rule discussion

[dehaven123 31]

ill kick it off...

the tiebreaker rule should be strongly considered for adjustment. i think we could all agree that hd 2 hd is just silly as the primary tiebreaker to get in the playoffs.

 

""- Tie Breaker to get into the playoffs will be :

1. head to head
2. overall points scored
3. division record
4. non division record
5. coin toss ""

 

[Gepetto 1,374]

ill kick it off...

the tiebreaker rule should be strongly considered for adjustment. i think we could all agree that hd 2 hd is just silly as the primary tiebreaker to get in the playoffs.

 

 

 

I agree.

[Gepetto 1,374]

I have a rules question. For the one year optional 2nd keeper can we keep a player as that designation and then the following year keep the exact same player as our primary (#1) keeper if we then only keep this one keeper and not a 2nd keeper? And then continue to keep that player for a few years if we want to?

[Little Big Head 6]

I don't see any reason why not (re: keeper question)

Overall points should be first tie breaker. I've argued this for years and have had zero support

[Gepetto 1,374]

I don't see any reason why not (re: keeper question)

Overall points should be first tie breaker. I've argued this for years and have had zero support

 

I agree with both of your points.

[WhiteWonder 2,767]

best tie breaker is always total points, unless you're in a league structured so that each team plays every other team 3+ times.. double headers i guess which ive never been a part of.

 

why the heck would i want to lose a tie breaker because i happened to play the guy i tied the week my studs were on bye?

 

 

 

regarding the keepers, the way i understood it was you keep 1 franchise player and you have the option to keep a transitional player every other season. with no limit on how often an individual player can be kept. so yeah, if you keep Geno Smith as your transitional player this year, you can go ahead and keep him as your franchise player next year and the year after that. But if you keep Geno Smith as your transitional player this year, you do not get a transitional player for 2015.

 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Im bored and slightly intoxicated so I feel like bringing up a few points for potential discussion in this rules thread......

 

im still not sure how I feel about the new keeper rules. If the transition player rule is meant to reward owners for correctly identifying young/new talent, the minimum round lost should be lower than the 4th that was previously discussed. I believe it was worded as something along the lines of 'the transitional player will cost the round they were drafted in with a minimum 4th rounder'

 

Making a really good waiver claim or late round pick shouldn't dock you a 4th round pick. Maybe a 7th or 8th. You're going to have people keeping STUDS at a 4th round value... what incentive would there be for an owner to keep a less heralded player if it costs the same?

 

im also not sure it feels right to allow an owner to keep lets say Matt Forte as a 'transitional player' but thats probably nit picking the idea of who can be considered a transitional player and the cost for keeping such an established stud as a 2nd keeper would be high enough, i think.

 

Finally, not sure how I feel about the 'Franchise Player' changing from being an option for all owners at the cost of their 1st round pick to now being mandatory with no cost. a pretty unique part of this league was deciding if it was a better choice to keep someone or have a 1st round pick.

[Gepetto 1,374]

Don't drink and make fantasy football rule decisions! Haha! just kidding.

[dehaven123 31]

best tie breaker is always total points, unless you're in a league structured so that each team plays every other team 3+ times.. double headers i guess which ive never been a part of.

 

why the heck would i want to lose a tie breaker because i happened to play the guy i tied the week my studs were on bye?

 

 

 

regarding the keepers, the way i understood it was you keep 1 franchise player and you have the option to keep a transitional player every other season. with no limit on how often an individual player can be kept. so yeah, if you keep Geno Smith as your transitional player this year, you can go ahead and keep him as your franchise player next year and the year after that. But if you keep Geno Smith as your transitional player this year, you do not get a transitional player for 2015.

 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Im bored and slightly intoxicated so I feel like bringing up a few points for potential discussion in this rules thread......

 

im still not sure how I feel about the new keeper rules. If the transition player rule is meant to reward owners for correctly identifying young/new talent, the minimum round lost should be lower than the 4th that was previously discussed. I believe it was worded as something along the lines of 'the transitional player will cost the round they were drafted in with a minimum 4th rounder'

 

Making a really good waiver claim or late round pick shouldn't dock you a 4th round pick. Maybe a 7th or 8th. You're going to have people keeping STUDS at a 4th round value... what incentive would there be for an owner to keep a less heralded player if it costs the same?

 

im also not sure it feels right to allow an owner to keep lets say Matt Forte as a 'transitional player' but thats probably nit picking the idea of who can be considered a transitional player and the cost for keeping such an established stud as a 2nd keeper would be high enough, i think.

