Can we get clarification on rookie vs. vet?

[Mark Buffington 3]

I posted the snippet from the rules in the rookie draft thread. I see what galt posted at the Sanc, but how were some of us supposed to know vets could be drafted?

 

I'm not b!tching necessarily, but it would have changed the strategy JUST a little.

[whoisjgalt 0]

I'm not a league funher, I just act like one at the forearm. But I would suggest that the best policy would be to ask if you're unsure. I always assumed that the vets were available.

 

In the Sanctuary comments (to date) we have wilzone, gazmo, & galt who assumed that vets were fraftable and lydell & TUS who assumed that they were not. Since Twitchy updated the fraft thread with the Warner pick and did not object to it, I assume it's 4-2.

[Orgazmo 2]

Whatever fuhner decides, when one sees fit to show.

So far we have one vet drafted, so things are still very reversible.

 

FUHNER(S)!!!

[Wilzone 0]

I can certainly see Buffington and TUS's point since the rules weren't clear.

 

The two picks made after mine were not players I would have taken at 3.10, so if a decision is made to nullify my Warner pick, I'm cool with it and I can select someone else.

 

If a fuhner decision isn't made before someone else comes in and drafts a guy I would have taken, I'm going to be less willing to give up Warner.

[whoisjgalt 0]

I just called OB. He'll be by in a few to make the ruling.

[Wilzone 0]

[Orgazmo 2]

Wilzone, if you have to go somewhere why don't you PM me your alternate choice. If OB declares rookie-only, I'll relay the pick.

[whoisjgalt 0]

He said he'd be by soon.

 

:ph34r: From what we discussed, you should count on being able to keep Warner. But maybe he's consulting his lawyer and will get told to change that decision.

[Orgazmo 2]

The potential for some of people's strategery may have been compromised by our literal word. If I were a betting man, I believe OB will keep it rookie only.

[Wilzone 0]

Wilzone, if you have to go somewhere why don't you PM me your alternate choice. If OB declares rookie-only, I'll relay the pick.

Sounds good.

[ICEMAN 39]

If he gets to keep Warner, this will have totally completely screwed the inconceivable strategorizing that I have been doing for months, just for this fraft!

 

 

ICEMAN

[OB1 33]

Guys,

My intention all along was to have the vets in this draft too. Especially with the limited Free agency we have, it's the only fair way.

 

Now, obviously I screwed the pooch by not clarifying that in the rules and for this I apologize.

 

 

Warner is kept.

 

Also, sorry about the delay, My bachelor party was last night in AC, and i'm still trying to recover. I fully intended to get out of bed and do this when galt called, but I fell right back to sleep.

[OB1 33]

If he gets to keep Warner, this will have totally completely screwed the inconceivable strategorizing that I have been doing for months, just for this fraft!

 

 

ICEMAN

I'm sorry that you feel screwed over, but this is the way I always intended the 'roookie' draft to be,a nd it's the only way i've ever seen dynasty drafts done after the first year. No one asked the question beforehand, so I never looked close enough to be sure that my wording reflected what I knew the intention was, I apologize.

[Orgazmo 2]

If he gets to keep Warner, this will have totally completely screwed the inconceivable strategorizing that I have been doing for months, just for this fraft!

 

 

ICEMAN

I'm sorry that you feel screwed over, but this is the way I always intended the 'roookie' draft to be,a nd it's the only way i've ever seen dynasty drafts done after the first year. No one asked the question beforehand, so I never looked close enough to be sure that my wording reflected what I knew the intention was, I apologize.

I'm pretty sure that was sarcasm, chief.

[whoisjgalt 0]

If he gets to keep Warner, this will have totally completely screwed the inconceivable strategorizing that I have been doing for months, just for this fraft!

 

 

ICEMAN

I'm sorry that you feel screwed over, but this is the way I always intended the 'roookie' draft to be,a nd it's the only way i've ever seen dynasty drafts done after the first year. No one asked the question beforehand, so I never looked close enough to be sure that my wording reflected what I knew the intention was, I apologize.

I'm pretty sure that was sarcasm, chief.

:yes:

[OB1 33]

If he gets to keep Warner, this will have totally completely screwed the inconceivable strategorizing that I have been doing for months, just for this fraft!

 

 

ICEMAN

I'm sorry that you feel screwed over, but this is the way I always intended the 'roookie' draft to be,a nd it's the only way i've ever seen dynasty drafts done after the first year. No one asked the question beforehand, so I never looked close enough to be sure that my wording reflected what I knew the intention was, I apologize.

I'm pretty sure that was sarcasm, chief.

I thought it might be but figured that would be a preemptive response to anyone who actually does feel slighed.

[ICEMAN 39]

I was just joking. I really don't think that this impacts anything too greatly and I agree that vets should be included in this draft.

 

ICEMAN