| 0 |
Subject: RQFL#1 - Regular Season Discussion #1
Posted by: I_AM_CANADIAN
- [227221220] Sat, Sep 11, 2004, 00:21
Since it has been request... Here is our new thread for the regular season. For previous threads, please see: Discussion #5, Discussion #4, Discussion #3, Discussion #2, Discussion #1
Still no update on points for Team Defense BTW... |
| 1 | I_AM_CANADIAN
ID: 227221220
Sat, Sep 11, 2004, 00:24
|
Also... we appear to still be missing about 5 Draft Recap posts, and a fair bit of Rationals. If we could try to finnish those up it would be really kewl.
I enjoy very much reading the thought processes of the other managers.
|
| 2 | I_AM_CANADIAN
ID: 227221220
Sat, Sep 11, 2004, 01:43
|
Question for YR...
Would you mind posting where we stand in Waiver priority for next week? I know you won't be taking them by email this week coming, but I just wanted to be sure of where I stand earlier rather than later.
Thanks again.
IAC
|
| 3 | youngroman
ID: 206491016
Sat, Sep 11, 2004, 03:34
|
IAC - from Rotoworld: "The players are awarded in reverse order of the standings.".
As soon as the order is updated I post it here and on the league-message-board. this should happen on Tuesday morning.
|
| 4 | loki
Dude
ID: 4211201420
Sat, Sep 11, 2004, 14:52
|
rotowold does seem to be responsive when notified about bugs--2003 stats were not being displayed. they fixed the problem and also notified me by e-mail that they had done so.
|
| 5 | youngroman
ID: 206491016
Sat, Sep 11, 2004, 17:17
|
loki - that is also my experience. I had sent them about 10 recommendations/bugs and they responded within a day and in most cases had a solution within 2. as long as they keep this rate they will receive my suggestions about their game.
|
| 6 | I_AM_CANADIAN
ID: 227221220
Sun, Sep 12, 2004, 18:19
|
Any news on why Defensive Team stats still not up from Thursday night? NE & IND still showing 0 points.
|
| 7 | youngroman
ID: 206491016
Sun, Sep 12, 2004, 19:16
|
IAC - no answer yet. I mailed them yesterday about this. If I hear nothing from them in time I have the ability to adjust scores to fix this temporarily.
|
| 8 | I_AM_CANADIAN
ID: 227221220
Sun, Sep 12, 2004, 21:06
|
I decided I would buy live stats from Rotoworld... and after paying by my Visa I get this nice msg:
"The Live Scoring is not working correctly at this time. We have removed access to the live scoring while we fix the problem. We apologize for the inconvenience this causes. We are working on the problem right now and will do everything we can to get it back working as soon as possible."
Grrr... Frustration levels rising!
|
| 9 | I_AM_CANADIAN
ID: 227221220
Sun, Sep 12, 2004, 21:12
|
Hmmm... as I go to send a MSG to rotoworld... they have posted this in a LARGE RED FONT:
"We know that Defensive Teams are not receiving their points. That will definitely be corrected - by Monday Sept. 13th at the latest.
The Live Scoring Applet is not working correctly. We are working on it now. We will keep you up to date with any progress we make in getting it fixed."
Personally, I'm not too fond of the red fonts. I find it very unproffesional of them.
|
| 10 | Tree
ID: 37818819
Mon, Sep 13, 2004, 06:57
|
hmm...still no update on our scores... ::sigh::
|
| 11 | youngroman
ID: 221118186
Mon, Sep 13, 2004, 07:10
|
defense scores are updated. all other scores can be found under your matchup and then click on the points of one of your players and you will see your stats in detail. this way you can also look at the other teams-stats.
stats are updated at the moment, each time I refresh that page I have more total points 107.5 -> 111 -> 113, I hope they don't stop this and I end up with 1000 points
|
| 12 | I_AM_CANADIAN
ID: 227221220
Mon, Sep 13, 2004, 09:18
|
We have a couple winners this week allready...
Species - THK = 1-0
Art of Monk - Bandos = 1-0
The rest of the games will be awaiting results from tonight.
|
| 13 | Slowhand @ work
ID: 40343218
Mon, Sep 13, 2004, 09:37
|
I will try to get caught up in in rationals and recap posting in the next day or two;I've been extremely busy at work and my laptop is in the shop :-(
|
| 14 | youngroman
ID: 221118186
Mon, Sep 13, 2004, 10:42
|
My match vs. wiggs will get interesting. He needs 23.91 points from J. Delhomme and B. Franks tonight.
I'm hoping for 250 pass-yards and 1 pass-TD from Delhomme (=14 pts) and a couple of yards and no TD from Franks. that should be less then 23.91 points. come on guys: please play like expected.
|
| 15 | Pancho Villa
Sustainer
ID: 533817
Mon, Sep 13, 2004, 11:08
|
Am I adding wrong? I have my team ahead of IAC in points, and he's done for the week, while I have the Panther D going tonight.
|
| 16 | Tree
ID: 76471215
Mon, Sep 13, 2004, 11:16
|
defense scores are updated. all other scores can be found under your matchup and then click on the points of one of your players and you will see your stats in detail. this way you can also look at the other teams-stats.
unfortunately, the actual "Results" aren't updating...
things look like this for my game:
Ric Flair's slap!
Player Opp Pts
Harrington, Joey - QB, DET @CHI 9/12 1:00 0
Alexander, Shaun - RB, SEA @NO 9/12 1:00 0
Staley, Duce - RB, PIT OAK 9/12 1:00 0
Booker, Marty - WR, MIA TEN 9/11 1:00 4
Bruce, Isaac - WR, STL ARZ 9/12 1:00 0
Harrison, Marvin - WR, IND @NE 9/9 9:00 10
Winslow, Kellen - TE, CLE BAL 9/12 1:00 0
Vinatieri, Adam - K, NE IND 9/9 9:00 8
Little, Leonard - DL, STL ARZ 9/12 1:00 0
Barnett, Nick - LB, GB @CAR 9/13 9:00 0
Brooking, Keith - LB, ATL @SF 9/12 4:15 0
Def/Spec Team, Packers - TM, GB @CAR 9/13 9:00 0
Total Points 22
Non-Starters
Cowart, Sam - LB, NYJ CIN 9/12 1:00 0
Hollings, Tony - RB, HOU SD 9/12 1:00 0
McNair, Steve - QB, TEN @MIA 9/11 1:00 8
Moore, Mewelde - RB, MIN DAL 9/12 4:15 0
Morris, Maurice - RB, SEA @NO 9/12 1:00 0
Patten, David - WR, NE IND 9/9 9:00 15
Warner, Kurt - QB, NYG @PHI 9/12 4:15 0
Watts, Darius - WR, DEN KC 9/12 8:30 0
Slowhand
Player Opp Pts
Manning, Peyton - QB, IND @NE 9/9 9:00 18
Duckett, T.J. - RB, ATL @SF 9/12 4:15 0
Johnson, Rudi - RB, CIN @NYJ 9/12 1:00 0
Jackson, Darrell - WR, SEA @NO 9/12 1:00 0
Lelie, Ashley - WR, DEN KC 9/12 8:30 0
Walker, Javon - WR, GB @CAR 9/13 9:00 0
Williams, Boo - TE, NO SEA 9/12 1:00 0
Longwell, Ryan - K, GB @CAR 9/13 9:00 0
Gbaja-Biamila, Kabeer - DL, GB @CAR 9/13 9:00 0
Sharper, Darren - DB, GB @CAR 9/13 9:00 0
Williams, Aeneas - DB, STL ARZ 9/12 1:00 0
Def/Spec Team, Titans - TM, TEN @MIA 9/11 1:00 25
Total Points 43
Non-Starters
Bell, Kendrell - LB, PIT OAK 9/12 1:00 0
Bledsoe, Drew - QB, BUF JAC 9/12 1:00 0
Diggs, Na'il - LB, GB @CAR 9/13 9:00 0
George, Eddie - RB, DAL @MIN 9/12 4:15 0
Kennison, Eddie - WR, KC @DEN 9/12 8:30 0
Miller, Billy - TE, HOU SD 9/12 1:00 0
Minor, Travis - RB, MIA TEN 9/11 1:00 5
Perry, Chris - RB, CIN @NYJ 9/12 1:00 0
nearly every player is listed as zero points so far. ugh.
|
| 17 | WiddleAvi
ID: 4356159
Mon, Sep 13, 2004, 12:23
|
I am surprised that I even had a chance in my game. No one did really well for me except Owens. But I guess Loki had the same. Should be close tonight. I have a kicker and he has a LB.
|
| 18 | I_AM_CANADIAN @ Work
ID: 364563113
Mon, Sep 13, 2004, 13:00
|
RE Pancho:
As far as I can tell...
I'm sitting with 107.7 Points, and you are with 97.58. So Carolina needs to produce 10.12+ Fantasy Points for you to take the W. Let's go Green Bay!
|
| 19 | loki
Dude
ID: 4211201420
Mon, Sep 13, 2004, 13:10
|
WA-i see that you have alredy done the math. what are our respective scores going into tonight?
I_A_C or YR-any idea if rotoworld will update quantitative results before the end of the week's games?
|
| 20 | youngroman
ID: 206491016
Mon, Sep 13, 2004, 13:11
|
Tree - check this link: scoring details, then click on an other teams points and you see their detailed scoring.
|
| 21 | Tree
ID: 76471215
Mon, Sep 13, 2004, 13:14
|
Tree - check this link
no, right i got that. but rotoworld is making it difficult, because we have to keep clicking to get the results that should instead be showing up on the main scoreboard page.
|
| 22 | youngroman
ID: 206491016
Mon, Sep 13, 2004, 13:33
|
Tree - you are absolutely right. I will write down all pages that have that problem (it is not only 1) and mail it to Rotoworld in a few minutes. They should be able to solve this quick because the stats are there they are only not linked together as it should be.
|
| 23 | loki
Dude
ID: 4211201420
Mon, Sep 13, 2004, 13:58
|
YR-i have not been able to find any team scoring. i tried the link in your post above, but it shows WA with 26 and NYT with zero. clicking on the individual teams had the same results. any advice?
|
| 24 | Toral
ID: 22731114
Mon, Sep 13, 2004, 14:02
|
I have a strong feeling that rotoworld, as a free site running games, for the first time, is not going to be a strong site. Itr's free, after all.
