Speedy G

1. Taylor 2. Henry 3. Eckler 4. Cook 5. Mixon 6. Adams 7. Harris 8. Chubb 9. Kupp 10. Chase 11. Kamara 12. McCaffrey

Um, STEVE YOUNG RETIRED AFTER 1999. Jeff Garcia, Steve Young, same difference. Owens was obviously a lot more than marginally better than Rice over those three years, anyway (not that it matters). Seven more TDs per year is a lot. In fact, it was more than twice as many.

But what about players dropped during the second waiver period? Or players dropped later during the free agency period? Presumably, those players are out of commission until next week. Seems rather convoluted to have some dropped players remain eligible this week while others are off limits until next week.

I think the point the rest of us are trying to make is that someone whose league vetoed a Kitna for Moss trade in week 11 looks like a hypocrite criticizing 'douchebaggery' or other shenanigans in someone else's league. And, I stand by the silly scoring system comment. I see no logical reason for tiered scoring so that one yard (the 10th or 20th or whatever) basically represents the yardage score accumulation.

I've never heard of waivers running multiple times in the same week and don't see any advantage to it.

This silly scoring system seems to be part of the problem. Sorry, but from where I sit, the douchebaggery in your story was on the part of those who voided the trade. Let's consider what Kitna had done in his four games through week 10: 187, 2, 0 (garbage time) 379, 1, 4 183, 1, 2 327, 3, 1 The dude who got screwed over by the trade veto is the one who should have quit and kept his money.

Released players should be locked until the waiver wire next runs, but I don't get how a 48 hour time period comes into play. How was Vick dropped via a WW claim on a Wednesday and then picked up by someone else two days later? He should have had to pass through waivers and hit the wire the following week.

Kind of a ###### move, but within your rules. You need to amend your league rules to prevent this. WW and FA additions need to stay on their new team's roster until the following week. What I don't understand is your leagues waiver wire process. Does it run multiple times each week?

Unless your commish has previously made moves for people b/w scheduled kickoff and actual kickoff or clearly stated that it is allowed, I think you have to enforce your website's deadline. Even if your rules state "before kickoff," that can be interpreted to mean "before scheduled kickoff." Otherwise, you are making your commish's job a lot harder and exposing him to a lot of complaints (e.g. suppose someone calls him just before kickoff, but by the time he makes the move, it's time stamped after kickoff; it also gives the commish an unfair advantage, b/c he can make these moves w/o having to call someone). However, there was a thread similar to this one last week, and I think most people felt the move should have been allowed.

Holy cow! That dude should have flattened him.

If kickoff was scheduled for 5:20, I would argue that lineups locked at that time (whether by website submission, message board post, or commissioner contact), not at the instant the kicker's foot meets the ball. I think your commish is asking for trouble by effectively extending the deadline for uncertain lengths of time. This isn't to say that your lineup change should definitely be voided. Has your commish ever done this before (honored a lineup change request after scheduled kickoff - i.e. after lineups locked - but before actual kickoff)? Has he ever publicly stated (i.e. communicated to the whole league) that lineups can be changed after they are locked if the ball hasn't yet been kicked? Otherwise, since you use a website that locks lineups at scheduled kickoff times, I would argue that that is the understood lineup submission deadline spelled out in your rules. This is a difficult question and demonstrates why league rules need to clearly spell out exactly what they are intended to mean.

Why does it have to be one or the other? Make rosters flexible, so you can start 2/3 or 1/4 (RB/WR). Our 12 team league requires 1 RB and 3 WR. What used to be a second RB is now RB/WR/TE. I will say, however, FA WRs are now a lot harder to find than RBs. I'd prefer to have the option of starting 3 RBs, but the rest of the league wouldn't go for it.

No way! Just b/c a team can't make the playoffs, doesn't mean there is nothing at stake in their game. A win by them might mean I make the playoffs or get a better seed. Handicapping them compromises the integrity of the league.

Please articulate a compelling argument to sit Vick this week and send it to my opponent. Please.

He's gotten four targets over the last three weeks and played fewer than 20 snaps in each game. No way he should be ranked that high. As far as I am concerned, he is unstartable.