I've got a mutiny on my hands

[pimptastic69 0]

Last year I changed my redraft league to a keeper. The rules are that you can keep any player, but he will cost you a draft pick 2 rounds earlier than their original draft pick. It's a 16 round draft, so in theory, you can keep up to 14 players. (Example: MJD was a 3rd round pick last year, so he'll be a 1st round pick this year. ADP was a 1st round pick last year, so he can't be kept.)

 

No one had a problem with it all last year, but now some owners (6 out of 10) are balking at the amount of keepers some teams can keep.

 

So, now I've got a bunch of "grasshoppers" that focked around all last year and a few "ants" that played it smart pitted against eachother.

 

This sucks. I focking laid out the rules well before the draft, and now some jackasses want me to change the rules because they're stuck with a bunch of overrated 1st and 2nd round draft picks from last year, while the rest of us loaded up on late round talent.

 

These grasshoppers want me to limit the keeper quantity to 2, while the ants want it left as is.

 

It's not like I can tell the grasshoppers to fock off, because then there would be no league.

 

Any suggestions?

[Vikings4ever 496]

Absolutely not fair to change the keeper rules for this year right now.

 

Tell them that any keeper rule changes will take effect next offseason.

[Cstriker 2]

Find middle ground. 2 Keepers sound fair for a format. But depends on what the majority wants. So take a vote, tell them which way the majority swings, and make a decision that is as fairly close as you can, maybe a max of 3-4 keepers.

 

Our league is 2 keepers for now. With a catchup draft for new owners. Have to see how it plays out.

 

Good luck.

[Belushi 9]

Tell them they can vote to change the rules for next year, but they're staying as-is this year. People have planned and made transactions for the upcoming year based on the rules laid out. You can't go and change this year's keeper rules now.

[the_risen_demon 0]

Question: can an owner keep a player for more than one year? For example, if a player was taken in round 7 last year, he can be kept at the expense of a 5th round pick this year. Could he be kept in exchange of a 3rd round pick next year, and a 1st the year after that? Or must he be released after being kept a year. I ask because if I was the guy who took Matt Forte or Chris Johnson in the 12th last year and I was planning on keeping him for years to come, I would not be ok with changing the rules, even for next year.

[Ras66not99 0]

wipe out the league and make it a damn dynasty... Keeper leagues with all these jazzy rules that change here and there every year blow.... make it a dynasty run it like the NFL and enjoy

[Phurfur 70]

Last year I changed my redraft league to a keeper. The rules are that you can keep any player, but he will cost you a draft pick 2 rounds earlier than their original draft pick. It's a 16 round draft, so in theory, you can keep up to 14 players. (Example: MJD was a 3rd round pick last year, so he'll be a 1st round pick this year. ADP was a 1st round pick last year, so he can't be kept.)

 

No one had a problem with it all last year, but now some owners (6 out of 10) are balking at the amount of keepers some teams can keep.

 

So, now I've got a bunch of "grasshoppers" that focked around all last year and a few "ants" that played it smart pitted against eachother.

 

This sucks. I focking laid out the rules well before the draft, and now some jackasses want me to change the rules because they're stuck with a bunch of overrated 1st and 2nd round draft picks from last year, while the rest of us loaded up on late round talent.

 

These grasshoppers want me to limit the keeper quantity to 2, while the ants want it left as is.

 

It's not like I can tell the grasshoppers to fock off, because then there would be no league.

 

Any suggestions?

 

 

 

No changes can be made this year unless 100% of the owners agree. There is no bargining on this! Tell the owners it looks like they have a majority and to bring up the new rules at the draft and that they will take effect next year if passed.

 

If I am one of the 4 ants and you changed the rules I would quit your league ASAP.

[Phurfur 70]

Tell them they can vote to change the rules for next year, but they're staying as-is this year. People have planned and made transactions for the upcoming year based on the rules laid out. You can go and change this year's keeper rules now.

 

It looks like you beat me to it.

 

This is the only correct answer.

[jdon 28]

have you considered punching anyone in the face? Or sleeping with anyone's wife/girlfriend? These option may not solve THE problem but, they should work well at shifting the conversation away from the issue at hand... then in August you draft as you stated in the rules last year...

