2006 1st Round Draft Order

[Wuerffel for MVP 0]

1. Chicken Capital USA 3-10

2. Uncle Paul 4-9 1249.18 points

3. (Big Show) Big Phatty 4-9 1335.46 points

4. Shox 4-9 1444.78 points

5. (Uncle Paul)The Big Show 5-8 1333.88 points

6. (Singman) Reluctant Prophets 6-7

7. (Uncle Paul) Singman 6-7 Won H2H

8. Beerboy 8-5

 

(Uncle Paul) Moz 8-5

(Uncle Paul) Jason Austin 9-4

Demolition 10-3

(Uncle Paul) Horny Toads 11-2

[The Moz 69]

It's all on Uncle Paul ! He better hope he loses this week ! He wins he gets Reggie Bush -- But to think -- he coulda had Bush , LJ , and Rudi next year ! along with R. Wayne , Vick , Heap -- he threw away a top 3 overall pick next season in LJ and a top 10 WR in Wayne likley for a ton of draft picks ! I hope it was worth it for the guy - becasue he might be kicking himself !

[Dr. Octopus 0]

It's all on Uncle Paul ! He better hope he loses this week ! He wins he gets Reggie Bush -- But to think -- he coulda had Bush , LJ , and Rudi next year ! along with R. Wayne , Vick , Heap -- he threw away a top 3 overall pick next season in LJ and a top 10 WR in Wayne likley for a ton of draft picks ! I hope it was worth it for the guy - becasue he might be kicking himself !

I don't think he had Reggie Wayne (it was Jerry Porter), but I agree w/ the overall sentiment.

 

Are five picks in the 5-12 range and a couple of backup RBs more valuable than LJ, Vick and Jerry Porter? Probably not for next year, but if he uncovers some gems it may make the deal worth it down the road.

[GameDay Guru 1]

I don't want this to come off as sour grapes, but I'm going to be honest I do not like the fact that I'm going to lose out on Bush via a tiebreaker when Uncle Paul went at least one week that I know of where he started players on a bye week. For the future I think this league really needs a policy on that, since it can have a major impact on the league for the future.

[Wuerffel for MVP 0]

I don't want this to come off as sour grapes, but I'm going to be honest I do not like the fact that I'm going to lose out on Bush via a tiebreaker when Uncle Paul went at least one week that I know of where he started players on a bye week. For the future I think this league really needs a policy on that, since it can have a major impact on the league for the future.

Check the scoreboard on RTsports. Even if he had started his highest scoring players he still would have lost. I agree though that we need to have a rule for this.

[GameDay Guru 1]

I don't want this to come off as sour grapes, but I'm going to be honest I do not like the fact that I'm going to lose out on Bush via a tiebreaker when Uncle Paul went at least one week that I know of where he started players on a bye week. For the future I think this league really needs a policy on that, since it can have a major impact on the league for the future.

Check the scoreboard on RTsports. Even if he had started his highest scoring players he still would have lost.

Yeah, but it would be a lot closer in the total points standings between him and I.

[Wuerffel for MVP 0]

Yeah you're probably right. What kind of rule would you suggest?

[GameDay Guru 1]

I really don't know, but I think we need to come up with something. I mean what's stopping me from starting Aaron Rogers, Cedric Benson and Duece McAllister this week so I can make a push for the first pick? I'm not saying I would do that, but I do think we need some reprocussions for someone who does.

[The Moz 69]

GDG - has a legit complaint ! not certain how to handle it -- let GDG start 3 inactive players this week ?

[singman2 0]

There is one way and one way only to handle this and that is following the stated rules.

 

"1. Each owner MUST submit his best lineup each week. Collusion or "Losing on Purpose" will result in that owner being dismissed from the league upon owner vote"

 

If you feel Paul did not set his lineup on purpose you may call for a vote. You have that right. Outside that there is nothing that can be done this season.

 

With that being said, if anyone wants to take a look at this section of the rules I am certainly open to ideas. I believe this is a tough area to move around in. Paul got married, changed jobs, etc...... Do you really want to punish him for having real life things going on? On the other hand do you want to do nothing and set the precedent that other owners can make up real life problems all under the guise of getting a higher draft pick? Tough to call.

 

I agree with the rule right now as is. If you find an owner losing games on purpose certainly kick his ass out of the league. If an owner simply lets his starting lineup slip his mind what is the penalty? I am open to suggestions. I could check lineups every Sunday and adjust bye week starters?

