|
| Posted by: Guru
- [2811847] Tue, Dec 06, 2005, 10:50
The playoff brackets are set, and can be viewed at http://rotoguru1.com/foot/RIFC.html.
As a reminder, we have limited roster add/drop flexibility during the playoffs:Players at the primary skill positions (QB, RB, WR) are frozen for the playoffs. Team defenses are also frozen, since they are not subject to injury uncertainty. Other positions are eligible for injury-replacement add/drop/claim transactions only.
Specifically, players in the other slots (TE, PK, IDP) may only be replaced if they are designated as questionable or worse on the NFL injury report.
Thus, you cannot add or drop a QB, RB, WR, or team Def after the week #13 freeze, period. You can only drop someone else if that player is designated as "Questionable" or lower. If one of those players is dropped, he can only be replaced by a player fulfilling the same position. (IDPs will be considered the same position for this purpose.)
Only teams that are still active in the Championship bracket may make roster substitutions. Teams in the Consolation bracket, and teams that have lost in the Championship bracket, are prohibited from making any roster add/drops.
Special Notice: I just realized that the above rules, as they were initially stated in the regular season discussion thread, mistakenly referred to week #14 when they should have stated week #13. All of the subsequent discussion seemed to have been based on the correct interpretation - that is, rosters at the end of week #13 are the frozen playoff rosters, subject to the limited injury replacement rules above. But I recognize that if someone read the rule specification literally, they wouild have expected to be able to make "normal" roster adjustments again this week.
For now, I'm going to go with the corrected version of the rule, because it appears that all discussion was based on this rule. But if there are managers who feel they have been duped, please speak up, because I realize that there was ambiguity. |
| | | 1 | Guru
ID: 2811847
Tue, Dec 06, 2005, 10:54
|
Note on playoff seeding for championship bracket:
Challenger and Oaktown were tied for the 6th position with a 13-13 record. They split their head-to-head matchups this season. So the tie is decided based on total points, and Oaktown gets the #6 slot.
The #7 and #8 slots are based solely on points, without regard to W/L record.
|
|
| | | 2 | Guru
ID: 2811847
Tue, Dec 06, 2005, 10:56
|
Notes on Consolation bracket:
There are only three games (six teams) in round one. For round two, the losing team in round one with the most points in that game will advance and take the open spot.
|
|
| | | 3 | Guru
ID: 2811847
Tue, Dec 06, 2005, 10:59
|
We agreed at the beginning of the season to run a "mock playoff" with a different initial seeding.
For this version, the top seeded team gets to pick its first round opponent (from among the teams seeded #5-8). The second seeded team gets the next choice, followed by the third seed. Once the initial round matchups are selected, the bracket continues as normal.
This was suggested as an alternate way to provide some sort of "home field advantage" to the top playoff qualifiers.
I get the first choice, but have not had the chance to consider the options (although I will probably stick with the #8 seed).
|
|
| | | 4 | Guru
ID: 2811847
Tue, Dec 06, 2005, 11:03
|
If you need to make an injury replacement, subject to our limited replacement rules, you have three opportunities to do so each week.
All injury replacements will use the free agent claiming system. These claims will be processed at noon on Thursday, Saturday, and Sunday. There will be no opportunity to pick up a free agent at any other time.
If a player is improperly claimed at any of these times, the Commish will reverse the transaction.
|
|
| | | 5 | leggestand
ID: 11102399
Tue, Dec 06, 2005, 16:26
|
I'm not too excited about drawing Oaktown Raiders. Matchup details:
Points for: 2 vs. 4
Notes from First Matchup:
Oaktown won 142-124
Players on bye: I didn't have Trent Green, LaMont Jordan, or Burress. Oaktown had a pretty full roster.
Stat of the Game: IDP's for Oaktown scored 44 points, IDP's for me scored 22.3 points.
Notes from Second Matchup:
I won 136-129
Players on bye: I has a full roster. Oaktown also had a full roster, except that Big Ben was hurt.
Stat of the Game: Jaguars D scores 23 points for me, while the Ravens score 0 for Oaktown. Also, Roderick Coleman (DL) for Oaktown puts up 0, while Simeon Rice scores 18 on the bench.
Overall, Alexander put up over 60 total points on me, and is facing the Niners this week. I am betting he keeps his 30 ppg average.
Should be a battle this week and I am going to self-proclaim it to be the Game of the Week.
|
|
| | | 6 | Bandos
Sustainer
ID: 279492419
Tue, Dec 06, 2005, 20:27
|
At 10-16, I imagine you would still choose to play me :)
Im happy to have made it into the playoffs. I think this season has cured me of my Vick/Moss infatuation.
|
|
| | | 7 | GoatLocker
Sustainer
ID: 060151121
Tue, Dec 06, 2005, 21:34
|
Real strange year as I think the 12-14 record shows, when you take the points into account.