I just hope their WW works ;)
Toral
|
| 25 | youngroman
ID: 206491016
Mon, Sep 13, 2004, 14:04
|
loki - for me it looks like New York Titans 78.98 vs. WiddleAvi's Dolphins 82.48
from Rotoworld contact-page:
"The update for scores for Sunday's games is going to take place throughout the day today. We expect to have all leagues updated today. In the future the update of scores will normally be completed by 9 am following game day. Thank you for your patience while we update leagues for the first Sunday." - I hope so.
|
| 26 | loki
Dude
ID: 4211201420
Mon, Sep 13, 2004, 15:25
|
YR-thanks for the links, but where are they on my team or league page?
|
| 27 | youngroman
ID: 206491016
Mon, Sep 13, 2004, 15:32
|
loki - you go to Scores -> Results and then in the top table where all the matchups are listed click on the score of a team and you will get this teams detailed score.
|
| 28 | WiddleAvi
ID: 1749249
Mon, Sep 13, 2004, 15:39
|
Loki - What I did was go to the matchup where is shows the score and then click on the 0 score by any player and it takes you to a page that shows the score for the enire team.
|
| 29 | loki
Dude
ID: 4211201420
Mon, Sep 13, 2004, 17:18
|
YR & WA-thank you both. i had clicked on the team names(not the zero) which was the intuitive and user friendly thing to do.
|
| 30 | Toral
ID: 22731114
Mon, Sep 13, 2004, 17:26
|
When are we going to get ordinary intuitive scores that we can imbibe with the morning coffee?
|
| 31 | loki
Dude
ID: 4211201420
Mon, Sep 13, 2004, 19:07
|
here are the fg points copied from rotoworld:
PLAYER - FIELD GOAL
3 points 1 Yards - 29 Yards
2 points 30 Yards - 39 Yards
3 points 40 Yards - 49 Yards
4 points 50 Yards - 100 Yards
and the points on the discussion page:
Field Goals 0-19 Yards (3)
Field Goals 20-29 Yards (3)
Field Goals 30-39 Yards (3)
Field Goals 40-49 Yards (4)
Field Goals 50+ Yards (5)
?????????????????????????????????????????????????
|
| 32 | I_AM_CANADIAN
ID: 227221220
Mon, Sep 13, 2004, 19:42
|
Oh boy... Any other point discrepansies?
|
| 33 | loki
Dude
ID: 4211201420
Mon, Sep 13, 2004, 19:58
|
I_A_C-i checked this out because my match with WA will be decided by his kicker and my line backer, both of which will be playing for carolina tonight. i did not have a chance to look for others. my guess is that if we look,which we probably should, we will find more.-l
|
| 34 | WiddleAvi
ID: 582361912
Mon, Sep 13, 2004, 20:10
|
Can we pick up players directly on the site or do we have to email YR ??
|
| 35 | I_AM_CANADIAN
ID: 227221220
Mon, Sep 13, 2004, 20:30
|
RE WiddleAvi:
All players are on Waivers till Wednesday evening. We will be setting up waiver priority once the standings are set for Week 1. Worst Team = Highest priority.
We will be doing it through Rotoworld.
|
| 37 | I_AM_CANADIAN
ID: 227221220
Mon, Sep 13, 2004, 20:44
|
RE Loki - Youre right.
Let's see (Discrepancies):
According to Thread:
Field Goals Missed 0-19 Yards (-1)
Field Goals Missed 20-29 Yards (-1)
Field Goals Missed 30-39 Yards (0)
Field Goals Missed 40-49 Yards (0)
Field Goals Missed 50+ Yards (0)
In Rotoworld:
PLAYER - MISSED FIELD GOAL
-1 points
This one, I'm not sure If we can get around or not? Seems kinda mean to give a negative to a guy who shanks a 60 yd attempt?
According to Thread:
2-Point Conversions (2)
In Rotworld:
PLAYER - 2 PT CONVERSION PASS
1 points
PLAYER - 2 PT CONVERSION RECEPTION
2 points
PLAYER - 2 PT CONVERSION RUN
2 points
RIFL is suppodedly using same system as is set up in Rotoworld?!
Kickoff and Punt Return appear to be accurate: Kick 25Yd/Point Punt 10Yd/Point
According to Thread:
Fumble Force (1)
Fumble Recovery (1)
In RotoWorld:
DEF/SPEC T - TOTAL FUMBLE RECOV
2 points 1 Recoveries - 1 Recoveries
Im gessing it's set this way because rotoworld has not DST Stat for Forced Fumble?
Not too much to complain about... I think the commish did a pretty good job overall. I would like to hear more about the Field Goal #'s though. Obvioulsy, the FG made is a mistake, but I'm not sure if I like a Generic -1 for every missed FG.
|
| 38 | Pancho Villa
Sustainer
ID: 533817
Mon, Sep 13, 2004, 21:40
|
IAC..The kicker gets the points if he makes it. Like in hoops, a half-court shot as time expires counts as a shot attempt.
BTW, Go Panther D!
|
| 39 | I_AM_CANADIAN
ID: 227221220
Mon, Sep 13, 2004, 21:49
|
The argument is though Pancho... (According to our thread)The Kicker is only supposed to be penalized for Kicks missed under 30 Yards. Not for any of 30 or over.
Also, as Loki pointed out, the FG/yard completions #'s are off.
|
| 40 | WiddleAvi
ID: 582361912
Mon, Sep 13, 2004, 21:51
|
Question about waivers. After the first week is the waiver priority reset each week meaning the best teams really never get a chance at waiver requests or after the 1st week if someone picks someone off waivers then that person gets moved to last on the priority that way eventually even the best teams will get to be #1.
Hope that made sense
|
| 41 | wiggs
ID: 507593021
Mon, Sep 13, 2004, 22:07
|
YR there is a delhomme td.
|
| 42 | WiddleAvi
ID: 582361912
Mon, Sep 13, 2004, 22:23
|
Last question.....In case of tie do we go to bench players or just call it a tie ??
|
| 43 | wiggs
ID: 507593021
Mon, Sep 13, 2004, 23:53
|
delhomme again.
|
| 45 | I_AM_CANADIAN
ID: 227221220
Tue, Sep 14, 2004, 00:17
|
Well that does it for Carolina-D. 2 points on the night for them.
Week 1 brings me the Win; despite having to face a lineup that had Culpepper and T.Jones having BIG games. Got to be happy with my well ballanced attack.
|
| 46 | WiddleAvi
ID: 582361912
Tue, Sep 14, 2004, 00:18
|
How does this work now. Before tonights game I had 82.48 and Loki had 78.98 which gives me a 3 1/2 point lead. I had Kasay who got 2 XP and he had Fields who had 5 Tackles and 1 assist which gives him 5.5 points. Final total: WiddleAvi 84.48 - Loki 84.48
|
| 47 | wiggs
ID: 507593021
Tue, Sep 14, 2004, 00:21
|
if I figured mine out right I won by 1 point. either way gg yr.
|
| 48 | loki
Dude
ID: 4211201420
Tue, Sep 14, 2004, 00:58
|
YR-re:post#31-if the scoring for fgs is counted as indicated in the thread, wilkins' 50 yd fg is worth 5 pts and the ny titans win by 1 pt. if the scoring is as shown on the rotoworld page, the game between the ny titans and WA is a tie, assuming my calculations are correct.
??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
THANKS!!
|
| 49 | youngroman
ID: 206491016
Tue, Sep 14, 2004, 03:09
|
here some short answers:
1. waiver-pickups: players will be picked on Rotoworld
2. FG-setup: points should be the following
FG made 0-39: 3pts
FG made 40-49: 4pts
FG made 50+: 5pts
FG missed <30: -1pt
there is a scoring discrepancy on rotoworld because the FG-attempts above 30yds are not counted.
3. Def-team fumble rec: I think it is 2pts because one of the 2 stats (forced, recovered) is not possible here
4. waivers: reset each week based on standings
more detailed answers will follow when I'm at work and find the time for it.
|
| 50 | youngroman
ID: 221118186
Tue, Sep 14, 2004, 04:50
|
following FG-scores are wrong because of the +1pt for kicking 30+yd FG (mailed that to Rotoworld yesterday):
Wiggs: Akers +1
loki: Wilkins +1
PanchoVilla: K. Brown +1
IAC: Vanderjagt +1
Species: Janikowski +1
THK: Stover +1
Bandos: Elam +2
Tree: Vinateri +1
the Titans-INT counting twice is resolved
that and the stats from Monday night should result in this scores:
youngroman - wiggs 113 : 108,16
dwfffan - Toral 115 : 94,02
WiddleAvi - loki 84,48 : 85,48
PanchoVilla - IAC 100,58 : 108,76
Species - THK 105,24 : 72,92
Bandos - ArtOfMonk 117 : 123,88
Tree - Slowhand 120,18 : 90,84
if a game would result in a tie it would be a tie. no bench player scores will be counted.
wiggs - what have you counted for your team? I have this:
youngroman: 113 (as posted on Rotoworld)
wiggs: 90,1 (as posted on Rotworld + 1 for the Akers 45yd FG) + Delhomme 15,36 (284yds=11,36 + 2TD=8 + INT=-2 + FUMBLE=-2) + Franks 2,7 (27yds) = 108.16
if my calculated scores are correct the waiver order should be:
THK
WiddleAvi
Slowhand
Toral
PanchoVilla
Wiggs
Bandos
loki
Species
IAC
youngroman
dwfffan
Tree
ArtOfMonk
|
| 51 | youngroman
ID: 221118186
Tue, Sep 14, 2004, 07:45
|
results are posted in Rotoworld, the difference between the points listed there and the points above is the FG-attempt-stat which leads to a win for loki vs. WiddleAvi. I'm waiting for a Rotoworld-answer on this.
waivers will be on until Wednesday night (11pm-5am), lineups for week 2 can be set.
Bandos - somehow you lost 8 points (from 117 to 109), can you check if your scoring is ok or if there is something wrong with it, if you have no time I'll check it this afternoon.
|
| 52 | loki
Dude
ID: 4211201420
Tue, Sep 14, 2004, 09:17
|
toral-trade proposal and e-mail sent.-loki
|
| 53 | youngroman
ID: 221118186
Tue, Sep 14, 2004, 10:24
|
I will correct the FG-scoring discrepancies by hand. it seems that I have misunderstood a scoring option. I now have set-up the scoring as it should be, at least I think so. We will see this next week.
any scoring-errors still left?
|
| 54 | loki
Dude
ID: 4211201420
Tue, Sep 14, 2004, 11:40
|
YR-thanks for your efforts and time spent.-l
|
| 55 | wiggs
ID: 507593021
Tue, Sep 14, 2004, 13:37
|
tds are only worth 4?
|
| 56 | Tree
ID: 76471215
Tue, Sep 14, 2004, 13:42
|
tds are only worth 4?
wow. is it that way in the RIFC too?
a 40 yard FG is worth the same amount as throwing a TD pass? and a 50 yard FG is worth more??
man, that's silly.
|
| 57 | wiggs
ID: 507593021
Tue, Sep 14, 2004, 13:43
|
it is listed that way, but it is a stupid scoring system. I guess I should have paid more attention to the settings.
|
| 58 | youngroman
ID: 206491016
Tue, Sep 14, 2004, 14:08
|
wiggs, Tree - that is what RIFC was coming up with. personally I would have set a pass-TD also at 6pts.