[Wuerffel for MVP 0]

I could check lineups every Sunday and adjust bye week starters?

This may be the best option. You can't really enforce people starting their best possible players. Hell sometimes the biggest risks yield the biggest rewards.

[singman2 0]

I could check lineups every Sunday and adjust bye week starters?

This may be the best option. You can't really enforce people starting their best possible players. Hell sometimes the biggest risks yield the biggest rewards.

Well, the general idea behind the "best" lineup is supposed to mean somebody who isn't on bye.

[GameDay Guru 1]

Yeah there is a fine line between best players and a risk. Shox took a risk this week and started Tatum Bell against me. On Thankgiving Bell is made inactive and I'm sure due to the holiday Shox had no way to get to the computer and make the change. These things happen and are part of the game.

 

I do think giving Singman the capablilities to change a bye week player makes sense, but of course it could work against the league as well -- if a playoff contender did that I'm sure no one would mind him taking a loss for his poor management. Tough call.

[JCW412 0]

I am not going to weigh in on this rule at this time, because I have nothing overly important to say to it. I brought it up when it happened and that is about all I have.

 

I did want to weigh in and say that I still own my pick, it is not Pauls.

[Wuerffel for MVP 0]

I did want to weigh in and say that I still own my pick, it is not Pauls.

Oops, fixored.

[The Moz 69]

I forgot about UP getting married a few weeks ago - tought situation but I think Sing handled it the best way possible - just its good getting this out so we know how to approach it in the future

[Shox 0]

Yeah there is a fine line between best players and a risk. Shox took a risk this week and started Tatum Bell against me. On Thankgiving Bell is made inactive and I'm sure due to the holiday Shox had no way to get to the computer and make the change. These things happen and are part of the game.

 

I do think giving Singman the capablilities to change a bye week player makes sense, but of course it could work against the league as well -- if a playoff contender did that I'm sure no one would mind him taking a loss for his poor management. Tough call.

Exactly what happened to me.

 

I was in the DEEEEEEPPP sticks of Arkansas with no internet access. My wifes uncle does not even have cable so I could not get even see any of the Thanksgiving Day games.

[The Brain 0]

Don't I have BigPhatty's 1rst rnd pick?

[Wuerffel for MVP 0]

Don't I have BigPhatty's 1rst rnd pick?

Fixed.

[GameDay Guru 1]

I guess I can thank Mike McMahon for this one -- watching this game is a form of tourture, but at least I get Bush out of it.

[Wuerffel for MVP 0]

Updated.

[Captain Lou 0]

Guys, just want to chime in here on the roster situation the weekend GDG got married. I looked over his starters as well as the players he could have inserted and found that injuries and bye weeks kept him from feilding a starting lineup.

He simply did not have the players to rpoduce anything that week and I feel that he did not tank that game on purpose as has been suggested. Guys on his bench

simply did not even dress, so this team was doomed at kickoff. I think that we as adults are all on the same page in terms of fairness, and none of us would tank on purpose in order to draft an underclassman who may not even come out. The only ones who have stated that he will be in the draft is the media. Let this go already.

Just my 2 cents worth.

[Wuerffel for MVP 0]

He told us that he got married that weekend so he didn't have a chance to fix his lineup. Regardless, as was stated before, he couldn't have won even if he could have set his lineup in hindsight with the best performing players.

 

It's a moot point IMO. From my experiences and personal interactions with the people in this league, I feel that we are all mature, responsible, ethical owners and I don't think anyone has purposely tanked a game.

 

However, to prevent it from happening in the future, perhaps something should be placed in the rules regarding this, if it isn't there already.

[GameDay Guru 1]

Guys, just want to chime in here on the roster situation the weekend GDG got married.

If I ever get married, I'll let you know.

 

Captain if you find a single week that I started a bye week player, I do not think this is the case. Some of the played like they were on bye, but they did have a game that week.

 

If you are talking about Uncle Paul, that situation worked itself out in my opinion.

[Captain Lou 0]

Guys, just want to chime in here on the roster situation the weekend GDG got married.

If I ever get married, I'll let you know.

 

Captain if you find a single week that I started a bye week player, I do not think this is the case. Some of the played like they were on bye, but they did have a game that week.

 

If you are talking about Uncle Paul, that situation worked itself out in my opinion.

too funny , I did in fact mean Uncle Paul. Sorry about that GDG,lol...

[Wuerffel for MVP 0]

Updated.