Of course, I was number 5 in Points for.
But, I had the most Points against.
As I said above, strange year.
But, am very happy to make the playoffs again.
Now, to figure out how to beat the defending Champ Motley in the first round of the playoffs.
Cliff
|
|
| | | 8 | GoatLocker
Sustainer
ID: 060151121
Tue, Dec 06, 2005, 21:52
|
Hopefully the third game is the charm.
1st game against MC - Lose by .56 points.
2nd game against MC - Lose by 86.46 points.
We shall see.
Cliff
|
|
| | | 9 | Motley Crue
ID: 2192327
Tue, Dec 06, 2005, 21:56
|
2nd game against MC - Lose by 86.46 points.
Well there you go on that highest points against number.
|
|
| | | 10 | Guru
ID: 2811847
Tue, Dec 06, 2005, 22:04
|
Well - I made it all year with Moats on the bench. Looks like he will now get a chance to start.
|
|
| | | 11 | Guru
ID: 2811847
Wed, Dec 07, 2005, 09:47
|
For our mock playoffs, I'll stick with Bandos as my opponent. Teams seem to play well against him!
Motley, you get the next choice.
|
|
| | | 12 | Motley Crue
Dude
ID: 439372011
Wed, Dec 07, 2005, 10:02
|
I'll take Oaktown Raiders.
|
|
| | | 13 | Doug
Leader
ID: 02730280
Wed, Dec 07, 2005, 13:04
|
So, leggestand, who will it be... Goat or IAC?
|
|
| | | 14 | leggestand
Leader
ID: 451036518
Wed, Dec 07, 2005, 21:55
|
Sorry I am so late...long business trip today.
I will take Goatlocker's Bruisers since he knocked me out of the playoffs last year in the RIFC. I want my (mock) revenge.
That leaves Doug vs. IAC in the final matchup.
|
|
| | | 15 | Motley Crue
ID: 2192327
Wed, Dec 07, 2005, 23:11
|
IAC was my second choice.
|
|
| | | 16 | Guru
ID: 2811847
Thu, Dec 08, 2005, 09:57
|
IAC was my second choice as well. I was tempted to pick him since I was already playing Bandos in the real playoffs. But I figured that if the mock playoffs were the actual playoffs, I probably would have stayed with Bandos - so I did.
|
|
| | | 17 | I_AM_CANADIAN
ID: 3579513
Thu, Dec 08, 2005, 11:50
|
Any particular reason why you all feel like getting your ARSES Kicked?!
You know your just fueling my team with good karma by dissing it! Ahhhh. Victory will be sooo sweet again this year. :)
Truthfully... I think you're all not giving my team enough credit. If I remember correctly; my boyz started out 1-5 or something horrible like that. They've since gotten their acts straight.
|
|
| | | 18 | Guru
ID: 2811847
Thu, Dec 08, 2005, 12:24
|
Was primarily looking at your current QB situation, IAC. Ryan Fitzpatrick is certainly unproven, and Boller doesn't offer an attractive alternative. Also, I wasn't sure about the RB situation in Detroit.
Not a diss on your team at all. I just thought that Goatlocker and Oaktown currently had slightly better potential. They both rank ahead of you in total points, although I didn't check to see how they compare in recent weeks.
|
|
| | | 19 | I_AM_CANADIAN
ID: 3579513
Thu, Dec 08, 2005, 12:37
|
Just trying to stir up a little playoff rivalry/spirit of competition.
;)
|
|
| | | 20 | Motley Crue
Dude
ID: 439372011
Thu, Dec 08, 2005, 12:49
|
Honestly, I just want to beat you so I can show that I was right when I said my team is well-rounded. But the mock Playoffs don't mean a thing anyway, so I went with the guy who had the worst string of games over the last few weeks.
And that probably means that Oaktown's team will bust out soon.
All I really care about is beating Cliff this weekend. In the real Playoffs.
|
|
| | | 21 | GoatLocker
Sustainer
ID: 060151121
Thu, Dec 08, 2005, 13:10
|
MC,
Don't hold your breath.
I love my matchups this weekend for the skill positions.
Cliff
|
|
| | | 22 | Motley Crue
Dude
ID: 439372011
Thu, Dec 08, 2005, 13:35
|
That's the beauty of having a well-rounded team. It doesn't matter what matchups you have. If you're getting 10 points out of each position, you're good. ; )
At least you aren't going down without a fight.
|
|
| | | 23 | Athletics Guy
ID: 1210562417
Thu, Dec 08, 2005, 15:58
|
Oaktown needs to really bounce back after 3 sub-par weeks. While Shaun Alexander has been doing a great job of carrying my team, I'm going to need some production out of my other RB spot. It seems everyone's banged up and I always wind up with a 0 due to gametime decisons(!@#$ Shanahan!). I'm going to go with Bell again, so he'll probably be inactive because Shanahan is that evil.