In my opinion the bonus-pts for kickers are good because that way the kickers with a greater range have an advantage over others. but the main problem at kicker is that you can have the best kicker out there but if he gets no opportunities to show that, he is worthless.
|
| 59 | Tree
ID: 76471215
Tue, Sep 14, 2004, 14:20
|
wow. i'd like to find out why the RIFC came up with that system.
i have NO problem with kickers getting extra points for harder kicks, but a FG should *never* be worth more than a TD.
|
| 60 | youngroman
ID: 206491016
Tue, Sep 14, 2004, 15:49
|
here is the story of a pass-TD worth 4 points
initial suggestion by Guru was 3 or 4, notes about his suggestion are found in post 19, in post 116 he changed that to 4 or 6 which resulted in a 8-6 league-vote for 4pts. coupled with the 4pt-pass-TD is the 1pt-pass-conversion (rush and recv conversions are worth 2 points)
|
| 61 | Tree
ID: 76471215
Tue, Sep 14, 2004, 17:37
|
eh, i still don't get the logic. to me, a touchdown is a touchdown is a touchdown.
why not make a safety worth 50 points, so a DL is equal value to a QB?
|
| 62 | WiddleAvi
ID: 398371416
Tue, Sep 14, 2004, 17:41
|
Little surprised by all the hoopla. It is very common for passing TD's to be worth 4 points. In fact I think it is more common to be worth 4 then it is to be worth 6.
|
| 63 | wiggs
ID: 507593021
Tue, Sep 14, 2004, 18:03
|
widdle, please show me 1 other league that doe it this way? i am a 6 year vet of fantasy sports between yahoo, sandbox other leagues and I have NEVER seen a passing td worth 4 points.
|
| 64 | I_AM_CANADIAN
ID: 227221220
Tue, Sep 14, 2004, 19:06
|
Very odd... I'm new to Fantasy Football, but not to hockey or baseball.
The irony of this I find, is in the a large # articles I read preparing for this years NFL season, I always saw a large amount of emphasis on "paying attention to the points system". In fact, some would say, it doesn't matter what the system is ... ie. wether you think it is practical or not, just be sure you understand it.
I really see no point in complaining about something at this point. We all asked to join this league, and the points systems had been in place from the get go. If you really don't like the system... why did you bother joining?
One year playing fantasy baseball, I saw a similar problem. A manager had set up scoring system that elevated the value of c-losers. He had made the points value of a save, much greater than that of a win. In his regard, he thought, that he was encouraging taking a closer earlier in the draft. I personally didn't like it that much, but planned accordingly, as did several other managers. The result: After the season began, a small group of the managers where complaining why were Closers dominating the points totals? After this, the points system was brought to their attention. I think one manager ended up droping out because he was so frustrated. From that day... I've always kept in mind, not to be one of those managers.
Is it so hard to give 5 minutes to look over the points system? As stated before, I'm new to Fantasy football, thus at a glance the #'s meant nothing to me. But after looking a little deeper, I saw a few slight differences from the norm, that I'd seen in my research, then adjusted accordingly.
|
| 65 | wiggs
ID: 507593021
Tue, Sep 14, 2004, 19:11
|
IAC, can you show me one place where I complained about it? I just didnt know it. I do look at the settings, but that is one setting that you look right over assuming all TDS are worth the same.
|
| 66 | I_AM_CANADIAN
ID: 227221220
Tue, Sep 14, 2004, 19:48
|
RE 65: Look at Post #57
"it is listed that way, but it is a stupid scoring system"
I don't like complaints about scoring. I find it cheapens the overall experience of the game.
By the way... I wasn't trying to single you out wiggs. I'm pretty sure you're not the only one that feels the way you do... I just don't see the point in bringing it up at this point.
|
| 67 | wiggs
ID: 507593021
Tue, Sep 14, 2004, 19:54
|
I only brought it up because I didnt know. I also posted that it was my own fault because I didnt pay attention. Maybe if you are going to post quotes you should post the whole thing rather then the part that makes me look bad. The quote was "it is listed that way, but it is a stupid scoring system. I guess I should have paid more attention to the settings
|
| 68 | Toral
ID: 22731114
Tue, Sep 14, 2004, 20:11
|
wiggs -- sent you an offer.
On the issue of the day -- can't speak to the norm in Yahoo! leagues but fantasy football magazines I gathered this year consider 4 pts per QB TD the norm and 6 the exception.
Toral
|
| 69 | Toral
ID: 22731114
Tue, Sep 14, 2004, 20:32
|
Onterrio Smith's appeal won't tbe held till October, so he'll be starting for a few weeks. he is available for trade.
Toral
|
| 70 | wiggs
ID: 507593021
Tue, Sep 14, 2004, 20:33
|
well i personally have never before now played in a league that qbs are so undervalued. I know it wouldnt have made a difference because if he added 2 more to yr's point totals for all his TDs he would have 10 more, so congrats YR on your win. I am not trying to shoot it down.
Example of how stupid this scoring set up is though, Bettis and his 3 half yard TDs scored 2 less points then Culpepper and his 5 passing TDs. Does that make sense to anyone?
YR this is not an attack on you, or anyone else in this league, so please do not take it that way. I know you just copied the settings off the other league.
|
| 71 | wiggs
ID: 507593021
Tue, Sep 14, 2004, 20:34
|
toral there is nothing there from you as far as a trade.
|
| 72 | Toral
ID: 22731114
Tue, Sep 14, 2004, 20:44
|
Weird. Go to transactions in the bar, click on trades and nothing shows up?
|
| 73 | wiggs
ID: 507593021
Tue, Sep 14, 2004, 20:54
|
it was there now, it is a no can do. Sorry man.
|
| 74 | WiddleAvi
ID: 582361912
Tue, Sep 14, 2004, 20:57
|
Re: #70 Example of how stupid this scoring set up is though, Bettis and his 3 half yard TDs scored 2 less points then Culpepper and his 5 passing TDs. Does that make sense to anyone?
You are only looking at TD's. Culpepper's total was 32.x points with yardage included. A comparable day by a RB, Say Griffin for example had 3 TD's and 160 some yards, which comes out to 32 points. It just happens to be that bettis only got 1 yard, thats an abberation. That about as normal as Culpepper having 5 TD's and only 10 yards passing.
|
| 75 | Toral
ID: 22731114
Tue, Sep 14, 2004, 20:59
|
Well it's practice working with the trade interface anyway ;)
For those more familiar with yahoo! -- well, that's everyone, I guess, be aware that your team page does NOT contain any special notice to let you know that a trade offer's waiting for you.
Toral
|
| 76 | wiggs
ID: 507593021
Tue, Sep 14, 2004, 22:06
|
lots of RBs had 3 TDs, 1 QB had 5 TDs passes. What is harder to do? Shouldnt the more difficult thing get more points?
I dont know everyone, but I know that Holmes, Alexander, Green, Griffen, and Bettis all had 3 TDs.
|
| 77 | WiddleAvi
ID: 582361912
Tue, Sep 14, 2004, 23:01
|
Bettis is an abberation. But a RB who gets 3 TD's and 150+ total yards is about equall to a QB who gets 5 TD's and 250 yards passing IMO
|
| 78 | loki
Dude
ID: 4211201420
Tue, Sep 14, 2004, 23:05
|
time to change the flow of the discussion to evaluations of your team and draft for the 1st week. any takers?
|
| 79 | I_AM_CANADIAN
ID: 227221220
Wed, Sep 15, 2004, 01:00
|
I found for my team, with my top choices not putting up exceptional #'s, I reallied more heavily on IDP, and Team DEF to pick me up the win. I managed 33 points out of those 4 spots.
I had mentioned it before too, but ballance was an important issue. My players only varried between 2.7-16.9 Points. If I throw away the top and lowest performer then they varried 6-14.2 points.
|
| 80 | youngroman
ID: 221118186
Wed, Sep 15, 2004, 04:59
|
kicker-scoring is updated - I think at the moment all Rotoworld-issues are solved.
short recap of my week:
- above average performances of McNabb, Dunn and Glenn, those 3 gave me 63.1 pts
- expected performances from Rod Smith and Z. Thomas for 24.6 pts.
-underperformers were J. Lewis, S. Moss, E. Hartwell and G. Wistrom and the Rams
- non-performers were Pollard with no catch and Gary Anderson who I thought will be with the team on Sunday, but it turned out that they played Saturday and so he was not with the team.
overall an above average week I think. If I had played Antonio Gates instead of Pollard I would lead the league. What I learned from this: Gates will be in my lineup for the reminder of the season
|
| 81 | Tree
ID: 37818819
Wed, Sep 15, 2004, 07:16
|
it's hard to be less pleased with week 1 results for my team. i had the second highest point total in the league, by fractions, and i did it with the guys who would have been my third and fourth highest scorers sitting on the bench.
i also made a slight tactical decision to start Joey Harrington over Steve McNair, which paid off with a couple of extra points, and i'm satisfied with that risk taken.
Nick Barnett was the NFC Defensive player of the week, and i think he's gonna pile up HUGE numbers if he remains healthy all season.
my biggest concern is Shaun Alexander's injury. i have Maurice Morris to back him up, so i'm not worried about that, but this day-to-day crap is a problem.
all told, i'm more than happy.
|
| 82 | loki
Dude
ID: 4211201420
Wed, Sep 15, 2004, 17:03
|
overall i was lucky to pull off a win with a point total of only 85.48. the only player that i was happy with was wilkins. i had drafted him relatively early hoping that he would help in close games, and he did just that with his 50 yarder. aside from wilkins, most everybody else underperformed. it was only the 1st game, but if lt and the raven defense continue to play like they did, i should do very well on the waiver wire.
|
| 83 | youngroman
ID: 221118186
Thu, Sep 16, 2004, 03:25
|
waivers were run last night - I hope everything went ok.
here the summary:
WiddleAvi: A. Bryant, J. Scobey for L. Betts, S. Morris
Slowhand: Saints Def for K. Bell
PanchoVilla: D. Gabriel for C. Rogers
Bandos: D. Terrell, T. Adalius for T. Taylor, R. Woods
loki: L. Jordan for T. Collins
IAC: M. Robinson for R. Ferguson
dwfffan: A. Akin for M. Doss
all claimed players are on your benches.
|
| 84 | Toral
ID: 22731114
Thu, Sep 16, 2004, 07:50
|
I don't understand this system. I put in 2 claims, and am ahead of the managers who got them in the waiver order, yet I got neither of them.
What did I do wrong?
Toral
|
| 85 | I_AM_CANADIAN
ID: 227221220
Thu, Sep 16, 2004, 08:59
|
Toral: Can you tell us which claims you had put in? Did you remember to make sure that he would be going to the proper position? ie... If he was replacing a starter, you can't claim that a person to the bench.
|
| 86 | Toral
ID: 22731114
Thu, Sep 16, 2004, 09:04
|
Ah, that's probably it. I didn't pay any attention to that...probably claimed both as starters, for bench players.
Where is that information found? I missed it obviously. Suppose I better look to see what other technicalities are there.
Toral
|
| 87 | youngroman
ID: 221118186
Thu, Sep 16, 2004, 09:06
|
any other manager where the waiver-process screwed someone?
I hope I get a quick answer from Rotoworld on this. Until I get an answer be patient when adding/dropping players because there is the possibility that I have to re-do some of the claims.
|
| 88 | youngroman
ID: 221118186
Thu, Sep 16, 2004, 09:09
|
IAC - thats also a possibilty, here are the Rotoworld-rules which are posted on the league-message-board and which can also be found in the Rotoworld-manual:
Enforcing Roster Restrictions.