 

Finally, not sure how I feel about the 'Franchise Player' changing from being an option for all owners at the cost of their 1st round pick to now being mandatory with no cost. a pretty unique part of this league was deciding if it was a better choice to keep someone or have a 1st round pick.

 

first, good to see we've had a consensus so far on the tiebreaker thingy. in this case, looks like sound reason will prevail.

 

also, i agree with all of your thoughts on the other stuff to a tee. so, try drinking all the time, makes you smarter. but, the train has left the station on the keeper stuff, so might be time to just come to terms with it and move past it. it aint gonna change now, not matter how much you or i dont like it.

 

in the future, it would be nice if these kind of structural changes, like the keeper thing, aren't just decided arbitratrarily, though its moz's perogative of course. we should all have an equal voice on these types of league matters.

[dehaven123 31]

the worst part, for me obviously, about the current config of the playoff tiebreaker, if MM would have beat me in the last wk of the regular season, his squad would have made it in instead of mine, even though i owned him in points, had the superior season, and better team. silly.

thankfully, destiny chose otherwise.

[famousb 11]

My thought on tiebreaker remains as it always has... Wife with the best rack, noodie pic required...

 

Ps. If you fockers were any good you wouldn't have to be worried about tie breakers.

[WhiteWonder 2,767]

 

first, good to see we've had a consensus so far on the tiebreaker thingy. in this case, looks like sound reason will prevail.

 

also, i agree with all of your thoughts on the other stuff to a tee. so, try drinking all the time, makes you smarter. but, the train has left the station on the keeper stuff, so might be time to just come to terms with it and move past it. it aint gonna change now, not matter how much you or i dont like it.

 

in the future, it would be nice if these kind of structural changes, like the keeper thing, aren't just decided arbitratrarily, though its moz's perogative of course. we should all have an equal voice on these types of league matters.

 

believe it or not, when it comes to league changes in any league i try to ignore my own team and look at things objectively. however I can easily use my own team as an example.

 

Previously we were allowed to keep a 'franchise player' at the cost of a first round pick or take your chances in round 1. Now, there is no reason not to have a franchise player as there is no cost.

 

I take this back because i do see Moz outlined this before last years draft. I was mistaken!

 

and in terms of the 'transitional player' which i think is a cool idea, especially only getting to use it every other season..... the 4th round pick cap really blows. Severely penalizes me for grabbing Zac Stacy off waivers before he blew up (while most were going after Pead). Now someone can keep Peyton Manning while I keep Stacy and it costs us the same penalty? thats straight garbage....

 

 

also being that we have a rules thread going on I don't see any of that as being set in stone. I would like to at least propose we vote on both points

 

1) Keeping the franchise player as it always has been, the cost of 1st rounder.

 

2) Lowering the 'transition player' price tag to something more in line with identifying late talent.... say, round 8.

[Little Big Head 6]

I think we should have just kept the rules we had. It feels like moz just comes up with these rules, posts them on the forum, a few vocal owners chime in favor of the change, and suddenly it's a done deal. It BS and no way to run a league. If you want to change a rule put it up for a vote and let every owner have equal say. I really liked the set up we had of choosing either a keeper or our 1st rd pick. The way people want to do it now seriously dilutes the draft pool. I enjoy playing against the people in this league. I like the competitiveness, and the enthusiasm but I'm tired of the way things are handled so arbitrarily

[famousb 11]

Transitional player has to be a guy you DRAFTED. So you can't keep a guy you grabbed off waivers, unless he's your franchise guy

[WhiteWonder 2,767]

Transitional player has to be a guy you DRAFTED. So you can't keep a guy you grabbed off waivers, unless he's your franchise guy

 

thats pretty dumb but i did go back and read the rule proposal and you are correct..... honestly if the rule is intended to reward owners for late round drafting, as Moz states, there is not much difference between drafting well late and doing a good job on waivers.

 

im not sure why the need to reward owners who drafted well in the late rounds as opposed to drafted well early or managed their team well during the season...

 

 

i conur with LBH. voting on these wide sweeping rule changes would have been the way to go but if they are set, they are set.

 

 

So I will follow suit with Dehaven and use this thread to propose the rules be looked at.

 

 

 

 

 

the keeper rules should strongly be considered for adjustment. The franchise player should be optional at the cost of a 1st round pick, while the transition player should be open to any rostered player at the cost of the round in which they were drafted with the minimum cost being an 8th round pick (which would also be the cost for undrafted players).

 

[dehaven123 31]

if its put to a vote, if, my vote is not n favor of the new rule. ive expressed the same sentment since it was imposed, i dont like it. no reason to change a good thing. but if you do, at least put it to a vote.

