockwork.
Let me remind me that you are the one who posted multiple threads NAMING ME as accusing my friends of cheating. I never did any such thing. It took you a long time to remove those posts, and to the best of my knowledge, you never apologized. I'm still salty about that.
JFC nobody is trying to take away your rights.
I never said anything about my rights. Not once. I am pointing to hypocrisy here on double standards, as well as the absolute silliness as this even being a thing.
warning: if four letter words offend you, don't hit the link. NSFW.
There you go, when it ain't your turn....
|
| 248 | R-Money
ID: 31128257
Wed, Aug 18, 2021, 09:39
|
I mean I did apologize to you in the Email I sent you in July. Youre still insulting me
You responded to that Email where I apologized to you saying Lets move past this and lets get past bad blood. And youre still insulting me
When I tried to make it clear the polls weren't attacking you - you still insulted me.
When I tried to make it clear anyone saying anyone was cheating that it was info I found that could be questioned. You still insulted me
When I tried to make it clear the polls weren't an indictment. You still insulted me.
I'm tired man. At what point is this abusive behavior?
|
| 249 | GO
ID: 33543812
Wed, Aug 18, 2021, 10:02
|
To be honest, I wanted the Fort Worth change to be fixed too as it goes against how the whole league was set up. Not sure why anyone would get a special waiver. Was on my list to ask as well.
|
| 250 | Tree
ID: 571142323
Wed, Aug 18, 2021, 10:11
|
R-money - you're doing a great job with the woe is me victim card.
I notice you didn't respond to my bullet points. Was anyone else email for an incorrect logo or helmet, or was I singled out again?
You called me out unfairly on a situation that didn't dictate it. You are asked to remove the posts, and had to be asked multiple times to remove them.
And no, you didn't apologize. You apologized to me for "making you feel that way," which isn't an apology.
You apologized for my feelings, and not your actions, and that's lot an apology at all. (if you want more insight on apologies, this is a decent article.
You're not the one being abused here bud. I am everyone's friend, and will defend them until the end, but if you come at me or mine, I will defend myself and them with vigor.
I'm happy to put this nonsense aside, but again, it sure feels personal.
|
| 251 | Judy
ID: 58791422
Wed, Aug 18, 2021, 13:33
|
I repeat my note:
Tree,
Just stop with all the chaos. Stop the accusations.
Change the name.
Move on.
|
| 252 | Tree
ID: 161118314
Wed, Aug 18, 2021, 13:46
|
man, all any of us want to do is play some Fantasy Football.
why are we worrying about things that literally don't matter, and only as they apply to one person in this league?
Let's move on and play some ball.
|
| 253 | Tree
ID: 161118314
Wed, Aug 18, 2021, 14:01
|
also Judy, i want to be perfectly clear. I have no issues with you whatsoever. none.
When we knew the commissionership of this league would be changing, several of us behind the scenes were in agreement that your contributions to this league have been immeasurable, and if you were interested in doing so, should absolutely remain in a leadership role.
my issue is how R-money has treated me.
It was a personal attack on me when he posted the falsehood that I had accused Donny of cheating. Donny is a friend, and I felt that accusation could do serious damage to our relationship. It wasn't the only time he addressed me or something about me in a less than respectable manner.
That's not a small thing.
|
| 254 | Judy
ID: 58791422
Wed, Aug 18, 2021, 14:33
|
Tree,
Some things belong in private.
|
| 255 | Nerfherders
ID: 56261418
Wed, Aug 18, 2021, 15:14
|
Not sure why we are hearing this on the forums. I'd prefer everyone to have their team names standard, but it's not a big deal.
*shrug*
|
| 256 | Doug
ID: 15547288
Wed, Aug 18, 2021, 15:33
|
Agree with Nerfherders, not end of world but just pointing out the original idea of this league was to mimic NFL as much as we could within the confines and reasonable expectations of a fantasy football game, and that has included >99% of the seasonal team names over the years.
If someone doesn't give two sh!ts about that history and wants THEIR team to be the one that is different, I'm not going to lose sleep over it... but I will also acknowledge it definitelyt comes across as a bit of an unnecessary "F.U." attitude. *shrug*
|
| 257 | Jim
ID: 465239
Wed, Aug 18, 2021, 18:09
|
First of all, I'm going to agree with Peter (ttucowboy) in the email he replied with that given the clear hard feelings between R-Money & Tree all along here (whether there was a truce once agreed to that someone feels was broken or not), R-Money was the absolute wrong pick to have email Tree about the team name thing. And yes, "change it, or we'll change it for you" was a bit aggressive and knowing Tree as we all have come to know him (whether only here in this league or elsewhere), that wasn't going to get an "ok, cool I'll take care of it" response. I mean that with the utmost respect Tree, but let's be honest...the way that was phrased to you was absolutely going to get a response from you and likely an equally aggressive one.
Hearing from a number of folks that the overall intention of this league has been to mimic the NFL as much as a Fantasy Football League can, then there needs to be a rule enacted that teams will be named after NFL teams. I guess if we want to include helmets and logos in that too (and if we're going to enact a rule about no changing team names, then it makes sense to include helmets/logos as well), fine. Perhaps we could allow for a chance for an owner to petition to swap their team name with one of the 12 teams in the NFL we don't have covered too (for instance if a big Saints fan joins the league or something). But that's a conversation for another day.
In the end, if team names/logos/helmets are that big of a deal to the league, then it certainly should have been addressed last year when it apparently transpired (I vaguely recall a post announcing the move...but I could be totally making that up in my head). Should have been nipped back then...but alas, here we are, so we need to deal with it now.
Ultimately, we're all here to have fun and play fantasy football, and the petty sniping and arguing just really pulls the fun out of it for alot of us I think, or at least for me.
|
| 258 | Tree
ID: 161118314
Wed, Aug 18, 2021, 18:22
|
I mean that with the utmost respect Tree, but let's be honest...the way that was phrased to you was absolutely going to get a response from you and likely an equally aggressive one.
no disrespect taken. We've known each other in the real world for a looong time, and you know me well. :D
Ultimately, we're all here to have fun and play fantasy football, and the petty sniping and arguing just really pulls the fun out of it for alot of us I think, or at least for me.
one of my biggest points. we're all here to have fun, and this hasn't been much fun.
|
| 259 | Judy
ID: 58791422
Wed, Aug 18, 2021, 19:48
|
I am starting a new thread with the goal of positive news,
http://rotoguru1.com/cgi-bin/read.pl?board=footst&thread=1207&lastpost=1629330427
|
|
|
|
Post a reply to this message: 1
|