Leggestand's going to be a tough first round matchup for me. It's probably going to take a 130+ pt week to do it.
|
|
| | | 24 | I_AM_CANADIAN
ID: 3579513
Thu, Dec 08, 2005, 17:51
|
RE 20 MC:
I was actually wondering if/when we'd but heads this year because of the fact that I found that we had very similar teams last year, and figured that we'd end up aiming for similar players this year.
Oddly enough, I think we took very different paths this year on how to contruct/manage our teams. It'll be intersting to see how it all pans out.
|
|
| | | 25 | GoatLocker
Sustainer
ID: 060151121
Thu, Dec 08, 2005, 18:30
|
Will be real interesting to see how things work out this year.
Last years playoff seeds are below:
1. Challenger
2. Taxman
3. Ender
4. Leggestand
5. GoatLocker
6. Motley Crue
7. Sludge
8. RotoGuru
The 1-4 Seeds all lost in the first round.
Motley and RotoGuru won the second round games.
Even though, RotoGuru only beat me by .74 points.
And Motley won it all.
Will continue later with other stats and thoughts.
Cliff
|
|
| | | 26 | Bandos
ID: 291037911
Fri, Dec 09, 2005, 14:08
|
Antonio Pierce is showing up as Questionable. Let me be very clear:
I have to DROP Pierce,
to
pick up another LB/IDP? IS this correct? OR
Could I drop another IDP, not listed as Questionable? such as Bailey.
I am pretty sure I know the answer, just don't really want to drop Pierce. As if it will matter...
|
|
| | | 27 | Doug
Leader
ID: 02730280
Fri, Dec 09, 2005, 15:11
|
From the original post of this thread:
You can only drop someone else if that player is designated as "Questionable" or lower.
Thus, you can't drop Player B simply because someone else (Player A) is questionable. You may only drop Player A himself, the player who is actually listed as questionable (or, in your case, Pierce).
|
|
| | | 28 | Motley Crue
Dude
ID: 439372011
Fri, Dec 09, 2005, 15:13
|
Doug's right, Bandos. I had the same dilemma last year. I made the move and it was beneficial.
You have nothing to lose, you're playing the #1 seed.
|
|
| | | 29 | Bandos
Sustainer
ID: 279492419
Fri, Dec 09, 2005, 15:18
|
Yeah, thats what I thought. Thanks.
|
|
| | | 30 | Doug
Leader
ID: 02730280
Fri, Dec 09, 2005, 15:21
|
Well, he does have something to lose... Pierce. I think he'll play this weekend. It's a question of whether he thinks there's a player availalbe who will put up better numbers than Pierce. If so, then I'd make the move ASAP, before Pierce gets upgraded. But if you'd rather stick with Pierce if he plays, then wait for the updates in the next day or two to see how things develop. Just my two cents.
From Rotowire:
Pierce did not practice Wednesday because of a bruised calf. Coach Tom Coughlin indicated he would return Thursday.
|
|
| | | 31 | Motley Crue
ID: 2192327
Fri, Dec 09, 2005, 17:59
|
Gosh, Doug, I never thought of it that way.
By him having nothing to lose, however, I meant that he should pick the strategy that would allow for highest potential point output, rather than playing safer and going with a sure thing. That's what I'd do. Seeing as how it's a one and done proposition, the best move isn't necessarily the safe one this time out. After all, if he has Pierce on his team next week, but he loses this week, it's irrelevant.
But I look forward to a lengthy discussion with you at this point as to why the opposite point of view is actually the correct one.
|
|
| | | 32 | Trip
Leader
ID: 13961611
Fri, Dec 09, 2005, 18:09
|
Is doubtful worse or better than questionable?
|
|
| | | 33 | Motley Crue
ID: 2192327
Fri, Dec 09, 2005, 18:23
|
Pending Doug's thoughts on the matter, "doubtful" means that a guy is less likely to play than "questionable". So if he's your guy, "doubtful" is worse.
|
|
| | | 34 | Doug
Leader
ID: 02730280
Fri, Dec 09, 2005, 18:37
|
I'm unclear on how we disagree.
|
|
| | | 35 | Doug
Leader
ID: 02730280
Sun, Dec 11, 2005, 04:06
|
I've submitted a claim to replace a questionable IDP on my roster. Am I correct in assuming that when this claim processes tomorrow, the replacement IDP will automatically be listed as a starter by the website? (or does anyone know) If not, my roster would become invalid at that point, which is clearly not the intent, so just wanted to raise the question ahead of time. I'm both West Coast and ill, so I may not be up and about by first game kickoff.
|
|
| | | 36 | Guru
ID: 2811847
Sun, Dec 11, 2005, 13:13
|
No, all added players go to your bench. I moved him into your lineup, however.
|
|
| | | 37 | Doug
Leader
ID: 02730280
Sun, Dec 11, 2005, 15:05
|
Thank you.
|
|
| | | 38 | Bandos
Sustainer
ID: 279492419
Sun, Dec 11, 2005, 19:57
|
Hmm...
what are the odds that Vick and Stallworth score 90...