[dehaven123 31]

I think we should have just kept the rules we had. It feels like moz just comes up with these rules, posts them on the forum, a few vocal owners chime in favor of the change, and suddenly it's a done deal. It BS and no way to run a league. If you want to change a rule put it up for a vote and let every owner have equal say. I really liked the set up we had of choosing either a keeper or our 1st rd pick. The way people want to do it now seriously dilutes the draft pool. I enjoy playing against the people in this league. I like the competitiveness, and the enthusiasm but I'm tired of the way things are handled so arbitrarily

 

well said

[Gepetto 1,374]

I'd like to keep about 8 players!

[dehaven123 31]

I'd like to keep about 8 players!

 

no worries. just ask moz, im sure he's down for another midstream adjustment.

[famousb 11]

Moz just changes the rules all of the time cause he can't win with the way they are... He always thinks this tweak or that tweak is going to finally put him over the hump...

[Meglamaniac 535]

It's a head to head league, what a team does against another team should matter more than anything, its the very basis of our playoff system. If we want to emphasize total points then make it a total points league.

 

Every major sport I have played and every head to head league I have played in uses head to head as the first tie breaker.

[Meglamaniac 535]

 

why the heck would i want to lose a tie breaker because i happened to play the guy i tied the week my studs were on bye?

 

 

Why the heck would I want to lose a tibreaker because a team I beat during the year had a couple of weeks scoring 200 plus points. Again, its a head to head league, what my team did when it played the other team should matter more than what that team did when playing someone else.

[WhiteWonder 2,767]

It's a head to head league, what a team does against another team should matter more than anything, its the very basis of our playoff system. If we want to emphasize total points then make it a total points league.

 

Every major sport I have played and every head to head league I have played in uses head to head as the first tie breaker.

 

im willing to bet that every major sport you have played, teams play each other more than once. thats my biggest issue with H2H as tie breaker. a lot of us only play each other once during the season.

 

that would be fine if everyones team was at full strength but being that this is fantasy sports and not reality, we have bye weeks to deal with that are beyond our control.

 

thats my main issue

[Meglamaniac 535]

 

im willing to bet that every major sport you have played, teams play each other more than once. thats my biggest issue with H2H as tie breaker. a lot of us only play each other once during the season.

 

that would be fine if everyones team was at full strength but being that this is fantasy sports and not reality, we have bye weeks to deal with that are beyond our control.

 

thats my main issue

No, every major college football conference uses head to head as the first tie breaker to determine a conference winner or a Divisional winner where there are 2 divisions and a championship game.

[WhiteWonder 2,767]

No, every major college football conference uses head to head as the first tie breaker to determine a conference winner or a Divisional winner where there are 2 divisions and a championship game.

 

yes but that brings me to point #2 that i listed being that Auburn for example, doesn't play Alabama while half its team is on bye week.

 

also college football isn't the best example to use as they are just now going to a playoff format. hard to compare FF with a playoff format to College Football with bowl games and a BCS system.

[Meglamaniac 535]

 

yes but that brings me to point #2 that i listed being that Auburn for example, doesn't play Alabama while half its team is on bye week.

 

also college football isn't the best example to use as they are just now going to a playoff format. hard to compare FF with a playoff format to College Football with bowl games and a BCS system.

I can see your points but the fact that its a head to head league and as such I feel that head to head results should be weighed more heavily than total points scored, I guess that's the old fart in me as it is all I've every known in my years of both FF and actual sports.

[dehaven123 31]

reasonable points by all, more reason why it should be put to a league vote.

[dehaven123 31]

delay proposal #2. We need to go to leaguesafe for dues this yr. no reason why not to. this shouldn't even be a debate, it's simply a matter of keeping up with the times.

[Little Big Head 6]

Agree on league safe

[famousb 11]

Word

[WhiteWonder 2,767]

delay proposal #2. We need to go to leaguesafe for dues this yr. no reason why not to. this shouldn't even be a debate, it's simply a matter of keeping up with the times.

 

i disagree. not vehemently but i feel leaguesafe is only needed if you don't trust the commish. id rather have 100% of funds available for the pot. Unless im mistaken leaguesafe has a fee. I know there is an option where initial deposit is free but there are also payment options where owners need to pay a tiny fee on top of their entry fee and i know leaguesafe takes a payment when you have them cut you a check at the end or direct deposit.

 

the fees are small and im nitpicking but if Moz has been reliable with the $ i see no reason not to continue that way

 

 

edit: just checked and payments by e-check are free but the following charges apply

 

 

Payments

• Credit Card: 3% of the transaction amount ($3)

 

Payouts

• Paper Check (standard): $1.50
• Paper Check (expedited): $7.00
• E-check: $5.00

 

 

again i know its pocket change but i just hate the idea of taking any kind of money out of our pot to use a holding service if Moz is reliable.

