2025: Items for review

[Bier Meister 1,714]

- schedule: 2 vs division, 1 vs other teams

- higher league fees

-payout for weekly high score

-payout for season high score (our regular season)

-discuss division

-add either roster or IR slot

[edjr 6,602]

I am oot. best of luck

[WhiteWonder 2,751]

I know this is just a list of items for review but we probably don't need a bunch of separate threads for each item where only 3-4 people will chime in anyway.

- Schedule:  2 vs division, 1 vs other teams.  .....  This should be a given since it is really a fix in the scheduling. It's how I had things set up on Yahoo but BL didn't carry it over when he created the ESPN version.   12 teams, 3 divisions, 14 regular season weeks sets up perfectly to play your division opponents 2X and all other teams 1X. 

 

- higher league fees:   sounds good to me but I am also of the mindset that if it's going to turn off too many people then we can keep it as is. I have enough leagues where I don't need this to be a higher stakes league if it's going to risk it falling apart or having to replace good owners with dbags. 

 

- high score payouts:    I think everyone knows my stance on those.  Bigly against them, especially weekly high score.  I think it just dilutes the pot which is better served going to podium finishers. Are we really going to waste $140 of the pot giving 10 bucks to the team who has the high score each week?  I've only ever seen that being useful if a league is trying to motivate owners from getting bored and being deadbeats if their team gets off to a bad start. We don't seem to have that problem. 

 

- Do we want to consider going to a system where you get a win or an additional win for being in the top 6 scoring for the week?  Edjr is really the only one who has cried about having a high weekly score but losing to the top team that week.  I'm probably against having the only wins go to the top 6 scoring teams because then there really is no point in divisions or head to head stuff.... but I am not totally against awarding a win for the matchup as well as an additional W for the top 6 scoring teams and an L for the bottom 6.  

[Bier Meister 1,714]

discuss divisions

add either roster spot or additional IR

[Bier Meister 1,714]

can we also update the site for 2025?

@bostonlager

@BiffTannen

@WhiteWonder

[BiffTannen 968]

Just now, Bier Meister said:

can we also update the site for 2025?

@bostonlager

@BiffTannen

@WhiteWonder

I reactivated the league. Not sure if we need to do more. 

[WhiteWonder 2,751]

• Once we have settled on 3 divisions (versus any alternative) I can play around with the scheduling to make sure everyone plays their division opponents 2x and other owners 1x. 
• With edjr gone from the league, I think we can probably strike down any form of additional wins for the top 6 point scoring teams for the week. No one else ever seemed to biotch about weekly luck of the draw in head2head format. 
• I really don't think any sort of high score payouts happen without higher league fees. I am good to let league members discuss and go along with what everyone wants.
• I am still against adding any additional bench or IR spots but gun to my head i'd rather add an IR spot.

[BiffTannen 968]

I'm good for whatever, but would like to see a shakeup in the divisions.

[WhiteWonder 2,751]

34 minutes ago, BiffTannen said:

I'm good for whatever, but would like to see a shakeup in the divisions.

So in my other leagues that do 3 divisions, post draft we draw A, B, C out of a hat. 

I am thinking we can use the dice roller again and just do top 4 rolls, middle 4 and bottom 4. I would suggest doing it post draft but since we are drafting near the deadline, we can go ahead and take care of this after the draft order is set. This way I have time to edit the divisions and redo the schedule as talked about earlier in this thread. 

[WhiteWonder 2,751]

On 10/18/2024 at 1:35 PM, Bier Meister said:

- schedule: 2 vs division, 1 vs other teams   < This will be taken care of 

- higher league fees  

-payout for weekly high score                                                 <--- These bolded items can't happen without increasing the league fees. There currently is not enough $ to waste on little weekly high score payouts.

-payout for season high score (our regular season)            

-discuss division      <  New divisions will be formulated

-add either roster or IR slot    < I am okay with adding an IR slot. Perhaps this needs to be put to a vote if people want to add one, or the other, or both.