WOW - Moats!
Great job today Guru - 178!. Congrats. Good Luck next round.
It's been a fun year- thank you all for the high level of competition. Special thanks to Guru for organizing all this.
|
|
| | | 39 | GoatLocker
Sustainer
ID: 060151121
Sun, Dec 11, 2005, 20:14
|
Bandos,
The odds of Vick and Stallworth scoring 90 for you is probably about the same as Kenoy Kennedy scoring 20 for Me.
Agree with Bandos.
Thanks Guru for putting this together.
Very high level of competition.
Cliff
|
|
| | | 40 | Motley Crue
ID: 2192327
Sun, Dec 11, 2005, 20:32
|
GL, don't give up yet. I never trust the IDP scoring in Fanball until Tuesday morning. I see some numbers that don't jive with what I saw earlier on NFL.com. I'm crossing my fingers that it shakes out in my favor, but it's close enough that if Kennedy can score around 10 points, I'll be real worried.
Besides, you just know Favre will throw 5 INT's tonight. If your guy can just be in the right place at the right time, that could be an easy 8 points.
|
|
| | | 41 | GoatLocker
Sustainer
ID: 060151121
Sun, Dec 11, 2005, 20:37
|
I figure I need two INTs for TDs.
That last TD by Brees really hurt.
We shall see.
Cliff
|
|
| | | 42 | Athletics Guy
ID: 1210562417
Sun, Dec 11, 2005, 22:28
|
Good luck the rest of the way Leggestand!
Your team was tough too tough this week, even with Jurevicius on the bench.
|
|
| | | 43 | leggestand
ID: 11102399
Mon, Dec 12, 2005, 09:08
|
Yep, good game/season AG. For the 3rd time this season we had a good match up, as no one ever scored under 120 points in any game, which in most matchups would usually get you a win.
|
|
| | | 44 | Motley Crue
Dude
ID: 439372011
Mon, Dec 12, 2005, 10:42
|
Yeah, AG--you beat me in my chosen matchup. Almost any other choice of opponent would have netted me a 'W'. Your team scored well.
I told you the IDP scoring would come back to Earth, GoatLocker. Hey, man, you played a great season. Your team was the 5th highest in overall scoring. That's pretty damn good in this league.
Well, we almost have the complete opposite result from what happened last year. Seeds 1,2,3, and 5 advance. So much for homefield advantage. For me, that settles that last year was a fluke.
|
|
| | | 45 | leggestand
ID: 11102399
Mon, Dec 12, 2005, 11:01
|
MC, wrong...we sorted out the waiver process this year to not kill the top teams, which we (I) deemed as being the sole reason for seeds 5-8 advancing last season ;)
|
|
| | | 46 | Motley Crue
Dude
ID: 439372011
Mon, Dec 12, 2005, 11:29
|
We had 6 weeks of claims that were mayhem, and 7 weeks that were orderly. I don't think those 7 weeks made that big of a difference. I'm sure they helped. But there were still 6 weeks this year for lesser teams to make a move.
|
|
| | | 47 | leggestand
ID: 11102399
Mon, Dec 12, 2005, 11:32
|
First season - full season of mayhem, seeds 5-8 win in the playoffs.
Second season - Six weeks of mayhem, 7 weeks of no re-seeding, seeds 1-3, 5 win in the playoffs.
Coincidence, I think not!
|
|
| | | 48 | BoNkA
ID: 5811401211
Mon, Dec 12, 2005, 12:41
|
At least I'm advancing in the toilet bowl! I'll just have to do well next year in one of the qualifiers so I can come back here for redemption. I blame Javon Walker for all of my troubles.
Now it's time to wait and see who can knock off Guru. His team has to put up a sub 100 point game sometime :P
|
|
| | | 49 | Sludge
ID: 581043311
Mon, Dec 12, 2005, 12:46
|
MC, wrong...we sorted out the waiver process this year to not kill the top teams, which we (I) deemed as being the sole reason for seeds 5-8 advancing last season ;)
I can assure you that this doesn't apply to my team winning a playoff game last year. Might be time to tweak that theory a bit.
|
|
| | | 50 | Motley Crue
Dude
ID: 439372011
Mon, Dec 12, 2005, 12:50
|
I obviously look forward to this thing playing out, but damn am I revved that I will be back next year (I think that presumption is justified at this point). I am already pondering the draft. I love the draft in this league. It's really the funnest part of the season. When you're drafting it feels like you can't lose. 14 managers feel like they are winning with each pick. OK, maybe that's an exaggeration, but everyone feels as if they could win. It's hard during the season when you're losing. The draft is the best part about this game to me. And the rationales make it so much better! Aaah! I'm psyched now.