[dehaven123 31]

 

i disagree. not vehemently but i feel leaguesafe is only needed if you don't trust the commish. id rather have 100% of funds available for the pot. Unless im mistaken leaguesafe has a fee. I know there is an option where initial deposit is free but there are also payment options where owners need to pay a tiny fee on top of their entry fee and i know leaguesafe takes a payment when you have them cut you a check at the end or direct deposit.

 

the fees are small and im nitpicking but if Moz has been reliable with the $ i see no reason not to continue that way

 

 

edit: just checked and payments by e-check are free but the following charges apply

 

 

Payments

• Credit Card: 3% of the transaction amount ($3)

 

Payouts

• Paper Check (standard): $1.50
• Paper Check (expedited): $7.00
• E-check: $5.00

 

 

again i know its pocket change but i just hate the idea of taking any kind of money out of our pot to use a holding service if Moz is reliable.

 

I'll only make this public, cause it may affect some of your opinions on this matter. this is important.

league payouts were substantially late this yr, like in the last wk or so kind of late.

change your mind about leaguesafe at all?

[Little Big Head 6]

I trusted Steve Ingman too. Most of us know how that turned out. Also I never mentioned this but last year I sent a money order and it got lost in the mail so I had to pay twice. I lost the receipt for it the first time so I ACCEPT BLAME but it still sucked balls. The 2nd time I made sure I sent it certified mail which I'll do again this year. League safe is just much easier and much more secure so I'm all for it

[famousb 11]

My vote is for leaguesafe - i like all of my winnings to be consolidated in one place...

 

and correct me if i am wrong here, but when you win $$$ in multiple leagues, can't you get one consolidated payout so you are only paying fees one time? Not that any of you bums would have ever had this scenario, but it means that you are dividing that $1.50 paper check cost by ALL league payouts - so if you are using leaguesafe for one league you might as well use it for ALL leagues.

[dehaven123 31]

I trusted Steve Ingman too. Most of us know how that turned out. Also I never mentioned this but last year I sent a money order and it got lost in the mail so I had to pay twice. I lost the receipt for it the first time so I ACCEPT BLAME but it still sucked balls. The 2nd time I made sure I sent it certified mail which I'll do again this year. League safe is just much easier and much more secure so I'm all for it

 

yep, he's a bum. we have enough shared experiences across all of our leagues to know leaguesafe is the way to go. it's not an indictment of shane on my part, its just prudent. the only reason i posted waht i did above is so we can all agree about the switch to leaguesafe.

i've talked to sahne via email about this early this yr, he agreed with me about leaguesafe.

[dehaven123 31]

My vote is for leaguesafe - i like all of my winnings to be consolidated in one place...

 

and correct me if i am wrong here, but when you win $$$ in multiple leagues, can't you get one consolidated payout so you are only paying fees one time? Not that any of you bums would have ever had this scenario, but it means that you are dividing that $1.50 paper check cost by ALL league payouts - so if you are using leaguesafe for one league you might as well use it for ALL leagues.

 

well, we know your time has passed in MFFL. you've failed to evolve, while others have made huge leaps. its a shame, too. you used to be awesome.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[famousb 11]

 

well, we know your time has passed in MFFL. you've failed to evolve, while others have made huge leaps. its a shame, too. you used to be awesome.

 

 

i may have took a several year hiatus, but intend on being fully back this year (no matter what random rule changes Mozillini decides to implement this year).

be prepared for #4, and all of the talk that comes with it...

[WhiteWonder 2,767]

Leaguesafe is fine. I just hope the payment method opened up is echeck. I just hate paying people to take my money...

 

Im not sure regarding consolidating winnings. I only had two leagues on leaguesafe last year and collected in one. I know u can choose to roll ur winnings over to next years dues...

[famousb 11]

I just hate paying people to take my money...

but you are so good at it!

 

... and collected in one.

even one is surprising for you!!!

[WhiteWonder 2,767]

but you are so good at it!

 

even one is surprising for you!!!

First one was good. I laughed. Second was trying too hard.

[dehaven123 31]

Leaguesafe is fine. I just hope the payment method opened up is echeck. I just hate paying people to take my money...

 

Im not sure regarding consolidating winnings. I only had two leagues on leaguesafe last year and collected in one. I know u can choose to roll ur winnings over to next years dues...

 

u can pay your dues for free of charge in leaguesafe.