Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
mmmmm...beer

Possible Rule Changes 2019

Recommended Posts

29 guests I think was the name?

For several years after, he would just randomly drop by our forearm and haunt us with emoticons. It was bizarre.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

29 guests is a real good guy. I've gotten to know him over the years in another dynasty and a fantasy baseball league.

 

I knew u guys probably meant him when you said emoticon only guy. That's his MO. But he PMs me often and does know words :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

29 guests is a real good guy. I've gotten to know him over the years in another dynasty and a fantasy baseball league.

 

I knew u guys probably meant him when you said emoticon only guy. That's his MO. But he PMs me often and does know words :P

He bought a 1965 Mustang from me... and is a pretty cool guy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In hindsight we probably should have kicked out gocolts instead.

 

been wanting to for many years, but so many of you liked him for some reason.

 

he turned into gciafp long ago for me

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

been wanting to for many years, but so many of you liked him for some reason.

 

he turned into gciafp long ago for me

 

I don't think it was people liking or disliking him. We just thought it would be a nightmare to find someone to replace his team. We figured eventually he would stay out of his own way for long enough, to get a few more assets. Then give him the boot. SkiBum has made more improvements to his team in 1 week, than he did in 4-5 years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

$55 per team.

 

I won a cool $200 for the championship and $45 in weekly prizes.

Which now that we're out of the charity business.. we maybe up that to 105 a year?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So... been thinking on this one for a bit.

 

Instead of QB, RB, RB, WR, WR, WR, FLEX, TE

 

We do: QB, RB, RB, WR, WR, FLEX, FLEX, TE

 

 

 

I propose TD passes go from 6 to 4

 

 

 

Which now that we're out of the charity business.. we maybe up that to 105 a year?

 

 

Getting back to these rule changes.....the above I believe could use some more discussion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Getting back to these rule changes.....the above I believe could use some more discussion.

I'm fine with QB point changes and increases in dues.

 

Really hate adding another flex. I think it takes away from strategy when you add more options for a team to fill a lineup with what they already have readily available.

 

Takes away from the importance of waivers, trading, identifying weekly sleepers etc...

 

It also likely helps some teams a great deal as currently constructed and hurts other teams (it would actually help me so I'm going against my own best interests here). Now, teams thay made themselves RB heavy will get a big time boost while teams that balanced themselves will suffer slightly as a result.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm fine with QB point changes and increases in dues.

 

Really hate adding another flex. I think it takes away from strategy when you add more options for a team to fill a lineup with what they already have readily available.

 

Takes away from the importance of waivers, trading, identifying weekly sleepers etc...

 

It also likely helps some teams a great deal as currently constructed and hurts other teams (it would actually help me so I'm going against my own best interests here). Now, teams thay made themselves RB heavy will get a big time boost while teams that balanced themselves will suffer slightly as a result.

 

That makes sense....I have been swayed.

 

Nix the starting lineup changes.

Increase league fees.

Reduce QB touchdowns from 6 to 4.

 

The Kats have meowed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

X everything but the fee increase

 

Only 1 QB playing... you slash his tds.. why even have him playing...leave QBs alone...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I vote for the opposite of whatever WW and mmm...beer propose. No questions asked.

i propose nada

 

i just give my opinion on other proposals.

 

i'd be more than happy leaving everything as is. :thumbsup: (minus Ed as the champion)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

prefer more flex- makes little sense to me to have to drop higher quality players due to byes and injuries for a warm body (if one even exists), especially in a dynasty

 

if we lower qb td scoring, i would want to increase the yardage to either .04 or .05 per yard (more standard)

 

no issue either way on dues.

 

 

 

while reviewing the rules, i noticed that trade vetoes are only subject collusion. i think we need to add some verbiage about owner indifference/abandonment (ie: frzn trading mccoy for mckinnon after stating he was leaving)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Add 2 more IR spots.

 

add 5 pts to home playoff teams

 

#1 seed gets to choose they want to face in the semi-finals, (not the #2 seed)

 

:thumbsup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Padrino and Savior has considered all proposed rule changes and shall now offer his opinion on a selected few.