Legge, I didn't say it was a coincidence, and I believe there was an effect. I'm not going to wholly attribute the 5-8 seeds winning last year to the claiming process, and by that logic, I don't think it's appropriate to attribute this past weekend's results to having a more orderly claiming process.
|
|
| | | 51 | leggestand
ID: 11102399
Mon, Dec 12, 2005, 13:22
|
I am really just saying all that stuff about the waiver process in jest. I don't really think it has had a huge effect, although I argued that it did last year. I think TB put together some good analysis last year, that made me change my tune a bit.
|
|
| | | 52 | Guru
ID: 2811847
Mon, Dec 12, 2005, 13:24
|
I'm pretty sure the claiming process had nothing to do with my playoff success last year. I think it was just one of those random things. Or maybe it's because we elevated the points for sacks!
It was nice to have my preseason draft of Ryan Moats finaly reap divdends yesterday, even though I could have sustained a zero from that slot and done OK yesterday. I just hope I didn't waste too many points that might be needed next week.
|
|
| | | 53 | Motley Crue
Dude
ID: 439372011
Mon, Dec 12, 2005, 13:42
|
Yes, I have been feeling like that about Darrent Williams most of the season. He had his worst game yesterday, however. Hopefully that was a blip on the radar and not him crashing into the rookie wall.
legge, you better back down on that argument. I've been arguing in here so much lately I'm thinking of starting a RotoGuru Debate Team.
With the first pick in the RotoGuru Invitational Debate Challenge Draft, Motley Crue selects... Madman.
Commentator chimes in:
A slight surprise going with the Knowledge King at #1. We all know how esoteric Madman can get in his discussions. You know a guy knows his stuff when the judges' eyes start to glaze over. I really thought someone with a little more zest and a little less substance might have gone #1. But we'll see guys like Mattinglyinthehall and Baldwin come off the board in the next few picks, followed by the junkyard dog types--those guys that will gnaw your leg off to prove their point--like sarge and Tree.
|
|
| | | 54 | leggestand
ID: 11102399
Mon, Dec 12, 2005, 14:03
|
Ha! Nice MC.
|
|
| | | 55 | Challenger
Donor
ID: 481126818
Mon, Dec 12, 2005, 14:03
|
LOL! Sarge gnawing your legs off! And he thinks he's a bulldog and will just rip your leg off with one chomp. Oh wait...maybe sarge is into torturing.
|
|
| | | 56 | GoatLocker
Sustainer
ID: 060151121
Mon, Dec 12, 2005, 19:24
|
Hey MC,
I hear ya.
The worst thing that probably could happen to me did.
Carson Palmer scoring 5.82 points.
Ya win some, ya lose some.
Cliff
|
|
| | | 57 | Doug
Leader
ID: 02730280
Mon, Dec 12, 2005, 19:36
|
I guess it's fitting that the one first-round upset this year came in the 4 vs. 5 matchup (presumably the most evenly matched, which also looks to be the game with the tightest margin of victory). Congrats IAC!
Hey Guru, I'd still like to get some sort of a poll of this year's manager's thoughts regarding playoff free agency ASAP. You indicated in the prior thread that you were thinking about it, and I understand you may be busy with other things, but thought I throw a reminder out there before this year becomes a past memory. =-) TIA...
|
|
| | | 58 | Motley Crue
ID: 2192327
Mon, Dec 12, 2005, 21:43
|
Carson Palmer scoring 5.82 points.
Yeah, I had this joker and his catch buddy, Chad Johnson, in TSN this week. Ouchie. I guess CJ gets to check the "Yes" box on the "Did they cover #85?" checklist this week. I'm sure that will be embarassing to look back and see who it came against. Cleveland? Ugh.
|
|
| | | 59 | I_AM_CANADIAN
ID: 23916230
Tue, Dec 13, 2005, 02:24
|
Thx Doug. Lookin forward to playin with ya next year? Still not sure if finnishing top 5 plus making into the 2nd round qualifies me for a invite yet... but considering that Guru was #1 anyways... I'd imagine that leaves a more room?
Based upon my comments, I guess you all can figure that I've pretty much lost hope from here on out. Guru's been on such a roll, and my team is seriously hurting, I don't see myself having much of a chance in this weeks upcoming matchup. Stranger things HAVE happened of course... so I'll be spending some time this week disecting which lineup I'll bring in. Boller at QB... oh that just sounds nasty! LOL
|
|
| | | 60 | Guru
ID: 2811847
Tue, Dec 13, 2005, 09:54
|
Sludge advances to the second round of the Consolation bracket by virtue of having the highest score among the three first round losers in that bracket.