 

 

honestly, I would let them all quit and can the league before letting the rules get changed this year....

jdon

[pimptastic69 0]

Question: can an owner keep a player for more than one year? For example, if a player was taken in round 7 last year, he can be kept at the expense of a 5th round pick this year. Could he be kept in exchange of a 3rd round pick next year, and a 1st the year after that? Or must he be released after being kept a year. I ask because if I was the guy who took Matt Forte or Chris Johnson in the 12th last year and I was planning on keeping him for years to come, I would not be ok with changing the rules, even for next year.

 

Yes, except once the player becomes a 1st or 2nd round pick, that is the last year you can keep him.

 

This is the cornerstone rule of the league (at least it was the intention). It's kind of a keeper/dynasty hybrid.

 

Last year I drafted Brady Quinn in the 16th round. Theoretically I can keep him for 8 years (14th in 2009, then a 12th, 10th, 8th, etc.). Here's the thing: he always carries that 16th round stigma. If I trade him (or even cut him), he's still considered a 2008 16th round draft pick, no matter which team he plays for.

[WhiteWonder 2,172]

1. those rules suck. leaves the option to keep wayyy too many players. In all keeper leagues I suggest limiting the number of keepers or just make it a dynasty. I understand it rewards owners with the ability to draft a little for the future but still. If you want to draft for the future.. go dynasty.

 

2. its too late to change things now.. Put it to a vote for next years draft. This year has to play out as is because many owners planned in advance for it.

 

my suggestion would be going to a 3-4 keeper limit for next year. frugal owners are still rewarded because of the draft round stipulation, but things won't start to get rediculous.

[the_risen_demon 0]

Yes, except once the player becomes a 1st or 2nd round pick, that is the last year you can keep him.

 

This is the cornerstone rule of the league (at least it was the intention). It's kind of a keeper/dynasty hybrid.

 

Last year I drafted Brady Quinn in the 16th round. Theoretically I can keep him for 8 years (14th in 2009, then a 12th, 10th, 8th, etc.). Here's the thing: he always carries that 16th round stigma. If I trade him (or even cut him), he's still considered a 2008 16th round draft pick, no matter which team he plays for.

 

In that case, I would say the only way to modify the keeper rules would be by unanymous vote. People (people like yourself) drafted last year based on the value that guys would have in years to come. That value was based on the rules that were established before last year's draft. Changing that policy now would be equivalent to changing your scoring system half way through the year. It cannot be allowed.

[Dan 59]

I don't think they have a beef, except that they feel they can't catch up, which seems illogical. What exactly is their complaint, unless you require owners to keep 'x' number of players (which you did not indicate here).

 

If a limit on the keepers is what they're looking for, I agree with everyone else. You cannot change that rule this year. Period. If they think that the keeper number should be limited, they need to present it, and then you negotiate. An unlimited number of keepers seems a bit much to me, but I get the concept . . . it's almost a hybrid dynasty. We did that for a few years, with a limit of 6 keepers, I believe. But the cost of keeping (we used 3 rounds, not 2) kept the number limited, anyway.

 

I think I would ask them if they would want to change the rule next year, should they have an impressive draft themselves. Sounds like an attempt to alter rules to current situations. Always dangerous, often backfires on the person complaining the most.

[pimptastic69 0]

I don't think they have a beef, except that they feel they can't catch up, which seems illogical. What exactly is their complaint, unless you require owners to keep 'x' number of players (which you did not indicate here).

 

If a limit on the keepers is what they're looking for, I agree with everyone else. You cannot change that rule this year. Period. If they think that the keeper number should be limited, they need to present it, and then you negotiate. An unlimited number of keepers seems a bit much to me, but I get the concept . . . it's almost a hybrid dynasty. We did that for a few years, with a limit of 6 keepers, I believe. But the cost of keeping (we used 3 rounds, not 2) kept the number limited, anyway.

 

I think I would ask them if they would want to change the rule next year, should they have an impressive draft themselves. Sounds like an attempt to alter rules to current situations. Always dangerous, often backfires on the person complaining the most.

 

You're not required to keep any players.

 

I thought about changing the rule from 2 rounds to 3, but I can't really do that. Knowing that you could potentially keep a 3rd round pick made that player a little more valuable when making trades and stuff.