The waiver wire program will enforce the league's roster requirements when the program tries to award players. For example, if a league plays that teams are allowed to have 10 players on the Bench and a team owner makes a claim for a player, specifies that the player should go to the Bench; has 10 players on the Bench at the time the waiver wire runs; and the claim made by the team owner did not specify a player to drop off the bench - the waiver wire program will NOT place the player on the team. Likewise, if a league allows 2 starting running backs and team makes a waiver claim to place a running back as a starter and the owner specifies to move a QB from Starter to Bench as part of the waiver claim; if when the waiver wire runs the team already has 2 starting running backs, the team will not receive the running back off waivers because it would place the team over the 2 starting running back limit.
|
| 89 | Toral
ID: 22731114
Thu, Sep 16, 2004, 09:15
|
Yes, the rule's there, and it makes sense.
Just hasn't been my week I guess -- #1 WR breaks leg, and I lose 2 more through not checking the rules.
Toral
|
| 90 | youngroman
ID: 221118186
Thu, Sep 16, 2004, 09:15
|
Toral - if that roster-restriction-issue is the cause that you not got the players, I'm sorry. I hope for you and for me that the 2 players you have not got, get injured this week. for you because you will not be screwed because of this and for me to have a better chance to win against those 2 teams.
I feel it in my little finger that Antonio Gates is this years Boldin and not any player that got claimed this week.
|
| 91 | I_AM_CANADIAN
ID: 227221220
Thu, Sep 16, 2004, 09:20
|
That sucks Toral... All I can say, is make sure that you remember next week; and try to make good use of the FA wire right now. Their are still lots of good options out there.
|
| 92 | loki
Dude
ID: 4211201420
Thu, Sep 16, 2004, 10:03
|
toral-re#84-perhaps you would like to reconsider my trade proposal. i still think that it would help both of us.
bandos-nice pick up of terrell. i claimed him also, but gave jordan a higher priority.
|
| 93 | I_AM_CANADIAN @ Work
ID: 364563113
Thu, Sep 16, 2004, 11:32
|
Toral, I sent you a trade offer. If you look it over, and get back to me.
|
| 94 | WiddleAvi
ID: 11829178
Sun, Sep 19, 2004, 17:47
|
My QB's are not looking good right now. Maddox got inured and Brad Johnson either is injured or just plain got pulled.
|
| 95 | youngroman
ID: 206491016
Sun, Sep 19, 2004, 18:21
|
WiddleAvi - according to KFFL he was pulled out because Gruden thought that Simms could do better.
It looks like our matchup is coming very close and that Johnson's points could have been the difference for you. currently it looks like 120 points are needed to win this week.
|
| 96 | Tree
ID: 37818819
Sun, Sep 19, 2004, 18:40
|
YR - other than just jotting everything down, is there any sort of live scoring that we have?
|
| 97 | loki
Dude
ID: 4211201420
Sun, Sep 19, 2004, 19:00
|
t-for about $9.95 you can purchase this service fom rotoworld. it was not funtioning last week, but it seems to be working today. it loads very slowly, however.-l
|
| 98 | youngroman
ID: 206491016
Sun, Sep 19, 2004, 19:41
|
I'm not using live-scoring, I did an excel-sheet where I only have to enter the stats and it gives me the points for the teams.
after all but 2 games I calculated that in my game vs. WiddleAvi I am down by less then 2 points with McNabb and Z. Thomas for me and Owens for him to go. I hope McNabb does not throw every ball to Owens. At least the TD-passes should be split to the other receivers.
|
| 99 | I_AM_CANADIAN
ID: 227221220
Sun, Sep 19, 2004, 20:14
|
I bought live scoring and it's not working at 100% at all. From the #'s I've Crunched, in my matchup against Wiggs:
IAC (0 Player's Left) = 130 Points
Wiggs (2 Player's Left) = 65 Points
So unless Akers, and Chad Johnson pull out some miracles... That'll put me at 2-0.
I got to give a hand to my WR core, who brought me in 43.5 Points.
|
| 100 | I_AM_CANADIAN
ID: 227221220
Sun, Sep 19, 2004, 20:20
|
For the rest of the Division... here are some #'s that Live Scoring is giving... Mind you... I know that their are errors in a lot of these:
Ric Flair: 79.84
Weedeaters: 66.9
wiggs:54.9
IAC: 123.6
NY Titans: 109.9
Fantasy Thugs:121.4
Bandos: 94.46
Toral Bills: 56.6
Slowhand: 70.28
Art of Monk: 87.75
Youngroman: 96.9
WiddleAvi: 75.25
Species: 63.52
dwfffan: 49.38
|
| 101 | Toral
ID: 22731114
Tue, Sep 21, 2004, 18:58
|
Moral Victory!
After my waiver debacle last week I e-mailed rotoworld and suggested that their designate-starter-or-bench rules served no useful purpose and that they should just have all waiver claims sent to the bench and let the managers activate them if they wanted to.
That's what they have done as of this week. When you make a waiver claim now you get this message:Please Note: All players picked up from waivers will be placed on your BENCH. Then, you can go to your Set Lineup page after the waiver wire runs and activate the player if you want him as a Starter So I feel better know. especially since my claims (Terrell and Robinson) didn't exactly light up the league last week.
Nevertheless, with my top RB and WR picks both out, it'll be a long season.
Toral
|
| 102 | loki
Dude
ID: 4211201420
Tue, Sep 21, 2004, 19:49
|
t- i guess that i should thank you for not accepting my trade proposal!!-l
|
| 103 | Toral
ID: 22731114
Tue, Sep 21, 2004, 19:59
|
Maybe I was too hasty -- why not make it again?
Toral
|
| 104 | loki
Dude
ID: 4211201420
Tue, Sep 21, 2004, 20:28
|
perhaps when the deuce is off the dl.
|
| 105 | I_AM_CANADIAN
ID: 227221220
Wed, Sep 22, 2004, 01:29
|
I've seen other divisions making comparisons of points made by the RIFC and their own. Let's see how we stack up:
Results Post Week 2
RIFC:
points: 5835
standard deviation: 57.34
RQFL #1: 2857.98 (5715.96)
standard deviation: 66.45
Note: We are not on a double header matchup schedule, thus the reason why the # in brackets has been multiplied by 2.
Off by just over 2% in points and a slightly larger point gap between best to worst team.
|
| 106 | youngroman
ID: 221118186
Wed, Sep 22, 2004, 03:59
|
Toral - I also noticed that, another way Rotoworld is showing that they are going to improve their game really quick.
IAC - you counted all of our players, including bench, right? to really compare all the leagues only the starters points should be counted. the benches could be really different depending on the individual managers strategy.
RQFL#1:
week 1: 1438,54
week 2: 1313,82
seems like the first waiver wire was not that effective. I don't think that the injuries that happened in the first 2 weeks were worth 125 points.
Looks like we did a good job in week 1 and a not that good one in week 2.
|
| 107 | I_AM_CANADIAN
ID: 227221220
Wed, Sep 22, 2004, 10:19
|
Actually no I didn't add in Bench players. I just totaled up the total points to date of each team.
|
| 108 | I_AM_CANADIAN
ID: 227221220
Wed, Sep 22, 2004, 10:23
|
Were still missing some Rationals and Draft Recaps.
It's still not too late... I really enjoy reading through these, and would encourage those who have the time to finnish them up and post them.
|
| 109 | Art of Monk
ID: 32531249
Wed, Sep 22, 2004, 17:10
|
when are waivers going to take place?
|
| 110 | youngroman
ID: 298482214
Wed, Sep 22, 2004, 17:33
|
waivers will be processed today between midnight and 5am.
waiver order is the reverse order of the current standings.
|
| 111 | I_AM_CANADIAN
ID: 227221220
Wed, Sep 22, 2004, 18:52
|
THK... I proposed you a trade. Have a look and AIM me.
|
| 112 | Species
Leader
ID: 07724916
Wed, Sep 22, 2004, 19:37
|
Needless to say it's good to be 2-0, although I'm the weakest 2-0 team in terms of points....
I had hoped to be .500 through week 6 when, I hope, Anquan Boldin returns to the lineup. While Moulds and Chambers are okay receivers, they lack that "Number 1" status that Boldin would give. Hopefully I'm not jinxing myself but I'm thrilled to be 2-0 when I really had a longer-term view of my season so this is a big bonus.
Anyone need a good, up-and-coming rookie receiver? (Michael Clayton)
Shockey needs to get his head out of his ass.
Can't be more pleased with Westbrook....Hasselbeck is a different story, but he hasn't hurt me.
|
| 113 | I_AM_CANADIAN
ID: 227221220
Wed, Sep 22, 2004, 21:38
|
Ummm... What exactly is going on? Apparently someone in our division did a FA move at 9PM? And then reversed it? How is this possible?
|
| 114 | I_AM_CANADIAN
ID: 227221220
Wed, Sep 22, 2004, 22:06
|
Trade Announcement:
From I_AM_CANADIAN to Fantasy Thugs:
Joe Horn - WR NO
Cowboys Def/Spec Team - TM DAL
From Fantasy Thugs to I_AM_CANADIAN:
Broncos Def/Spec Team - TM DEN
Travis Henry - RB BUF
|
| 115 | Tree
ID: 37818819
Wed, Sep 22, 2004, 22:09
|
IAC - read the notes on the main page of our league, in regards to post 113....
|
| 116 | youngroman
ID: 298482214
Thu, Sep 23, 2004, 02:57
|
claims are processed (16, of a total of 44 that were sent in)
all claimed players land on your bench, all dropped players will be subject to next weeks waivers and can not be picked up now. all others are first-come-first-serve.
the above trade will not help me in this weeks matchup vs. THK because he is likely to get more points from the new players then from the traded ones. but that is only the view for this week. And: should I really care about my opponent? My staff looked strong in weeks 1 and 2 and will continue that pace as long as the injury bug does not bite me. Dunn and Gates should practice today and it looks like they will play on Sunday
|
| 117 | Tree
ID: 37818819
Thu, Sep 23, 2004, 06:55
|
extraordinarily slooooooooow for me this morning. in fact, have yet to be able to access my team...