I have matched up the six teams that have been eliminated from the two playoff brackets. Those matchups are listed as "game 2" for those teams. If you wish to set a lineup for this matchup, please set your game 2 lineup. In addition to giving those teams something to do this week, it will allow the system to calculate team scores for those teams that are competing in the cross-league championship.
|
|
| | | 61 | leggestand
ID: 11102399
Tue, Dec 13, 2005, 10:49
|
So, in the "real" playoffs, we have:
MC vs. Leggestand
IAC vs. Guru
In the "mock" playoffs, we have:
Athletics Guy vs. Leggestand
IAC vs. Guru
I think that's correct.
|
|
| | | 62 | Motley Crue
Dude
ID: 439372011
Tue, Dec 13, 2005, 11:06
|
So it comes down to us, legge. It ought to be a pretty good matchup. We've both scored real well this season and the averages for our starting lineups are very close. A real clash of Titans appears to be in the offing. I hope it ends up as billed. I'm looking for a 160-150 game.
|
|
| | | 63 | Guru
ID: 2811847
Tue, Dec 13, 2005, 11:14
|
If the Oaktown Raiders had gone 0-2 in the final regular season weekend (instead of 1-1), they would still be alive today. That would have placed them in the #7 seed, where they would have beaten Motley (by 5 points). Instead, they got the #6 seed and get throttled by Leggestand (by almost 29 points).
|
|
| | | 64 | leggestand
ID: 11102399
Tue, Dec 13, 2005, 11:49
|
Guru, that seems to be Oaktown's MO this season. He always seemed to have the wrong matchup each week. I guess every league has a team like that (in one of my leagues, I am that guy...let up 1450 points during the season, next most was 1320).
MC, I always and never look forward to meeting up with you. Your team can go off on any week, and I know mine can, too, but every week I look at my squad and wonder how in the world I am putting up so many points. Two or three non-studs seem to carry me every week (last week was Chambers, PacMan, and Gado), and if no one steps up against you, I am doomed.
Our first two matchups were blowouts, so, I would bet that we are going to have a close one this week. Short week this week...can't wait for Saturday!
|
|
| | | 65 | Motley Crue
Dude
ID: 439372011
Tue, Dec 13, 2005, 12:37
|
With all of the IDP's it's not hard to get a great score in this game. But you're right--either team could go off anytime. Here's to hoping they both do this week.
I had cruddy matchups last week, but several of my guys played well anyway. I know I got lucky to move on. I think I have better matchups this week, but it's always better to have the hot hand (Chambers, Galloway, Gado). That's what won it for me last season. If I win this week, I'll have earned it.
|
|
| | | 66 | GoatLocker
Sustainer
ID: 060151121
Tue, Dec 13, 2005, 13:46
|
MC,
Don't go rubbin it in...*LOL*
It's all Carson's fault as I said earlier.
And not much I could have done differently as far as to who I played.
Wait til next year.
Cliff
|
|
| | | 67 | Motley Crue
Dude
ID: 439372011
Tue, Dec 13, 2005, 14:04
|
Ah, but if you could keep Carson going into next year, we know you would.
I know the RIFC can't be a keeper, but I think it would be great to get a bunch of the RIFC teams (Guru) into a spinoff keeper league. I've been thinking about that a lot. Not like League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, necessarily. I'd like to use a scoring format closer to the one used in RIFC. And I like the 14 team format. It really makes for a greater challenge.
Also OT here, but TB and I were talking about configuration for next year's RIFC and I came up with this:
Top 6 from RIFC (4 semi-finalists plus 2 highest-scoring-in-the-regular-season Playoff teams) [6]
+
Winner, runner-up, and highest scoring from each AAA [3 x 2AAA leagues = 6]
+
Winner and highest scoring from AA [2]
=
14
Sorry if that's been recommended before. If it has, TB made me say that. If not, it was my idea.
|
|
| | | 68 | leggestand
ID: 11102399
Tue, Dec 13, 2005, 14:08
|
I would be interested in an RIFC spinoff keeper league. Keep me posted, MC.
|
|
| | | 69 | GoatLocker
Sustainer
ID: 060151121
Tue, Dec 13, 2005, 14:19
|
MC,
Of course I'm interested.
Of course I keep CARSON.