 

Question: Why did you stop using this system?

[oldguru 0]

As a commissioner of 5 leagues, (played in 10 leagues last season), there is only one stance for you to take in my opinion:

 

1. Your new keeper rules were fine. They were fine because everyone knew the rules before the draft. Period.

 

2. There is no common ground to be considered. (see #1 above)

 

3. You never.....ever change the rules once the draft has started. Period.

 

4. There is no vote to be allowed to change the keeper rules. (see #3 above)

[Dan 59]

You're not required to keep any players.

 

I thought about changing the rule from 2 rounds to 3, but I can't really do that. Knowing that you could potentially keep a 3rd round pick made that player a little more valuable when making trades and stuff.

 

Question: Why did you stop using this system?

 

Simply put, we had too much turnover. That rule did not cause division, but the normal turnover in that league led us to decide that the fairest solution was to go to re-draft. Many of the folks that have come through that league are getting used to fantasy football, or our scoring system and are hoping to get a spot in our dynasty league (a few actually are). But the turnover was the biggest reason.

 

I like the rule a lot . . . made it very interesting, with a challenge with a different twist. But you do have to have owners that know how to draft, and look forward while doing so.

[Yippie Skippy 0]

I understand the line in the sand and the rules are the rules option. I'd try to find some middle ground since there are two sides on this one.

 

Limit the quantity of keepers to 2 or 3 for this season and take a vote on the matter for the 2010 season.

[Ras66not99 0]

As a commissioner of 5 leagues, (played in 10 leagues last season),

 

Come on homie.... enough is enough .... how do you even enjoy it ???

[oldguru 0]

I understand the line in the sand and the rules are the rules option. I'd try to find some middle ground since there are two sides on this one.

 

Limit the quantity of keepers to 2 or 3 for this season and take a vote on the matter for the 2010 season.

 

Just one more thought. The reason that you can never change the rules once the draft starts in any league is because every player that was drafted, every trade that was made, every FA pickup that was done, every player that was dropped from a roster, was done with a certain value system in place. If you change the rules, you change a players value in some way. It doesn't make any difference to me whether it involves the number of starters, or scoring, or keeper elgibility. You don't change the rules. I don't believe that there should be any middle ground agreed to. Pimp clearly stated in his first post: "all owners had no problem with the rules last year". If the owners want to change the rules before a draft every year....they should always play in re-draft leagues where that is acceptable. I believe that keeper & dynasty league rules should remain constant to avoid changing the value system for all players. If owners cannot rely on rules being constant, then they can not have any respect in the future for the commissioner. JMO.

[Lab 0]

The people who say you shouldn't change the rules this season, and any rule change ought to wait until next season, are right. However, I hear your point that many of the grasshoppers may just quit if no change is made. Some might say "let 'em quit!," but if they're otherwise good owners, it seems a shame to blow up the league over this. Also, you'll have a tough time getting new owners for the grasshoppers' teams (because they sound relatively weak for 2009). For all those reasons, you need to find a compromise for 2009. No, it's not "right" or "fair" to compromise, and it hurts the ants who stockpiled last year. But in the end, everyone (even the ants) are better off with a functioning league even if it means they have to give up a little advantage. "Would you rather be right, or would you rather be happy?" So, I think you ought to tell everyone that since the new-in-2008 keeper rule was not totally clear to everyone (at least not clear in how it would affect them long-term), you're adjusting it slightly to make 2009 a phase-in year.

 

So how should you adjust it for the 2009 phase-in? Several others have posted good ideas. One other that I had is to increase the "cost" of a keeper as a team selects more keepers. So for example, for a team's first three keepers, the cost is a draft pick two rounds earlier. For keepers 4-6, the cost is a draft pick three rounds earlier. For keepers 7+, the cost is a draft pick four rounds earlier. Another way would be to increase the cost of keepers depending on how many years they are kept. So for example, the first year a team keeps a player, the cost is a draft pick two rounds higher. But for the second year that player is kept, the cost is a draft pick three rounds earlier, and further increases in cost for later years. It's sort of like having salaries for each player that escalate each year they are kept. I was in a league that did the increasing salaries, and it was really fun -- unfortunately the league blew up because the commish is a crook. Anyway, all these ideas promote lots more turnover, but would still reward those ants who saved last year (and ants who might save in the future).

