Note to all from the commish

[Miller_Time_21 0]

OK guys, the debates have been great on the rules, but unfortunatly I think we have started to go over board with the whole changing of the rules. The purpose of the rule changes each year is to tweak our current rules to work out any bugs there may be to improve the Current league we have. It is not to change the basic foundation the league has been built upon. Out of the 8 suggestions I post last night, 5 of the 8 I would consider critical changes that alter that basic foundation. It is my opinion that we have a great league and the rules are solid. They can be tweak, but they always can be. They do not need blown up like some of the suggestions would suggest. It seems to me that alot of these suggestions are shaded to individuals teams as well. It's not hard to turn a team around under the current rules, look at some examples, Tuna went from terriable to a powerhouse in a year (year 1 to year 2), 2 of the 5 new teams last year went to the playoffs in round 1, one of them won a division. It can be done.

 

Once again this is EVERYONE's league, and if blowing up foundations is what we want to do, fine, but I don't think that's a good way to keep the longevity of the league going.

 

Just my thoughts, do with them what you wish.

[e-factor 13]

It's not hard to turn a team around under the current rules, look at some examples, Tuna went from terriable to a powerhouse in a year (year 1 to year 2), 2 of the 5 new teams last year went to the playoffs in round 1, one of them won a division.  It can be done.

Nobody said it was hard to turn a team around. Went through most of the posts and didn't see one suggestion of that.........................

 

However, if you are talking about a rule change that makes more players valuable, therefore allowing more teams to field stronger lineups, therefore allowing more competition thoughout the entire season, therefore making the league more enjoyable for everyone, and that would allow some different drafting strategies, as a bad thing because it would create "change", then I guess I get where you're going with this. But sometimes, change is good. This is supposed to be a fun game and some of you guys act like we're trying to change the constitution of the United States (which seems like an easier process in comparison). In addition, these are suggestions to put to vote and discuss, not actual changes to make right now, so to suggest that the longevity of the league is at risk, is a bit dramatic..............................

[ninerfan 0]

I guess I didn't realize that my proposals were out-of-line. I'm not trying to radically change the league (maybe my suggestion for a 6th keeper is just too much for some folks) but I think our defensive scoring rules stink. My proposal on this is VERY reasonable, even conservative by some standards. Oh well.

[Miller_Time_21 0]

I guess I didn't realize that my proposals were out-of-line. I'm not trying to radically change the league (maybe my suggestion for a 6th keeper is just too much for some folks) but I think our defensive scoring rules stink. My proposal on this is VERY reasonable, even conservative by some standards. Oh well.

Not calling out anyone's proposals, just the overall tone of everything. Noone is out of line, just my thoughts, which don't mean much. This isn't a personal attack vs anyone. And agree with your thoughts on D scoring, but either way is ok with me, it's a hell of alot better then the old D scoring we had.

[bigtuna 0]

I agree with MIllertime. I am getting very scared that we are messing with the way this league was set up.

 

The only thing i would like to change MAJOR, about this league..is make it easier for the lower half teams to improve. Whatever means we can do that I am in favor of.