|
| 118 | youngroman
ID: 221118186
Thu, Sep 23, 2004, 08:00
|
here are the results: | Team | - | Player Claimed | - | Attached Player | | Toral Bills | - | Stecker, Aaron - RB, NO | - | Lee Evans - WR, BUF to Waivers/Free Agent | | WiddleAvi's Dolphins | - | Roethlisberger, Ben - QB, PIT | - | Josh Scobey - RB, ARZ to Waivers/Free Agent | | dwfffan | - | Smith, L.J. - TE, PHI | - | Al Wilson - LB, DEN to Waivers/Free Agent | | Weedeaters | - | Morton, Johnnie - WR, KC | - | Reggie Williams - WR, JAC to Waivers/Free Agent | | New York Titans | - | Lang, Kenard - DL, CLE | - | Aaron Schobel - DL, BUF to Waivers/Free Agent | | Ric Flair's slap! | - | Dawson, Phil - K, CLE | - | Sam Cowart - LB, NYJ to Waivers/Free Agent | | Bandos | - | Carter, Ki-jana - RB, NO | - | Dat Nguyen - LB, DAL to Waivers/Free Agent | | Endangered Species | - | Caldwell, Reche - WR, SD | - | Jerry Rice - WR, OAK to Waivers/Free Agent | | ArtofMonk | - | Simmons, Brian - LB, CIN | - | Takeo Spikes - LB, BUF to RESER | | I_AM_CANADIAN | - | Ferguson, Robert - WR, GB | - | Anthony Thomas - RB, CHI to Waivers/Free Agent | | Toral Bills | - | Blaylock, Derrick - RB, KC | - | Steve Smith - WR, CAR to Waivers/Free Agent | | WiddleAvi's Dolphins | - | Simms, Chris - QB, TB | - | Joey Galloway - WR, TB to Waivers/Free Agent | | dwfffan | - | Robertson, Jamal - RB, SF | - | Michael Jenkins - WR, ATL to Waivers/Free Agent | | ArtofMonk | - | Lewis, Chad - TE, PHI | - | Najeh Davenport - RB, GB to Waivers/Free Agent | | I_AM_CANADIAN | - | Smith, Derek - LB, SF | - | Mike Barrow - LB, WAS to Waivers/Free Agent | | Toral Bills | - | Carter, Tim - WR, NYG | - | Tai Streets - WR, DET to Waivers/Free Agent | | dwfffan | - | Def/Spec Team, Giants - TM, NYG | - | Vikings Def/Spec Team - TM, MIN to Waivers/Free Agent | | | | | |
|
| 119 | youngroman
ID: 221118186
Thu, Sep 23, 2004, 08:03
|
Tree - I have no performance-problems at the moment. my experience is that Rotoworld is slow in the evening and fast in the morning.
|
| 120 | I_AM_CANADIAN @ Work
ID: 364563113
Thu, Sep 23, 2004, 10:41
|
RE Tree: No problems for my RotoWorld performance either. + thanks I read the other thread now.
RE YR: I actually did mention to THK that I though he could use the extra firepower to take you on this week (Since Dilon & Henry were on bye weeks). I think it works out well for the both of us.
|
| 121 | Tree
ID: 76471215
Thu, Sep 23, 2004, 13:23
|
yea. it must have been a short hitch. 20 minutes later, it was fine...
|
| 122 | Toral
ID: 22731114
Sun, Sep 26, 2004, 20:42
|
Oh crap. A great week to have Brett Favre and Reggie Wayne -- except that we're playing Peyton Manning and Javon Walker.
This team is cursed. Cursed, i tell you.
Toral
|
| 123 | youngroman
ID: 298482214
Mon, Sep 27, 2004, 04:13
|
points are posted on the scoring-details-page.
tough match between THK and me. he has Witten (5.95 pt avg) and a 7.9 points lead vs. my Terry Glenn (12.2 pt avg) in the Monday night game.
THKs Seahawks shutout hurts in this matchup.
Come on Terry - catch some balls and go deep!
|
| 124 | youngroman
ID: 221118186
Mon, Sep 27, 2004, 07:21
|
points are posted on Rotoworld.
IAC could be the only undefeated team after week 3. Species and I are still in, but will need big games of Portis and Glenn.
interesting that all of those GB/IND big point producers played in one matchup in our league.
Toral - you can go 0-13 and still reach the playoffs if you have enough points.
|
| 125 | Tree
ID: 37818819
Mon, Sep 27, 2004, 07:24
|
yea - YR - my defense played a role in that indy/gb game...yech! LOL
|
| 126 | youngroman
ID: 221118186
Mon, Sep 27, 2004, 07:48
|
Tree - this week you learned the lesson not to play a defense vs. Indy. at least not as long as Peyton throws the entire first quarter for over 250 yds and 4 TDs without a single running play. in that quarter the GB defense looked not really good and they found nothing to stop Peyton throwing the ball. I understand that a defense looks bad for 5 or even 10 plays, but for over 20 passing plays in a row?
In this game you have seen which QB is among the best passers in the league and which one is the best passer in the league.
|
| 127 | I_AM_CANADIAN @ Work
ID: 364563113
Mon, Sep 27, 2004, 12:54
|
In my matchup this week I got very lucky and very unlucky.
I'll be very happy to walk away from this week with a win, while having M.Robison putting up 0 Points before injuring his hamstring, Barlow's pathetic effort, and Palmer's rookie struggles against a strong defence.
Also, I knew week 3 would be really hard having just traded away Horn for Henry who would be on a bye week. This added to Pennington and Bruschi who were allready on bye.
My saving grace really was picking up Atlanta late on the FA wire for their matchup against Arizona. With them putting up 21 points, and Green Bay going a -4 this is really the most important points differation CAT for the week.
|
| 128 | Tree
ID: 76471215
Mon, Sep 27, 2004, 13:26
|
YR - this may very well the week i look back at the week i didn't pay attention to my defense.
my game was close enough, and it stands to reason i could lose this week because of my negative defensive points.
if i miss the playoffs, i will look back at week 3.
|
| 129 | youngroman
ID: 221118186
Tue, Sep 28, 2004, 07:04
|
there goes my perfect season - Glenn did well but Witten scored a TD too. damn. that trade this week made the difference.
I have still only one player that is injured and possibly one or two (Pinner and Williams if healthy) starting RB for the next few weeks on my bench.
IAC - prepare for a week 13 showdown for the #1 seed in the playoffs.
|
| 130 | Toral
ID: 22731114
Tue, Sep 28, 2004, 09:04
|
My position held up through last night's game -- second in the league in points this week, and I lost.
Well a football takes funny bounces, being an oblate spereoid.
|
| 131 | I_AM_CANADIAN @ Work
ID: 364563113
Tue, Sep 28, 2004, 11:39
|
Ron Dayne is on the block if anyone is interested. I'm looking for a WR4 to replace him with.
I'm also open to other offers of course. If your looking to mix up your team a little, send me an email.
|
| 132 | Tree
ID: 37818819
Wed, Sep 29, 2004, 06:54
|
attn - dwfffan - there is a trade offer out to you...check it when you get a chance...
thanks,
Tree
|
| 133 | dwfffan
ID: 458462817
Wed, Sep 29, 2004, 20:04
|
Tree, no thanks, I am not gonna sell out yet.
|
| 134 | Tree
ID: 37818819
Wed, Sep 29, 2004, 21:03
|
no sweat. i just working the phones, trying to swing a deal. :o)
|
| 136 | I_AM_CANADIAN
ID: 227221220
Wed, Sep 29, 2004, 23:51
|
Ummm... Tree or YR... Can you look into this anomoly?
According to the rosters for this week, Art of Monk has 21 Players on his team? The error appears to be linked with the waivers from last week:
ArtofMonk - Simmons, Brian - LB, CIN Takeo Spikes - LB, BUF to RESER MOVE EXECUTED OK
Takeo is still showing on his roster however. I just thought that this might want to be fixed before this weeks claims go through.
|
| 137 | youngroman
ID: 221118186
Thu, Sep 30, 2004, 04:22
|
IAC - I e-mailed Rotoworld about this and removed Spikes from ArtOfMonks roster. he is now on waivers.
If someone want to claim Takeo Spikes for this week, he is still available. I'll give you time until Friday midnight to e-mail me if you want him. I'll process this claim on Saturday morning.
|
| 138 | Tree
ID: 37818819
Thu, Sep 30, 2004, 07:11
|
guys, i'm having the same problem with my team.
i currently have 22 players on my roster.
even though the waiver wire indicates that i dropped Booker, Dawson, and Moore, Dawson and Booker are still showing up on my roster.
as a result, i can't set my lineup...
|
| 139 | Toral
ID: 22731114
Thu, Sep 30, 2004, 07:47
|
To set your lineup, manually set to "drop" the players that should have been dropped when your waiver claims went through.
Worked for me.
Toral
|
| 140 | youngroman
ID: 221118186
Thu, Sep 30, 2004, 08:59
|
it seems that when you want to drop a starter for a waiver-claim, both players end up on your bench after waivers were processed.
this week dwfffan, Toral and Tree were affected by this, last week it was ArtOfMonk.
|
| 141 | I_AM_CANADIAN
ID: 227221220
Thu, Sep 30, 2004, 09:01
|
It also appeared that through last nights run of Waivers, that it for some odd reason wouldn't let Loki (NY Titans) drop Chad Morton for 4 straight players he had lined up. Luckily the #1 on his list was still available as a FA this morning.
RE: Tree you can't just drop them? I would have thought that with having co-commish powers that it wouldn't be that difficult.
|
| 142 | youngroman
ID: 221118186
Thu, Sep 30, 2004, 09:40
|
IAC - loki moved Chad Morton from bench to starter yesterday and his claim was "Morton from bench to waivers" so Morton moved and he got the message "ONE OR BOTH OF THE PLAYERS HAS ALREADY BEEN MOVED".
here is an excerpt from the Rotoworld-FAQ:
"Because of this system it is very important that once you tie a player to a waiver claim you DO NOT move that tied player before the wiver wire run takes place. You should not even move the tied player from Bench to Starter or vice versa. If you move the tied player before the waiver wire runs the waiver wire will NOT award the waiver player to you because the tied player is not where he was when the waiver claim was made."
|
| 143 | youngroman
ID: 221118186
Thu, Sep 30, 2004, 09:44
|
Tree - to drop your players you also have to set your starters with that transaction. currently you are missing a RB and a kicker in your starting-lineup.
|
| 144 | Tree
ID: 76471215
Thu, Sep 30, 2004, 10:33
|
well, i can do it manually, i presume.
it seems weird to me though that even though my claim processed and i picked up the player i wanted, it didn't drop the player tied to the claim.
it sort of defeats the purpose, because technically, i could hold off until saturday or something and drop someone else, as an injury or something might dictate.
|
| 145 | I_AM_CANADIAN @ Work
ID: 364563113
Thu, Sep 30, 2004, 15:59
|
Thanks for the trade offer Tree... but I'm sooo not interested.
|
| 146 | Species
Leader
ID: 07724916
Thu, Sep 30, 2004, 16:40
|
Hmmmmmmmm..........if you are Canadian at work, does this mean you're American when you're at home? ;-)
|
| 147 | loki
Dude
ID: 4211201420
Thu, Sep 30, 2004, 17:42
|
re: #142-i realized my error when i checked the waiver transactions screen, and as was noted i was able to claim my pick from the free agent list.
|
| 148 | Bandos
ID: 13762111
Sun, Oct 03, 2004, 17:04
|
If you have live scoring, would you mind posting it sometime after the late games? Thanks.
|
| 149 | Bandos
ID: 13762111
Sun, Oct 03, 2004, 19:14
|
Great - I started Wheatley - who got hurt, over Emmitt who had what will probablt be the best day of his year. RRRRRggggghhhhhh. Why did I make that change???
|
| 150 | loki
Dude
ID: 4211201420
Sun, Oct 03, 2004, 22:41
|
re:148-i could not copy the live scoring page to copy here(if you can tell me how, i would be glad to do it.),but as of 10:40pm our score is bandos 63.02-nyt 59.66.
|
| 151 | Species
Leader
ID: 07724916
Sun, Oct 03, 2004, 23:38
|
How about the rest of the scores? Pretty please
|
| 152 | I_AM_CANADIAN
ID: 227221220
Mon, Oct 04, 2004, 00:17
|
Warning... Live Scoring Results aren't 100% accurate. That said, here is what their presently showing:
YR 88.56 - 1
dwfffan 87.47 - 1
WiddleAvi 109.8 - 0
IAC 65.52 - 0 (+~13?)