 

If you decide to go the compromise route, maybe you should let the league vote on which compromise solution gets picked. That will help bind everyone to the league and maybe minimize complaining, since they're all part of the process. Just announce that there will be some compromise phase-in rule change, and then lay out the two or three options you like best. Whichever option gets the most votes will win. I guess you could even add the options of "no change at all" or "redraft in 2009 with new rule to take effect in 2010," to see if those extreme options get any votes.

 

Good luck!

[Young_Grasshopper 0]

Here's the reality: if the owners were idiots going into the draft, they're not going to suddenly inherit the wisdom of Soloman and say "well, fair's fair, I guess I'll just shut up and play the cards I've been dealt." No. They're going to whine a lot then probably quit. Keep in mind all these replies saying you can't change this year's rules are from people saavy and obsessive enough to log in to a Fantasy Football board during one of the slowest points in the NFL year. They are not on the same level as the grasshoppers who probably print a mock draft off Yahoo 5 minutes before you started making picks.

 

Unless you can find folks to take the place of those who quit, I say you have to face reality to save the league. Compromise. Restricting the number of keepers to 3 or 4 gives some advantage to the ants without making the grasshoppers feel like they have no shot. This is where you also have to step up as a leader and make everyone accept the compromise. Not your fault you got in this position, but everyone's going to look to the commish to fix it.

[pimptastic69 0]

The people who say you shouldn't change the rules this season, and any rule change ought to wait until next season, are right. However, I hear your point that many of the grasshoppers may just quit if no change is made. Some might say "let 'em quit!," but if they're otherwise good owners, it seems a shame to blow up the league over this. Also, you'll have a tough time getting new owners for the grasshoppers' teams (because they sound relatively weak for 2009). For all those reasons, you need to find a compromise for 2009. No, it's not "right" or "fair" to compromise, and it hurts the ants who stockpiled last year. But in the end, everyone (even the ants) are better off with a functioning league even if it means they have to give up a little advantage. "Would you rather be right, or would you rather be happy?" So, I think you ought to tell everyone that since the new-in-2008 keeper rule was not totally clear to everyone (at least not clear in how it would affect them long-term), you're adjusting it slightly to make 2009 a phase-in year.

 

So how should you adjust it for the 2009 phase-in? Several others have posted good ideas. One other that I had is to increase the "cost" of a keeper as a team selects more keepers. So for example, for a team's first three keepers, the cost is a draft pick two rounds earlier. For keepers 4-6, the cost is a draft pick three rounds earlier. For keepers 7+, the cost is a draft pick four rounds earlier. Another way would be to increase the cost of keepers depending on how many years they are kept. So for example, the first year a team keeps a player, the cost is a draft pick two rounds higher. But for the second year that player is kept, the cost is a draft pick three rounds earlier, and further increases in cost for later years. It's sort of like having salaries for each player that escalate each year they are kept. I was in a league that did the increasing salaries, and it was really fun -- unfortunately the league blew up because the commish is a crook. Anyway, all these ideas promote lots more turnover, but would still reward those ants who saved last year (and ants who might save in the future).

 

If you decide to go the compromise route, maybe you should let the league vote on which compromise solution gets picked. That will help bind everyone to the league and maybe minimize complaining, since they're all part of the process. Just announce that there will be some compromise phase-in rule change, and then lay out the two or three options you like best. Whichever option gets the most votes will win. I guess you could even add the options of "no change at all" or "redraft in 2009 with new rule to take effect in 2010," to see if those extreme options get any votes.

 

Good luck!

 

That's a pretty good idea. I think I'll give that a shot.

[oldguru 0]

Here's the reality: if the owners were idiots going into the draft, they're not going to suddenly inherit the wisdom of Soloman and say "well, fair's fair, I guess I'll just shut up and play the cards I've been dealt." No. They're going to whine a lot then probably quit. Keep in mind all these replies saying you can't change this year's rules are from people saavy and obsessive enough to log in to a Fantasy Football board during one of the slowest points in the NFL year. They are not on the same level as the grasshoppers who probably print a mock draft off Yahoo 5 minutes before you started making picks.

