UFAAB - Universal Free_Agent_Acquisition_Budget

King of Queens · Post by **King of Queens** » Wed Jul 05, 2006 6:54 am

It's an interesting, fairly-well thought out concept. The league vs. overall aspect of this contest is one that will always pose elements of unfairness. In addition to imbalanced availability of free agents, you also have leagues with a higher percentage of "weaker" (I'll use this word in quotes so as not to annoy Greg) owners. UFAAB might help with some of this perceived or reality-based inequity, but as been posited here by many, there are too many "discomforts" that would be caused by it. And no, it's not a simple matter of getting used to it (a la FAAB) -- this idea comes into complete conflict with the league-based NFFC ideology. In addition, much like orange juice on Cheerios, it simply goes too far against the grain to be palatable for most.

On a related note, I think we would all love to win the $100,000, but winning our league is the first order of business. One of the best aspects of the NFFC is that it combines the big contest feel (and money) of a CDM league with the rub-it-in-your-face flavor of a local league. I think that's one of the reasons that Greg is so in favor of H2H. Here, you really do get the best of both worlds.

Coming up with progressive ideas like UFAAB is exactly what makes this group so strong. However good the intentions of the idea, I believe this is one that will not fly with the masses.

eddiejag44 · Post by **eddiejag44** » Wed Jul 05, 2006 10:38 am

Well said king of queens, the league itself is 1st .Im the one who grabbed GADO in the ultimate for a dollar, when the following week he went 150 to 700 dollars.I also did do some blocking in the ultimate on another team who blew his money and needed a QB, NO way he was getting one and had to play kyle boller for the playoffs.
I enjoy it just the way it is, and looks like a lot of other people do too.

RiFF · Post by **RiFF** » Wed Jul 05, 2006 1:01 pm

After the draft is complete, in a H2H contest, a major strategic factor, if not the most significant factor is management of the FA budget. To maintain the competitive/strategic balance of each league, along with its integrity, in this format it would seem that the same player shouldn't/couldn't be on more than one team in each league. All the frustrations you listed, all of them valid, are just part of managing the FA budget. Do you go after a "hot" FA early at the peril of not being able to replace an injured or bye week player later in the season? Do you pick up a backup to one of your starters this week after he was waived the previous week. All these types of strategic decisions would be "watered-down" if you had 20 possible shots at them instead of one. Although, it would certainly make the management of the FA budget easier. Also, how would you police possible collusion? That is, you or your buddy has a team in a different league. He starts waiving players that will substantially strengthen your team. Knowing this was about to occur you have saved your FA dollars to pick up each of these players. What if this player(S) was already on your team; could you have more than one of the same player? What if this occurred in multiple leagues, could your 3 RB's all be Larry Johnson? Just a couple of quick observations without giving the idea a lot of thought.

One of the reasons I believe BBDS is such a unique idea is because of the added strategic value it adds to the FA process. It seems to me, that the idea of a "universal FA" process would actually do the opposite of BBDS by detracting from FA strategically (assuming you could overcome all the logistical hurdles).

King of Queens · Post by **King of Queens** » Wed Jul 05, 2006 3:17 pm

Originally posted by RiFF:
After the draft is complete, in a H2H contest, a major strategic factor, if not the most significant factor is management of the FA budget. To maintain the competitive/strategic balance of each league, along with its integrity, in this format it would seem that the same player shouldn't/couldn't be on more than one team in each league. All the frustrations you listed, all of them valid, are just part of managing the FA budget. Do you go after a "hot" FA early at the peril of not being able to replace an injured or bye week player later in the season? Do you pick up a backup to one of your starters this week after he was waived the previous week. All these types of strategic decisions would be "watered-down" if you had 20 possible shots at them instead of one. Although, it would certainly make the management of the FA budget easier. Also, how would you police possible collusion? That is, you or your buddy has a team in a different league. He starts waiving players that will substantially strengthen your team. Knowing this was about to occur you have saved your FA dollars to pick up each of these players. What if this player(S) was already on your team; could you have more than one of the same player? What if this occurred in multiple leagues, could your 3 RB's all be Larry Johnson? Just a couple of quick observations without giving the idea a lot of thought.Some good points, except for the collusion. Greg would remove these players from the free agent pool, making it impossible for anyone to benefit from such a move.