Species 115.60 - 0
Slowhand 58.20 - 0
RFSlap 87.09 - 0
AoM 98.29 - 0
wiggs 63.72 - 2
THK 63.67 - 1
NY Titans 59.66 - 2
Bandos 63.02 - 3
Weedeaters 55.71 - 3
Toral Bills 99.56 - 1
|
| 153 | I_AM_CANADIAN
ID: 227221220
Mon, Oct 04, 2004, 00:29
|
I certainly wasn't expecting a perfect season, but was quite suprised by the outcome of my matchup this week.
My offence had a combined total of 0 TD's?! Coles, Henry, and Crumpler put of not bad #'s from Yds alone, but it wasn't enough.
Even had I started the Falcons & Suggs over the Broncos & Barlow, I still couldn't have won this weeks matchup, so there is no sense second guessing myself, and treat this as a learning experience.
Were probably going to have a pillup of 3-1 teams going into week 5.
|
| 154 | Species
Leader
ID: 07724916
Tue, Oct 05, 2004, 19:06
|
Just checked who I play this week, and thankfully both Weedeaters and I both have the pain of our #2 RB with a bye (Westbrook and T. Jones).....but man why couldn't I play him LAST week when Culpepper was sitting? :(
|
| 155 | Slowhand
SuperDude
ID: 056744223
Tue, Oct 05, 2004, 20:41
|
Jeez Species...wasn't it enough fun to kick my A## ;-)
|
| 156 | I_AM_CANADIAN
ID: 227221220
Thu, Oct 07, 2004, 01:53
|
Once again the Waiver moves need to be adjusted.
Players to be Droped:
From Toral Bills: L.Tynes K
From Slowhand: T.Titans DEF
Both were starters last week.
|
| 157 | Toral
ID: 22731114
Thu, Oct 07, 2004, 07:52
|
Tynes has been dropped now.
|
| 158 | Bandos
ID: 13762111
Thu, Oct 07, 2004, 10:58
|
I find myself with Gonzo and Eric Johnson. I am looking to upgrade at RB/WR if someone finds themselves with a glut.
|
| 159 | youngroman
ID: 298482214
Thu, Oct 07, 2004, 13:50
|
I just removed the Titans from Slowhand's roster.
|
| 160 | youngroman
ID: 298482214
Thu, Oct 07, 2004, 18:05
|
looks like Live scoring is free this week.
|
| 161 | I_AM_CANADIAN
ID: 227221220
Sat, Oct 09, 2004, 11:35
|
Hey YR. I wanted to bring back up an old subject.
In this Thread (Click Me) , in posts 154 & 155 it was very briefly mentioned about IDP player's not supposing to be credited for offensive #'s. ie. Return Yardage on Punts and Kickoffs. Where do we stand on this now?
I'm pretty sure that:
Allen Rossum
&
Terrence McGee
would qualify to be mainly Return Yardage point getters.
|
| 162 | loki
Dude
ID: 4211201420
Sat, Oct 09, 2004, 12:35
|
going one step further, an offensive player should be credited for defensive points he could obtain on special teams.
|
| 163 | youngroman
ID: 298482214
Sat, Oct 09, 2004, 12:56
|
IAC and loki:
scoring is set up that defense players get their return-points and offense players their defense-points.
when I look at this years stats in our league the following defense-players got return points:
London Fletcher 32 kick return in week 2
Darren Sharper 9 punt return in week 2
tackles for offense players occur more on a regular basis, in the first 4 weeks 47 tackles by offense players were credited. even kickers are scoring points (Vanderjagt had a 2 tackle game in the IND-GB shootout in week 3).
|
| 164 | I_AM_CANADIAN
ID: 227221220
Sat, Oct 09, 2004, 13:01
|
RE: 162... you mean shouldn't right?
ie... a kicker getting a tackle after a punt?
I have no problem with that. But IMO, I don't know of any kickers that will rack up the points this year from tackles; but I'm pretty sure that the two above meantioned players would benefit highly from a points system "error/oversight".
I personally stayed away from McGee knowing that we weren't supposed to use IDPs for Offensive production. Thus in my waiver claims this week, I had another DB in mind instead of him. (One that isn't handling returns)
|
| 166 | I_AM_CANADIAN
ID: 227221220
Sat, Oct 09, 2004, 13:10
|
RE: 163... I don't think you answered my question.
It appeared that according to what was written in the aforementioned thread, that IDP's should not be credited with DEF points. Correct me if I'm wrong, but this appears to be what was suggested.
And as far as more offensive occurances... I agree there has been more, but they are not skewing the numbers of any one player as significantly as is the case in this situation. If Vander gets two tackles, then that's all of two points! On the grand scheme of things, It would probably ballance out because a player on the other team would probably 1 or 2 players that got one too.
In the case of the afforementioned defensive players however... it appears roughly half or more of their points are comming from those offensive points.
|
| 167 | I_AM_CANADIAN
ID: 227221220
Sat, Oct 09, 2004, 13:19
|
One more thing YR...
I know you make reference to two IDP players that "have" received points in our league from returns; but please look into these two players:
Allen Rossum (NY Titans) = 384 yds = 23.82 Points
&
Terrence McGee (AoM) = 267 yds + 1TD = 16.68 Points
They were both picked up this week, and I'm pretty sure that you would agree that most likely, their situation is much different than that of Fletcher or Sharper.
|
| 168 | youngroman
ID: 298482214
Sat, Oct 09, 2004, 13:36
|
McGee got lucky last week with that 98 kick return TD. when you reduce that single play he is not worth holding for kick returns only.
Rossum was mentioned over a month ago and everyone in the league passed on him until this week. I don't know why he got picked up this week but looking at his points he is around 25th in the league in defense points. defense players with the same points this season are still available.
every defense back or even a linebacker can get lucky one week and return an INT for a TD. but I do not pick up a defense player because of that possibility. I also don't expect that from my returners.
Lets see how this works out this week.
|
| 169 | I_AM_CANADIAN
ID: 227221220
Sat, Oct 09, 2004, 14:25
|
RE YR:
Your own personal philosphy on wether or not a player get's lucky is quite informative and all, but that's not really what I was looking for. I can make those type of educated guesses myself also. What I'm looking for is a clear answer on the points system: (From the Commish's Unbiased standpoint)
Will we be allowing IDP's to score Offensive Points? Yes or No?
I thought that answer was supposed to be no, but I'd rather clear the air now, before the matchups this week. What kind of difference does this make?
Well McGee goes from being a mediocre DB (Thus why he wasn't drafted.) to being the Highest PPG producer for ALL IDP's so far this season.(His #'s didn't appear huge before, because Buffalo had an early bye week.)
I'm expecting a very close matchup against AoM this week, and if I lose over points that are made by an defensive player in one of these type of situations; I may be a little upset.
|
| 170 | loki
Dude
ID: 4211201420
Sat, Oct 09, 2004, 15:21
|
I_A_C-my interpretation is that idps do receive offensive points and therefore as a correlary, ofensive players should receive defensive points.-l
|
| 171 | I_AM_CANADIAN
ID: 227221220
Sat, Oct 09, 2004, 15:35
|
We are supposed to be basing our season on the RIFC right? Yes we are. Then this makes things very clear:
"IDP receive points for any touchdowns scored, regardless of cause (off, def, or return)
IDP do not receive other offensive points or return points"
Link to RIFC - Draft preparation - Post 0 (Click me)
|
| 172 | loki
Dude
ID: 4211201420
Sat, Oct 09, 2004, 15:57
|
I_A_C-i picked up rossum this week because of his return points;otherwise as an idp he is of little value. while we are supposed to base the league on rifc, guru has stated that the rules do not need to be exactly the same. if our scoring system gave idps offensive points from the start of the season, then we should not change at this time.
in #168 yr indicates that this will be the status quo for this week. i think that it should remain so for the remainder of the season.-l
|
| 173 | I_AM_CANADIAN
ID: 227221220
Sat, Oct 09, 2004, 16:11
|
RE Loki: Personally, I find that post #168 and the sourounding discussion to be rather vague, and it got passed over rather quickly. In the following Thread (Click me), In post #5 where YR is breaking down the differences between our settings and that of Guru's their is no mention made to return yards by defensive players.
|
| 174 | I_AM_CANADIAN
ID: 227221220
Sat, Oct 09, 2004, 16:25
|
Just found another couple mosels... same thread... Post 41 YR "does" make another vague reference:
"all but 1 RIFL scoring option can be entered (the one is that you can't specify yards at missed FG). defense and IDP are supported, return yards for IDP are supported, weekly waivers are supported."
but then later, in Post 103:
"yes we use Rotoworld, and yes I was able to enter identical scoring options to Guru's RIFL...the only stat where I have to do a trick is FGs, scoring looks like this:
Field Goal Attempts"
Up to this point, I'm still under the assumption that we are trying to mimic RIFC's point system, and thus IDP Returns should be 0.
Had their been a difference in scoring between our own and RIFC's it should have been mentioned before the Draft.
|
| 175 | I_AM_CANADIAN
ID: 227221220
Sat, Oct 09, 2004, 16:31
|
More... Link (Click Me)
Post #4
"IDP:
2pts/blocked kick (FG or PAT)
6pts/TD (fumble or INT)
3pts/safety
1pt/fumble recovery
1pt/fumble forced
2pts/INT
2pts/sack
1pt/tackle
0.5pts/assisted tackle
1pt/pass defensed
scoring should be identical with RIFL"
|
| 176 | youngroman
ID: 298482214
Sat, Oct 09, 2004, 16:42
|
just got back from watching soccer world cup qualifiers.
i thought that RIFC uses return points for defense players so I set it up that way in our league. when I look at the RQFL#2 which also uses fanball they are adjusting the return-points every week because IDPs are not covered at Fanball, I think.
IDPs get points for all offense categories including punt and kick returns - offense players get points for all defense categories , which are mainly tackles.
this scoring systems will remain that way for the rest of the season.
sorry for being that vague in my previous posts. I'm going to sleep now to be awake for the STL-LA game later.
|
| 177 | I_AM_CANADIAN
ID: 227221220
Sat, Oct 09, 2004, 17:32
|
This is BS! I protest! Where is heck do you think you have the right to change the points system at this point in the game?
I can't wait to beat you out for the #1 spot in this division in order to make it up into a division that doesn't change their rules mid-stream. You are aware that nobody drafted in regard to this?
I wasted 2 hours of my time backing up an argument that is 99% correct based on all above mentioned posts+common scense, and you go pull an "I thought"?! Well too bad! I don't care what you thought, you'd better fix the points system!
It is very uncomfortable playing in a division where the rules are always bent/broken to accomadate a few. Take the rest of us into account! We have been following the rules, so we get what for it?
BS BS BS !!!
|
| 178 | Toral
ID: 22731114
Sat, Oct 09, 2004, 18:53
|
I guess the first question I would ask is -- is it possible in the rotoworld game machine to have IDPs not collect return yardage points but others do so? If it's not possible I guess it will have to be accepted.