 

  • We are IN FAVOR of adding 2 more IR spots. The negative effect on trades/waivers is so minimal compared to the negative effect on quality lineups one can experience by carrying too many undroppable yet injured players.
  • We are AGAINST the changing of our starting lineup. Teams have built rosters for years based on the 2RB, 3 WR, 1 Flex model. Strategies have been developed. And so on.
  • We are AGAINST the proposed changing of QB touchdowns from 6 points to 4 points. With 12 franchises choosing amongst 32 NFL QBs, the demand for the position is already lower than RB, WR, TE, etc. We don't need to lessen the advantages of those with prime QBs even more. The Dakota Skyes for example, would probably have serious regreats about trading away an Odell Beckham for Aaron Rodgers only to learn Aaron Rodgers' position would become less valuable in the coming offseason.
  • In a bold move that could be groundbreaking throughout the FF universe, The Great Legitmizer is IN FAVOR of awarding 5 points to home teams throughout the post season. It adds value to the seeding process and creates an x factor that will weigh on people. In short, The Lord and Padrino proposes a 1 year trial run, which shall be considered for permanent implementation next offseason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

prefer more flex- makes little sense to me to have to drop higher quality players due to byes and injuries for a warm body (if one even exists), especially in a dynasty

 

if we lower qb td scoring, i would want to increase the yardage to either .04 or .05 per yard

 

 

 

while reviewing the rules, i noticed that trade vetoes are only subject collusion. i think we need to add some verbiage about owner indifference/abandonment (ie: frzn trading mccoy for mckinnon after stating he was leaving)

1. Our rosters are deep enough that dropping more talented players for a "warm body" shouldnt ever really be an issue. If its a case of not wanting to drop a speculative player you like then that harkens back to the statement I made about extra flex taking away from strategy and tough decisions.

 

2. .05 is standard for QBs. I agree with this. 1 point per 20 yards or in some cases 1 point per 25. I honestly hadn't realized it was not.

 

3. Definitely need to address owners who state they are leaving. They should be locked immediately from roster moves outside of setting a lineup and a replacement search should begin right away. Better to replace them mid season and let the new person start working on the roster with no financial commitment. Would make the opening more attractive as well

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Absolutely against 5 points for home field playoff teams. There are many scenarios where a higher seed may only be a higher seed because of the division they were in. There is no home field advantage in FF. Yiu play for a bye week and your advantage, as a top team, is that you may get to play a weaker opponent.

 

If anything, I would propose getting rid of the 6th seed going to highest points regardless of record. That way the top seed doesn't feel shafted into playing a team who may only be the 6 seed because of bad scheduling luck during the regular season.

 

Also the idea of the #1 seed being able to pick their 2nd round opponent helps here as well

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Also the idea of the #1 seed being able to pick their 2nd round opponent helps here as well

 

gets to pick their 1st opponent (only one time anyway), as they get the bye week 1.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

12 hours for picks, we always do a family reunion in early August.

 

I am sure at your family reunions, there is much inbred focking going on.

 

We won't skip you for sex.

 

We never did for CBF

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Drop it to 4 pts qb and make the flex a super flex thats been a lot of fun being able to start 2 qbs in my other league adds a lot of strategery

 

Also since some of these pussies feel the need to keep 3 elite qbs and expect top tier talent for them at least they would be used

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Drop it to 4 pts qb and make the flex a super flex thats been a lot of fun being able to start 2 qbs in my other league adds a lot of strategery

 

Also since some of these pussies feel the need to keep 3 elite qbs and expect top tier talent for them at least they would be used

Weve all discussed this privately and voted it down. Thanks for the idea though.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

- if drop passing tds to 4, should raise yardage to either .04/yd or .05/yd

 

- not a fan of 2 qb/super flex

 

- am a fan of more flexibility for lineups

qb, rb, wr,wr, te, flex, flex, pk, d/st ........ or ......... qb, rb, wr, wr, te, flex, flex, flex, pk, d/st. happy to cap a max of 2 or 3 rbs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

QB superflex is horrendous. Been in one that we tried and tried to get a majority vote to change it but more than half the league was lazy.

 

Being able to flex a QB is basically making the league a 2 QB league as your average QB will score more points than your average any other position. It's also easier in a 10 or 12 team league to find a plug and play QB than any other position. There's actually little to no strategy involved.

 

I suppose it's slightly better in dynasty where most of the QBs are owned... but still way too easy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In favor of additional ir spots. 2 more sounds good. Against all other proposals except I dont care if league fees are raised.

 

We should have a date specified in the constitution when the rule changes discussion period takes place and a date when its voted on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

any changes happening?

 

I am in meetings with my trusted advisers. I will let you know what comes of it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have another proposal.... Player cuts = first day after last preseason game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×