 

Unless you can find folks to take the place of those who quit, I say you have to face reality to save the league. Compromise. Restricting the number of keepers to 3 or 4 gives some advantage to the ants without making the grasshoppers feel like they have no shot. This is where you also have to step up as a leader and make everyone accept the compromise. Not your fault you got in this position, but everyone's going to look to the commish to fix it.

 

The last couple of posts raise good points. If you want to keep the league owners together then maybe you need to change the league. But I will stand by my convictions that you cannot treat owners fairly if you change the rules after a draft has started. There really is no middle ground for me. Not all owners are going to enjoy keeper & dynasty rules. Oh yea, they all thought that the keeper rules would be great initially.....now they are having owners remorse and want to change the rules. This is wrong. *If you want to keep the league owners together, then a total re-draft is the only fair way to go in my opinion. And if you decide to change the league now, I would never consider going a keeper league again with these particular owners. They have proven that they are not reliable owners for keeper or dynasty rules to me. Keeper & dynasty rules should always stay constant. If the other owners can't understand that premise, they should never agree to play in one. Right is right, and wrong is wrong for me. If your owners have more fun and less bitching re-drafting every year.....then I say to each his own. It sounds like if six owners are not happy after the first season, there would always be several that cry about their keeper choices at the end of a different season. {I am not trying to sound all holy with my thinking. But with some things, middle ground should not be an option for me.} I have now shared my opinion. Good luck with the decisions you will have to make as commissioner. I hope that your league continues to be fun for all the owners.

[oldguru 0]

If you are going to consider different rules for this or other leagues, I commish a dynasty league that is a alittle different than most. We call it a dynasty because an owner can keep all of their players. However, for each player you keep....you lose a draft pick. If you keep 5 players, you lose your first 5 picks. If you keep 10 players, you lose your first 10 picks. If you keep 15 players, you lose your first 15 picks, etc. So for example: if you keep 10 players, and I keep 15 players, you will get 5 picks before I get my first pick in the draft. Another extreme example would be that one team only feels like they have 5 players worthy of keeping, and I feel my roster is pretty stacked, so I am going to keep 20. In this case the other owner would get 15 picks before I get my first pick in the draft. This method really allows for teams that feel behind in talent, to catch up at a much faster pace. (especially with the rookies). It also creates a bit of suspense and fun in deciding how many players each owner will drop or retain. This league is 9 years old, and we have had a low turnover in owners for what it is worth. Just another option to consider if you are ever setting up new rules. Something alittle different.

[jaxjag 43]

If you are going to consider different rules for this or other leagues, I commish a dynasty league that is a alittle different than most. We call it a dynasty because an owner can keep all of their players. However, for each player you keep....you lose a draft pick. If you keep 5 players, you lose your first 5 picks. If you keep 10 players, you lose your first 10 picks. If you keep 15 players, you lose your first 15 picks, etc. So for example: if you keep 10 players, and I keep 15 players, you will get 5 picks before I get my first pick in the draft. Another extreme example would be that one team only feels like they have 5 players worthy of keeping, and I feel my roster is pretty stacked, so I am going to keep 20. In this case the other owner would get 15 picks before I get my first pick in the draft. This method really allows for teams that feel behind in talent, to catch up at a much faster pace. (especially with the rookies). It also creates a bit of suspense and fun in deciding how many players each owner will drop or retain. This league is 9 years old, and we have had a low turnover in owners for what it is worth. Just another option to consider if you are ever setting up new rules. Something alittle different.

 

For an oldguru, these rules really suck!

 

"x" keepers is "x" keepers. A fair and open draft like the NFL...

 

Incidentally, my league is 15 years old and we've never lost an owner (zero, nada, zilch).

[oldguru 0]

For an oldguru, these rules really suck!

 

"x" keepers is "x" keepers. A fair and open draft like the NFL...

 

Incidentally, my league is 15 years old and we've never lost an owner (zero, nada, zilch).

 

I have often said: to each his own. I have also heard that variety can be the spice of life. I play in quite a few different formats. *I am sure not trying to sell anyone on one set of rules, or claim that one set is better than another. I guess I have posted enough for this off-season. Good luck to all of you in the new season. I am looking forward to it.