If it is possible to change it, it would be better to change it to the rules as we understood them (no return points for IDPs). That's if others understood it the way IAC and I did.
To make things even more interesting ;), McGee is starting this week with Vincent out.
Toral
|
| 179 | loki
Dude
ID: 4211201420
Sat, Oct 09, 2004, 19:16
|
Not directed towards any individual:
Source: Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary, © 1996, 1998 MICRA, Inc.
contentious
adj 1: inclined or showing an inclination to dispute or disagree, even to engage in law suits; "a style described as abrasive and contentious"; "a disputatious lawyer"; "a litigious and acrimonious spirit" [syn: disputatious, disputative, litigious] 2: involving or likely to cause controversy; "a central and contentious element of the book"- Tim W.Ferfuson 3: having or showing a ready disposition to fight; "bellicose young officers"; "a combative impulse"; "a contentious nature" [syn: battleful, bellicose, combative]
4: RQFL#1
I think that definition 2 describes us the best.
|
| 180 | I_AM_CANADIAN
ID: 227221220
Sat, Oct 09, 2004, 19:19
|
RE: Toral, Yes it is possible to only allow scoring to offensive players for return yardage. Holt had gathered this information from Rotoworld staff a month ago, but YR decided not to implement it since nobody had "drafted" one of these players.
YR, "so it currently makes no difference for us."
Well guess what... It does make a difference now!
|
| 181 | I_AM_CANADIAN
ID: 227221220
Sat, Oct 09, 2004, 19:25
|
RE 179: LOL, I do agree that this year has been full, of disagreement's so far. Unfortunately, I find that most of these could easily have been avoided.
but I won't back down...
|
| 182 | I_AM_CANADIAN
ID: 227221220
Sat, Oct 09, 2004, 19:34
|
On an unrelated note...
The matchups this week are quite interesting:
3-1 vs 3-1
3-1 vs 3-1
1-3 vs 1-3
1-3 vs 1-3
2-2 vs 2-2
3-1 vs 2-2
2-2 vs 1-3
No real lopsided contests probably, and two teams will be coming out of this week 4-1, while two will be coming out 1-4, this could very well be the most important week for playoff hopefull teams.
|
| 183 | Tree
ID: 28883018
Sat, Oct 09, 2004, 19:45
|
i'm not grasping this all 100 percent, but if we haven't been using the proper scoring system the whole time, and that's what we drafted based on, then what??
|
| 184 | I_AM_CANADIAN
ID: 227221220
Sat, Oct 09, 2004, 20:06
|
RE Tree: I would think that normally the commish would be in a hurry to fix an error; but it appears somehow that it doesn't matter what draft strategy we used, nor what the rules were supposed to be previous to the season commencing?! I really don't get the logic behind this one. It's just wrong!
|
| 185 | youngroman
ID: 298482214
Sat, Oct 09, 2004, 20:27
|
I would have no problem as a manager to change the scoring system to not credit IDPs with return yards. as I understand Rotoworld I should also be able to change the scoring for the past 4 weeks for the 2 IDP-players that got credited this season.
Question 1 - should we change the scoring system to not count return yards for IDPs?
a) yes
b) no
Question 2 - when should the change be applied (if it is possible in Rotoworld) ?
a) since week 1
b) since week 5 (this week, would screw up ArtOfMonk and lokis waiver claims this week)
c) since week 6 (next week)
if we get a high majority (2/3) of the league to vote for the change at this point in the season I'll do it.
I now know (or should I say I know this for weeks)that commishing a football league like this is a lot harder then commishing other leagues because of that many rules and complex scoring systems. Add a new league-site to the list and you end up where we are right now. if I could only go back 2 months ....
|
| 186 | Toral
ID: 22731114
Sat, Oct 09, 2004, 20:35
|
1) yes
2) c -- 1st choice
b -- 2nd choice
Toral
|
| 187 | I_AM_CANADIAN
ID: 227221220
Sat, Oct 09, 2004, 20:38
|
1)A
2)A
FYI - for Loki, it is a FA move not a Waiver claim.
I still don't understand why we have to vote for something to be set something back to the way it orginially was supposed to be?!
RE: YR... I know it's hard to manage a league, but no rules should be left up to opinion. They should be set in stone! Thus why I don't like: "so it currently makes no difference for us." This lack of judgement from you put us in the mess we are now dealing with. On top of everything, I'll mention this again; that post by Holt came after the draft, thus why I feel the rules were being bent (or left open to interpretation) afterwards.
|
| 188 | Tree
ID: 28883018
Sat, Oct 09, 2004, 21:49
|
presuming this is changing back to the rules as originally anticipated, i'm for A and A.
|
| 189 | Pancho Villa
Sustainer
ID: 533817
Sat, Oct 09, 2004, 22:20
|
1. A
2. No preference
|
| 190 | WiddleAvi
ID: 408232822
Sat, Oct 09, 2004, 22:27
|
1.a
2.a
|
| 191 | I_AM_CANADIAN
ID: 227221220
Sat, Oct 09, 2004, 22:31
|
Also, if we could do as Loki indicated would also be fair... Remove defensive points from offensive players. (ie. tackles for kickers)
In the grand scheme of things, it may not be quite as important, but I'd rather see ALL rules followed as closely as possible.
(oh, and just to clarify... When I say IDP's scoring offensive points, I mean yardage return's, and do not refer to TD's. TD's should count in all instances, even if it was on a punt return. [just like in the RIFC])
|
| 192 | WiddleAvi
ID: 17955617
Sat, Oct 09, 2004, 22:59
|
sorry meant
1.a
2.b
|
| 193 | loki
Dude
ID: 4211201420
Sat, Oct 09, 2004, 23:25
|
yr-i will be turning in soon as i have to get up early for work in the am. therefore i most likely,but not definitely,will not have computer access until after 1pm kickoff. if you are going to change the rules, which i strongly protest(obviously a no vote to your question), please do it now so that i can make a roster change, or not all. otherwise i might as well have left rossum's roster spot blank.THANKS!!-l
|
| 194 | I_AM_CANADIAN
ID: 227221220
Sun, Oct 10, 2004, 00:15
|
So far... the count is 5-1... the 1 obviously coming from one of the manager's with the aforementioned players. (suprised?)
With most managers not checking their teams till Sunday morning, I wouldn't expect this to be resolved this evening.
From an unbiased standpoint, I'd rather not see Loki penalized if he can't make the change in time; but at the same time, having a clue of the current results, he should be able to figure out that the vote will most likely end in one favoring the RIFC system, thus he has the opportunity to make the change now.
I would suggest to make your move now Loki.
|
| 195 | I_AM_CANADIAN
ID: 227221220
Sun, Oct 10, 2004, 00:29
|
Once we get this current discussion dealt with, I suggest that we open a 2nd Regular Season Discussion Thread; because this one is taking forever to load now.
Sorry, probably my fault... half the posts are mine.
:)
|
| 196 | I_AM_CANADIAN
ID: 227221220
Sun, Oct 10, 2004, 00:37
|
Sorry correction to last post... now 55 are mine, with this post... so closer to 1/4 than 1/2. LOL.
|
| 197 | I_AM_CANADIAN
ID: 227221220
Sun, Oct 10, 2004, 01:41
|
hmmm... Art of Monk logs on to RotoWorld at 1:24AM (Lineup Adjustment) and yet makes no post here for the state of this argument.
I think he may be trying to avoid this discussion for a reason?
|
| 198 | youngroman
ID: 298482214
Sun, Oct 10, 2004, 05:34
|
after sleeping over this discussion I vote for 1a and 2c, with that the vote is 6-1 at the moment. to get a majority we need at least 2 more yes-votes.
at this point it looks like that the return-scoring-system will change. depending on the second question the depending weeks are still in question. current votes are 2.3 for week1, 1.3 for week5, 2.3 for week6, for loki I assume c) which results in a lead for week6
loki and ArtOfMonk - you can mail me the player you would like to pick up in case the 2nd question results in a) or b). you even can mail me the player after 1pm if the player to be picked up hasn't started yet.
|
| 199 | loki
Dude
ID: 4211201420
Sun, Oct 10, 2004, 06:53
|
up early and made roster change before leaving for work--under protest of course!!
|
| 200 | dwfffan
ID: 3997513
Sun, Oct 10, 2004, 09:16
|
1) a
2) a
|
| 201 | Tree
ID: 28883018
Sun, Oct 10, 2004, 10:48
|
for the record, i think return points should be counted for every player. i think any possible way of a player scoring should be counted.
HOWEVER - if that's not what was originally specified, then it's wrong. we should definitely go with what the rules stated originally, regardless of my personal beliefs.
|
| 202 | I_AM_CANADIAN
ID: 227221220
Sun, Oct 10, 2004, 10:56
|
RE Tree... I personally think it's an interesting point variable.
But I think that it would have to be stipulated before the draft, so that we all can have the chance to adjust our rankings accordingly. I'm assuming that Rossum would have made it to some peoples short-lists had we been doing research for return yardage.
ie. For me NorthCutt got bumped up in my WR rankings because of the fact he was returning.
|
| 203 | holt
ID: 497552
Sun, Oct 10, 2004, 16:06
|
just barely read some of this discussion. looks like you're discussing return points for idp's.
the commish has the power to edit point totals. if there's only one player involved then it seems like the easiest (and fairest according to the rules of the league) thing to do would just be to edit out that players return points. only takes a minute to do it. much easier than re-doing all the league scoring settings (you can set it so idp's don't get return points, but then you also have to re-enter the scoring set-ups for QB, RB,WR, etc.).
BTW - ROTOWORLD HAS FREE LIVE SCORING THIS WEEK (FREE TRIAL).
|
| 204 | I_AM_CANADIAN
ID: 227221220
Sun, Oct 10, 2004, 23:25
|
Well it looks like AoM wins this week. Congrats.
This is my 2nd straight loss; and the 2nd week with very poor TD production from my OFF. Last week, I managed 0, this week 1?!
Oh, well, I conceed. Your players outplayed mine AoM... I look forward to maybe a rematch in the playoffs.
I'm out... g'night all.
|
| 205 | art of monk
ID: 49828119
Mon, Oct 11, 2004, 00:11
|
wow, i am very confused here as well. Please post rules before we started drafting. I don't even remember. I know I looked at offensive players that would get return yards. I also looked at some defensive players that would get return yards, but didn't find one that I wanted to draft since I went DL heavy. Why do we just use the league's message board since we don't have to look in two different places.
League vote
1. b
2. don't change
I don't see what the big deal is here. Not too many players to get that are productive KR/PR that also get big points from other areas. Why would we give return yards for offensive players and not defensive players? In my opinion changing rules midseason is not a good idea. Whatever the rule interuptation was was implied to everyone. Everyone had the option to pickup Mcgee. I was one of the last on the priority list. I vote get rid of return yardage completely for next year. I also vote to move this to the league website. No I was not avoiding the issue. I didn't even know their was an issue.
|
| 206 | I_AM_CANADIAN
ID: 227221220
Mon, Oct 11, 2004, 02:51
|
AoM... you didn't get the AIM msg's that I sent to you pre-kickoff today? I find that odd because they didn't give me an error about receipt not available etc...