Originally posted by RiFF:
One of the reasons I believe BBDS is such a unique idea is because of the added strategic value it adds to the FA process. It seems to me, that the idea of a "universal FA" process would actually do the opposite of BBDS by detracting from FA strategically (assuming you could overcome all the logistical hurdles). I have to agree with this as well.

Gordon Gekko · Post by **Gordon Gekko** » Thu Jul 06, 2006 3:36 am

Originally posted by Captain Hook:
This is a truly terrible idea for the NFFC which is divided into LEAGUES.

Back to the drawing board lizard thanks for the constuctive criticism. back to the basement for hook

Gordon Gekko · Post by **Gordon Gekko** » Thu Jul 06, 2006 3:37 am

thanks for the comments guys. i'm in ocean city for the week, so i'll respond in more detail this weekend or next week.

TamuScarecrow · Post by **TamuScarecrow** » Thu Jul 06, 2006 9:36 am

Strategy killer, GG. Would not want any part of this as this rewards the slow-thinking, conservative owner. Why reward the owner who has only 2 qbs on his roster, both on the same NFL team and 1 hurt, and 8 wrs? The intelligent owner picks up that extra qb to cover his team while the risk-taker doesn't. All part of the game, isn't that right, Diesel?

Gordon Gekko · Post by **Gordon Gekko** » Sun Jul 09, 2006 2:05 pm

Originally posted by BillyWaz:
You now would be getting into "this league is easier because they don't have 5 Samkon Gado's", etc. THIS WOULD COMPLETELY MESS UP THE TOTAL POINTS THAT EVERYONE TAKES INTO THE PLAYOFFS!!!!That would create a TON of bitching by other leagues, and I feel it would cause even MORE people to "give up" on thier teams midway through the season.
i think most of your arguements are crap-based, but that is only my opinion. i chalk that up to fear of the unknown. if everyone has a chance at every free agent, isn't that the FAIREST way to allocate free agents?

please tell me how the current FAAB is more fair than the proposed UFAAB while addressing the following two situations. thanks.

1. A good player (B.Favre, B.Roethlisberger, L.Johnson, J.Bettis) was dropped in another league AND is not available in your league.

2. You had the 2nd highest bid on a player (available in all 20 leagues ), but unfortunately, the owner with the single highest bid in the entire NFFC came from, you guessed it, your league? you bid $150, but lost out to someone bidding $151. all of the other 19 winning bids came in under $150.

[ July 09, 2006, 09:01 PM: Message edited by: Gordon Gekko ]

Gordon Gekko · Post by **Gordon Gekko** » Sun Jul 09, 2006 2:09 pm

Originally posted by Tamuscarecrow:
Strategy killer, GG. Would not want any part of this as this rewards the slow-thinking, conservative owner. Why reward the owner who has only 2 qbs on his roster, both on the same NFL team and 1 hurt, and 8 wrs? The intelligent owner picks up that extra qb to cover his team while the risk-taker doesn't. All part of the game, isn't that right, Diesel? please detail how this is a strategy killer.

what about the owner who gets to pick up larry johnson (only available in one league) in week 13 and rides him to the 100K?

Gordon Gekko · Post by **Gordon Gekko** » Sun Jul 09, 2006 2:11 pm

Originally posted by BillyWaz:
It completely takes away the 14 team league concept and it DOES make it a contest to where you are playing against everyone.
hasn't the lighbulb gone off yet. YOU ARE PLAYING AGAINST EVERYONE!!!

while it's nice to have, i'm certainly not playing this event for the 5K league title. i can get that in my local league, without having to pay the "overhead" costs. i play for the 100K.