 

[Bier Meister 1,714]

@WhiteWonder

agree about divisions/schedule

agree that we cannot offer weekly payout nor year end bonus without increasing entry fees

ok with division shuffle

definitely need one or the other. i might lean roster spot for the lingering  injuries that are not ir

[BiffTannen 968]

8 hours ago, WhiteWonder said:

So in my other leagues that do 3 divisions, post draft we draw A, B, C out of a hat. 

I am thinking we can use the dice roller again and just do top 4 rolls, middle 4 and bottom 4. I would suggest doing it post draft but since we are drafting near the deadline, we can go ahead and take care of this after the draft order is set. This way I have time to edit the divisions and redo the schedule as talked about earlier in this thread. 

I’m tired of butting heads with you and bier lol. The three of us need a vacation from each other. 

[Bier Meister 1,714]

14 hours ago, BiffTannen said:

I’m tired of butting heads with you and bier lol. The three of us need a vacation from each other. 

Yeah… work continues to consume me. 
 

I have been contemplating eding (or taking a year off)

[BiffTannen 968]

8 hours ago, Bier Meister said:

Yeah… work continues to consume me. 
 

In have been contemplating eding (or taking a year off)

We’d hate to see you go, but raiderhater is on deck. If you got things that need to be taken care of he would likely be willing to pinch hit and see where you are next year. 

[WhiteWonder 2,751]

On 7/25/2025 at 11:01 PM, Bier Meister said:

Yeah… work continues to consume me. 
 

I have been contemplating eding (or taking a year off)

I think he meant us being in the same division. Not that we actually but heads 

[Herbivore 1,134]

On 7/25/2025 at 12:43 PM, Bier Meister said:

@WhiteWonder

agree about divisions/schedule

agree that we cannot offer weekly payout nor year end bonus without increasing entry fees

ok with division shuffle

definitely need one or the other. i might lean roster spot for the lingering  injuries that are not ir

agree with this generally. don't think we should add a roster spot. we have 7 bench spots and 3 IR as it is. 

[WhiteWonder 2,751]

6 minutes ago, Herbivore said:

agree with this generally. don't think we should add a roster spot. we have 7 bench spots and 3 IR as it is. 

it was 2 IR in previous seasons.   I proactively added another IR for this season because I think adding an IR is better than adding another bench but was going to adjust based on what most others would like to do. 

I just personally don't like hoarding players we "have a feeling about". It depletes the free agent pool, and also makes decisions less difficult when it comes to maybe having to drop someone to cover a heavy bye week, etc. 

Adding 1 more IR spot helps guard against an influx of injuries and that felt like a solid compromise to me.

[Herbivore 1,134]

4 minutes ago, WhiteWonder said:

it was 2 IR in previous seasons.   I proactively added another IR for this season because I think adding an IR is better than adding another bench but was going to adjust based on what most others would like to do. 

I just personally don't like hoarding players we "have a feeling about". It depletes the free agent pool, and also makes decisions less difficult when it comes to maybe having to drop someone to cover a heavy bye week, etc. 

Adding 1 more IR spot helps guard against an influx of injuries and that felt like a solid compromise to me.

ok, I wasn't sure, looked back and saw the 3 IR, didn't remember that it was 2 last year. this is fine by me. I did have a lot of injuries last year with Godwin, Deebo, KWjr, but as it was the free agent pool was terribly thin. 

[Bier Meister 1,714]

11 minutes ago, WhiteWonder said:

 

I just personally don't like hoarding players we "have a feeling about". It depletes the free agent pool, and also makes decisions less difficult when it comes to maybe having to drop someone to cover a heavy bye week, etc. 

 

It’s not about hoarding.

 

while we all get injuries, last year I was well beyond the norm for extended time. 
 

aside from that, there should be room for a little speculation. 
 

I am all for discussing and voting = will of the league

[WhiteWonder 2,751]

Just now, Bier Meister said:

It’s not about hoarding.

 

while we all get injuries, last year I was well beyond the norm for extended time. 
 

aside from that, there should be room for a little speculation. 
 