As far as the rules... you are just as capable of looking back at them as everyone is; it's not like they've been deleted or anything. If you really want an easy breakdown... go throught Post 171, 173, 174, & 175 of this thread.
I do find it unfortunate that you chose to vote on a subject from a biased standpoint however... what you should have said is that, "I will stand by whatever the rules where."
Any other stance I find lacking in fairplay.
|
| 207 | I_AM_CANADIAN
ID: 227221220
Mon, Oct 11, 2004, 02:56
|
Btw... for a recap of the vote:
7 for
vs
The 2 managers who had the aforementioned players.
|
| 208 | loki
Dude
ID: 4211201420
Mon, Oct 11, 2004, 07:49
|
I_A_C-of course AoM could have looked back, as could have myself and everyone else in the league. however i assumed as AoM probably did that the rules conformed with the rotoworld default scoring system in place for our league at the onset of play. it never occurred to me that return yardage would not be valid for idps since the scoring tables for our league counted it. it did not seem that it was going to make a difference in the outcomes of yesterday's games, but even if it did AoM's idp return points should count. futhermore yr said that they would not count only if a supermajority voted this way and not even a simple majority was obtained. as i was able to make a roster change, i was not affected, but i still felt that it was unfair to change at this time and therefore voted as i did.-l
|
| 209 | Art of Monk
ID: 32531249
Mon, Oct 11, 2004, 10:51
|
No I didn't get your aim, IAC I was busy changing lineups for another league that I am commishing. I am not voting on a biased position, I am strictly voting based on you don't change rules or start enforcing a rule midseason, especially if we want these rules to go back and possibly affect previous weeks. I am not the one complaining about what are current rules are. I am living with them. I do understand that we are trying to follow the RIFC league rules, so why wasn't this rule brought up after week 1? or was it?
I do agree that we are trying to follow the RIFC league rules, but I never actually looked at their rules, I didn't read their posts before the draft.
From our league youngroman posted league rules in post #4. I think it is vague on return yards. I honestly believe it could be read either way as to include or exclude IDP from return yards. This is a hairy situation. The argument could also be that return yards are return yards period shouldn't matter if the player is IDP or other. is a KR really considered a defensive player? Not to be a smarta$$ here but I thought a defensive player is suppose to tackle other players not run the ball. When a team has the ball in their position aren't they considered to be the offense and the other team the defense. What about return yardage from a fumble or a INT? What do we do with players that play off/def like deion or champ of course we would all agree the are IDP but they have lined up as WR, should they get receiving yards? What about that special teams player from Mia that kicked the field goal should he get credit for kicking a field goal? Last arguments should offensive players get any points for making tackles on special teams or due to a turnover. I believe that we do need to make a decision, but it should be for next year not this year. I think we could also put this to groupies on rotoguru and I would hope that most would agree you don't change or start enforcing rules during the season. I am also posting this on the league website, because I am unsure if everybody still looks at football standings. IAC please do not be offended and no I truly didn't get your IM and if I did I still wouldn't have looked at it until I had set lineups. I am willing to do whatever the league decides, but I still find it interesting we are dealing with a scoring problem that should have been brought up after week 1.
|
| 210 | I_AM_CANADIAN
ID: 227221220
Mon, Oct 11, 2004, 12:15
|
AoM... A lot of your points have some validity... but most of them have allready been covered:
1) IDP Kickoff and Punt Return yardage was brought but prior to week one as an issue, but YR skipped over the subject because nobody had drafted one of these players.
2) When an error was found in the FG #'s after week 1, we did go back and adjust to try to get something as close the RIFC as possible. I believe this did have an effect on 1 matchup.
3) IDP Kickoff and Punt Return yardage are the CAT's in question. Yes, return yardage after a fumble or INT still qualifies, for their respective CAT's (not the same stat).
4) Offensive players receiving defensive stats should also be corrected, as they are stats that were not part of the orginal design.
5) By the rules... IDP players also should not get receiving yards from offensive plays. Thus Champ Baily & Deion should hold little value in our league.
I am not offended by your action AoM, nor Loki. I can understand why you may have confused the rules. I wish that YR had fixed the issue of scoring right away before the season started, but as was mentioned, he didn't see a need to. So this is why were dealing with it now, I tried to bring it up and have it resolved prior to this weeks matchups so that nobody would feel that they are getting an unfair deal. Obviously you had just got done picking up the player this week, so their was no need to say anything in previous weeks.
+
RE: Loki...
7 vs 2 is not a Super Majority?
|
| 211 | Art of Monk
ID: 32531249
Mon, Oct 11, 2004, 13:23
|
I am posting what Youngroman posted as the rules. I am unsure if everybody has looked at the rules before they voted. I see both sides here. IAC, I was offended and still am, I am sure I will get over it. IAC, you are claiming that you brought this issue up before and youngroman didn't feel that it didn't need to be dealt with yet? Where did you bring it up? I am not doubting you I just want to see when and I don't want to sort through all of the discussions threads. Last point both Youngroman and the NY Titans both tried to claim McGee as well, I wonder which way they would be voting if they would have gotten McGee. Have we gotten any clafication from GURU whether their IDP don't get return yards and do we want to be identical?
Once again I see both sides here, I will follow the rules. IAC are you sure that champ or Neon won't get pts for any receiving or rushing yards or what if sapp gets to catch a td again? I think players should get points for everything they do on the field? What does guru say about this?
scoring (all stats in decimal format)
passing:
1pt/25yds
4pts/TD
1pt/2pt-conversion
rushing:
1pt/10yds
6pts/TD
2pts/2pt-conversion
reveiving:
1pt/10yds
6pts/TD
2pts/2pt-conversion
kicking:
1pt/FG attempt 30 to 100
3pts/ 1 to 29 Yards FG
2pts/ 30 to 39 Yards FG (= 3pts with 1pt from attempt)
3pts/ 40 to 49 Yards FG (= 4pts with 1pt from attempt)
4pts/ 50 to 100 Yards FG (=5pts with 1 pt from attempt)
1pt/PAT
-1pt/missed FG
-1pt/missed PAT
turnovers:
-2pt/INT or fumble
returns:
1pt/25 kick return yards
1pt/10 punt return yards
6pts/return TD (kick, punt, blocked kick)
IDP:
2pts/blocked kick (FG or PAT)
6pts/TD (fumble or INT)
3pts/safety
1pt/fumble recovery
1pt/fumble forced
2pts/INT
2pts/sack
1pt/tackle
0.5pts/assisted tackle
1pt/pass defensed
defense team:
6pts/TD (fumble or INT or blocked kick)
3pts/safety
2pts/fumble recovery
2pts/INT
1pt/sack
2pts/blocked kick (FG or PAT)
10pts/shutout
7pts/1-6 pts allowed
4pts/7-13 pts allowed
1pt/14-20 pts allowed
0pt/21-27 pts allowed
-1pt/28-34 pts allowed
-4 pts/35+ pts allowed
scoring should be identical with RIFL
|
| 212 | loki
Dude
ID: 4211201420
Mon, Oct 11, 2004, 14:09
|
re: #210-I_A_C-i believe that a simple majority vote in our league would require 8 votes, i.e.,one more than 50% of the number of eligible voters or of a quorum as defined by the rules, which the could be more or less than 8. a super majority is a number greater than a than that required for a simple majority. it can be any number, but it usually is defined as 2/3-3/4 of the total number of eligible voters or quorem as defined by the rules. in any event the point is moot if outcome of games were not affected. anybody have a roberts rules of order?(i am joking of course. we need not to take everything so seriously.)
re: #211-AoM-you are mistaken. i was the other no vote.see post #208.
|
| 213 | Bandos
ID: 52836313
Mon, Oct 11, 2004, 17:57
|
RRRggghhh! I lost with over 110 again. Damn Vick, I coulda had Tiki...:) Nonetheless, I am glad to be competitive after my unusual draft. I am still looking to move a TE.
Oh, for the topic at hand. I went back and found this:
From the thread that IAC posted above
post 155 - by yr (the bastard who beat me this week!:)
holt - I have set it the same for all players which means defense players get credited for return-yards. looking at last years stats, the following defense players were regular returners: P. Buchanon, RW. McQuarters, A. Rossum, D. O'Neal, L. Brightful (all are DB). none of them was drafted in our league so it currently makes no difference for us.
While vague, it implies that we were playing with IDP getting return yardage, eventhough it wasn't a RIFC rule. So I vote to allow defensive players to score those points. All points should count.
So
1)b
Bandos
|
| 214 | I_AM_CANADIAN
ID: 227221220
Mon, Oct 11, 2004, 18:07
|
AoM - I know it's a lot stuff to read but all the answers are there, here's my best effort:
I didn't claim that I originally brought up the point. In our division the point was actually brought up by an outside commisioner (Holt) who wanted to inform us of how his division was dealing with it. The manager in question in his division that found the discrepency was Hubble, a good friend of mine from Montreal (also where I live), and we had discussed it in detail. Here it is copy & pasted from thread that I originally refered to in post 161:
"Holt -
hey youngroman. hubble just asked me about IDP's getting credit for kick/punt returns, so I e-mailed rotoworld:
Rotoworld.com Customer Service:
By default the IDPs will definitely get credit for kick and punt returns. If you don't want that you need to change the league scoring to score differently for different positions. Then do not enter any scoring for the Default position for kick and punt returns. Enter scoring for kick and punt returns for QBs, RBs, WRs and TEs - that way they will get credit for those stats and IDPs won't
Replying to your message:
hi. my league uses IDP's. we want to make sure that the IDP's don't score points for kick/punt returns. we only want offensive players to score in those categories. can you explain to me how that works?
hopefully this is the default setting. otherwise we'll have people drafting DB's who return kicks.
____________________________________
I don't think our ql-3 league is set for individual positions is it? this would mean I'd have to go back and re-enter the scoring settings for every position individually. arghhhh! I'm really starting to hate rotoworld.
YR - holt - I have set it the same for all players which means defense players get credited for return-yards. looking at last years stats, the following defense players were regular returners: P. Buchanon, RW. McQuarters, A. Rossum, D. O'Neal, L. Brightful (all are DB). none of them was drafted in our league so it currently makes no difference for us."
Oh... and as far as Guru's stance:
"Sorry, not getting involved in another league's brouhaha.
(Actually, I'm not sorry at all!)"
And as far as offensive points... TD's always count for points, no matter the situation.
RE Loki - Well... In a perfect world more managers would have showed up to vote.
RE Bandos - LOL, I see that it can be easy to get confused by the points system, but even YR, the Commish who put them in place (or on hold), understands that Return Yardage was only supposed to be for Offensive players orginally.
|
| 215 | I_AM_CANADIAN
ID: 227221220
Mon, Oct 11, 2004, 18:19
|
Let's shut this one down guys...
I personally have allready said everything that I had to say at least once on this subject in this thread, thus will not be posting anymore about it in the next thread. You guys deal with it whatever way you want.
Link to Regular Season Discussion #2 (Click Me)
|
|
|
Post a reply to this message: (But first, how about checking out this sponsor?)
|