Cliff
|
|
| | | 70 | Motley Crue
Dude
ID: 439372011
Tue, Dec 13, 2005, 14:32
|
I think we start from scratch if we do it, fellas. That's my first rule. I don't want to keep any players from the current rosters.
legge, we have lots of stuff to talk about (this, fantasy WC, TB's Mama wearing army boots), so maybe we can get in touch soon.
|
|
| | | 71 | I_AM_CANADIAN
ID: 23916230
Tue, Dec 13, 2005, 16:54
|
I'd definetly be in to a keeper... I've never done one before... but I'd love to take on a long time challenge...
|
|
| | | 72 | Hubble
ID: 0992417
Tue, Dec 13, 2005, 16:59
|
If ever u need one more for a keeper i'd be in too :)
|
|
| | | 73 | Letter_J
ID: 511026169
Wed, Dec 14, 2005, 12:35
|
Just a question concerning the playoffs,
Is our injury report based upon the NFL's released injury report or is it based upon Fanball's projected injuries, as they seem to differ?
|
|
| | | 74 | Motley Crue
Dude
ID: 439372011
Wed, Dec 14, 2005, 12:52
|
I'll waste a post here, as you're likely looking for official (RotoGuru) confirmation.
The NFL injury report trumps anything else. Keep in mind that the official report comes out on Wednesdays, but that a player's status may be changed subsequent to that initial announcement.
Honestly, I think the precedent has been that each qualifier determines their own rules within certain parameters. So you guys could have a different rule than what we use.
|
|
| | | 75 | Guru
ID: 2811847
Wed, Dec 14, 2005, 13:22
|
What he said.
I don't think fanball updates their injury qualifiers until after the NFL report is released, so anything that is still posted now is probably left over from last weekend. That's why we moved our first playoff claiming period back to Thursday.
|
|
| | | 76 | Motley Crue
ID: 2192327
Sat, Dec 17, 2005, 10:42
|
I attempted to waive doubtful DL Robert Mathis and add another DL yesterday. Assuming the transaction goes through, I'd like to start the new guy. I will be travelling today and I won't be online again until this evening at the earliest.
//MC
|
|
| | | 77 | Guru
ID: 2811847
Sat, Dec 17, 2005, 10:47
|
I'll take care of it.
|
|
| | | 78 | Bandos
Sustainer
ID: 279492419
Sun, Dec 18, 2005, 08:59
|
Looks like my team is finally rounding into form...DOH! a week late.
|
|
| | | 79 | Guru
ID: 2811847
Sun, Dec 18, 2005, 11:58
|
I was thinking the same thing, Bandos. Glad I played you last week and not this week.
|
|
| | | 80 | I_AM_CANADIAN
ID: 23916230
Mon, Dec 19, 2005, 01:43
|
Congrats on another Victory Guru. Good luck in the finals.
After yesterday's games I was pretty confident that you had it. I had been telling myself beforehand... if only LJ could "only" put up ~14 points... then I'd have a chance.
Hoping to play with you all again next year... we'll see how that pans out.
|
|
| | | 81 | MC on road
ID: 531145189
Mon, Dec 19, 2005, 09:41
|
Guru, thanks for setting up my lineup change.
Barring Gado pulling 35+ tonight, I will see you next week in the rematch. By the way, I'll be at the game in the nosebleed stratosphere tonight, and I'll be waving at you guys if I see you.
Merry Christmas
Motley Crue
|
|
| | | 82 | Guru
ID: 2811847
Mon, Dec 19, 2005, 10:17
|
Although I'm the higher seed, I'll feel like a slight underdog against MC. Since his awful 2-6 start, his team has only 2 losses after week #4, and one of those was the final week game against me by less than a point. Since week 4, he's also averaged about 2 points more than me.
I'd feel better if I could put the right QB in, but I have a very frustrating habit of leaving the majority of my QB points on the bench. Ditto at WR, although I think that WR points are more of a crap shoot.
Regardless, I'm relieved to have survived two playoff rounds. It's so easy to come up short in any single game.
|
|
| | | 83 | leggestand
Leader
ID: 451036518
Mon, Dec 19, 2005, 16:10
|
Yikes, talk about laying an egg. 83 points with 1 to go. Only 2 players on my team scored at/above his average, and one was my kicker with 11 points. Motley's team didn't fare much better, but Cooley coming up with a game way over his head didn't help me very much.
Good luck guys in the rematch from last year's Super Bowl. Pretty impressive feat with the strength of the league. See you next year!
|
|
| | | 84 | Athletics Guy
ID: 911151321
Tue, Dec 20, 2005, 00:17
|
re: post 63
And I would have won this week too under that scenario!
At least I'm still alive in the Mock Playoffs.
|
|
| | | 85 | Guru
ID: 2811847
Tue, Dec 20, 2005, 10:17
|
I assigned a "game 2" matchup for the 10 teams that are out of their respective playoff brackets for week 16.
|
|
| | | 86 | Guru
ID: 2811847
Tue, Dec 20, 2005, 10:31
|
If we had used week 15 games for our first round playoff matchups, three of the results would have been different.
Bandos would have beaten me.
Doug would have beaten IAC.
Oaktown would have beaten leggestand.
Only Motley would have prevailed either week.