I am all for discussing and voting = will of the league

Being plagued by injuries should be helped a bit by simply adding an IR spot. I am all for that. 

Perhaps hoarding is too strong of a word, but we all want to speculate on less heralded players. I always wish I had 5 extra bench spots to stash some guys I have a feeling about, as I'm sure lots of other owners do. That's why I sometimes call it hoarding. The desire to roster a number of speculative players and not have to potentially cut bait on them as you navigate roster management from week to week.  The biggest issue, as Herbie just mentioned, is how thin free agency and waivers becomes. As those speculative players gain relevance, they have already been "hoarded" onto rosters since the draft. 

I am just giving my take on it, not being combative.  If the majority of owners want 10 bench spots each, I will roll with what the majority wants. 

[Bier Meister 1,714]

3 minutes ago, WhiteWonder said:

Being plagued by injuries should be helped a bit by simply adding an IR spot. I am all for that. 

Perhaps hoarding is too strong of a word, but we all want to speculate on less heralded players. I always wish I had 5 extra bench spots to stash some guys I have a feeling about, as I'm sure lots of other owners do. That's why I sometimes call it hoarding. The desire to roster a number of speculative players and not have to potentially cut bait on them as you navigate roster management from week to week.  The biggest issue, as Herbie just mentioned, is how thin free agency and waivers becomes. As those speculative players gain relevance, they have already been "hoarded" onto rosters since the draft. 

I am just giving my take on it, not being combative.  If the majority of owners want 10 bench spots each, I will roll with what the majority wants. 

 

I am not completely disagreeing with you here. i think it is a mater of degree and margin.

teams who suffer less injuries have more luxury to carry speculative players.

a bigger roster "should" balance the WW issue.

[jerryskids 6,825]

I'm fine with the division/schedule change, division mixup (only my second year so, whatever).

I'd add a little to fees to pay the season high score, but it seems that momentum is against this.

I'll defer to you guys on another IR spot.  Seems like a lot for a redraft league, but whatever.

 

[WhiteWonder 2,751]

1 minute ago, Bier Meister said:

 

I am not completely disagreeing with you here. i think it is a mater of degree and margin.

teams who suffer less injuries have more luxury to carry speculative players.

a bigger roster "should" balance the WW issue.

I'm just chatting because I enjoy theory talk. 

I agree, teams who suffer less injuries have more luxury to carry, or hold onto, those speculative players. If injury is the main concern then the additional IR spot should help alleviate that. Especially as the IR spots can be used for any player designated as OUT. 

As for bigger rosters balancing out the WW issue, i'm not so sure. It certainly rewards owners who are better at identifying and hitting on speculative players... and while those owners should be rewarded, It might lead to less avenues for struggling teams to right the ship (via waiver priority or FCFS free agency), which in turn might lead to more teams being out of it earlier in the season.   If you whiff on all your late round speculative players, sucks for you, but now you are double screwed as waivers and free agency will be bare. 

 

but if we are talking about going from 7 bench to 8, I don't think that is so drastic. I just don't want like 10 bench spots and 3 IR spots, etc.

[Bier Meister 1,714]

13 minutes ago, WhiteWonder said:

I'm just chatting because I enjoy theory talk. 

I agree, teams who suffer less injuries have more luxury to carry, or hold onto, those speculative players. If injury is the main concern then the additional IR spot should help alleviate that. Especially as the IR spots can be used for any player designated as OUT. 

As for bigger rosters balancing out the WW issue, i'm not so sure. It certainly rewards owners who are better at identifying and hitting on speculative players... and while those owners should be rewarded, It might lead to less avenues for struggling teams to right the ship (via waiver priority or FCFS free agency), which in turn might lead to more teams being out of it earlier in the season.   If you whiff on all your late round speculative players, sucks for you, but now you are double screwed as waivers and free agency will be bare. 

 

but if we are talking about going from 7 bench to 8, I don't think that is so drastic. I just don't want like 10 bench spots and 3 IR spots, etc.