Just goes to show that the playoffs are still an essentially random event.
|
|
| | | 87 | Challenger
Donor
ID: 481126818
Wed, Dec 21, 2005, 11:26
|
Alert: Set your lineups early as all but 3 games are being played on Saturday with 2 games Sunday and one Monday.
|
|
| | | 88 | Guru
ID: 330592710
Fri, Dec 23, 2005, 10:26
|
Curiosity: Each of the teams in the championship game have D. Hall in the lineup.
|
|
| | | 89 | Motley Crue
ID: 3311172123
Fri, Dec 23, 2005, 12:00
|
I am planning to donate $100 to RotoGuru.com this week. If Guru beats me in the Championship, I will double my donation. What the hell--if he beats me by 50 or more fantasy points, I'll donate $250.
Maybe that will ratchet up the pressure significantly enough to get him to make some mistakes with his lineup. ; )
|
|
| | | 90 | Guru
ID: 330592710
Fri, Dec 23, 2005, 13:55
|
I don't need any pressure to make mistakes. I've made them all year - particularly at QB, as my bench QB has outscored my starting QB most weeks. I've decided to start Plummer over Eli this week, so if you have Eli on your team, you should start him with confidence.
MC - At least you don't have that problem this week (i.e., deciding who to start at QB).
|
|
| | | 91 | Motley Crue
ID: 3311172123
Fri, Dec 23, 2005, 18:39
|
Yeah, I get to figure out whether James will play more than a half. And if not, will Moore or Rhodes outpoint him.
|
|
| | | 92 | Athletics Guy
ID: 911151321
Sat, Dec 24, 2005, 16:16
|
Terrence McGee with a HUGE game for Guru.
|
|
| | | 93 | Motley Crue
ID: 3311172123
Sat, Dec 24, 2005, 17:11
|
I'm not expecting a great comeback, but I won't concede until after I see what Thomas Jones can do against Green Bay. He may destroy them. They looked pathetic on Monday in Baltimore.
Right now, however, the realist in me is looking for some points to ensure I don't lose by 50!
|
|
| | | 94 | Motley Crue
ID: 3311172123
Mon, Dec 26, 2005, 10:11
|
I was thinking if I could average 17 points per player last night, I would have a prayer. Only Koren Robinson didn't pull his weight, as Briggs, CHI D, and Jones all had very good games. I'm pleased with my final score. Not getting the regular effort from James (which I expected) hurts, but it hurts even worse having to play against Larry Johnson! He beat me down in 2 leagues this week, and I lost with him starting in another final. That sucks.
Anyway, Guru will probably top 150 with Vilma the Animal going tonight and that is a damn fine score for a Championship game. Congrats for your excellent play this season, Guru. I suppose there are some long odds of us breaking this 1-1 tie in 2006, but you can bet I'll be doing my best to get back to the Championship.
|
|
| | | 95 | Guru
ID: 330592710
Mon, Dec 26, 2005, 16:35
|
I was feeling pretty good going into Sunday's games, but when Briggs made that TD interception, it suddenly got interesting. That play was worth about 17 points (including the Bear defense), and brought the gap to within a plausibly good game from Koren Robinson. No shame in losing with a score of 133+.
|
|
| | | 96 | Motley Crue
ID: 3311172123
Mon, Dec 26, 2005, 17:07
|
Yeah, I was pleased with that score with Edge riding the pine for my team. Thanks.
|
|
| | | 97 | Guru
ID: 330592710
Mon, Dec 26, 2005, 22:17
|
If you'd have started Vrabel, we'd have a barn burner!
|
|
| | | 98 | leggestand
ID: 101150287
Wed, Dec 28, 2005, 08:50
|
Congrats guys on making it to the final, and congrats to Guru for winning it all. Like MC, I am eagerly awaiting next year's draft!
|
|
| | | 99 | GoatLocker
Sustainer
ID: 060151121
Wed, Dec 28, 2005, 08:54
|
Great SB game for both Guru and MC.
Nice way to end the season.
Cliff
|
|
| | | 100 | Ender
ID: 406351010
Wed, Dec 28, 2005, 22:59
|
Congrats to both MC and Guru for fine seasons.
I've enjoyed my 2 seasons and will hopefully have an opportunity to play again in the future.
Congrats to Challenger as well for his victory in the Toilet Bowl. I was hoping to pull out the win myself to salvage some pride from a disappointing season. I'll take what I got. It beats the spot I occupied for most of the season.
|
|
| | | 101 | BoNkA
ID: 5011383010
Fri, Dec 30, 2005, 11:38
|
Congrats to both of you even making it that far. It's not easy to have a team consistantly play well. While it might have been more enjoyable had my team stayed healthy and done better, I still had fun this season and tried to make the most out of it. You can't always do well (I did manage to pull in one league championship however).
I will definitely be looking forward to the draft for one of the AAA leagues next season.
|
|
|
|