Where's the...
"HEY...wait a minute...why did I have to play vs. the team that had a healthy Owen Daniels, and the REST of the league from now on get to face that team without Owen Daniels...it's not FAIR!?"
I know, I know...that's stretching it, but it seems that the complaining and calls for rule changes are a year-round sport.
Eventually, you have an event whose rules are fair and sound...and you leave it be, making year-to-year comparisons real.
Changing rules so often really doesn't look good, and doesn't fix everything.
Change for changes sake casts an image on the league like it doesn't know what it wants and is at the mercy of the loudest crying.
[ November 02, 2009, 06:55 PM: Message edited by: sportsbettingman ]
what is the policy regarding inactiveness
-
sportsbettingman
- Posts: 1805
- Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2005 6:00 pm
what is the policy regarding inactiveness
"The first man what makes a move can count amongst 'is treasure a ball from this pistol."
~Long John Silver
~Long John Silver
what is the policy regarding inactiveness
Every time this topic gets discussed some people start making giant exaggerations like wanting to make moves for players who are doubtful or questionable... or distractions like the comment above about playing a team who lost their tight end when everyone else played teams with healthy tight ends (which obviously has nothing to do with the point, thread, or discussion).
I find that when people make these gross exaggerations they are usually doing it to draw attention away from the topic by taking the conversation off on tangents.
All that is being said (that I have seen) regarding this issue is that IF a team has a player starting in their lineup that is listed as OUT or on a BYE and they have a viable starting player on their bench... the highest scoring viable replacement on their bench should be plugged in. The positive that would come from this minor thing (that would only come into play very seldom) FAR EXCEEDS how much negative can come from when quitter teams ruin the competitive integrity of a high stakes fantasy league.
Occasionally people talk about this or mock this problem like it is really no big deal yet the issue comes up every single year. Why? Because this is a huge problem that truly turns off people in events when the stakes are high. If it was not a legit problem this exact conversation would not be found on this forum numerous times from 2005 until now.
I have to believe there are enough smart fantasy football (and computer) minds here on this forum for us to at least come up with some good ideas. Maybe this could be policed from within each league if the NFFC could come up with a rational way to do it. Maybe owners in a league can bring a quitter team or situation to the attention of others in the league and a consensus is made on a replacement. With a "for the good of the game" approach like MLB has allowing executive decisions to be made.
I am just throwing out ideas. The topic is ABSOLUTELY worth discussing. I also do not think that making changes that result in steadily streamlining this (or any) event to constantly make it an improving entity is a bad thing. This isn't change for the sake of change.. this is change for the betterment of the event. This is something that would further separate the NFFC from typical fantasy leagues. It would in no way make comparing season to season a problem.
This makes the NFFC more professional.
I would also make an announcement on this topic before every draft in every city reminding people this isn't a typical yahoo league where if your season goes bad you quit. That in and of itself would help too.
[ November 02, 2009, 11:40 PM: Message edited by: Renman ]
I find that when people make these gross exaggerations they are usually doing it to draw attention away from the topic by taking the conversation off on tangents.
All that is being said (that I have seen) regarding this issue is that IF a team has a player starting in their lineup that is listed as OUT or on a BYE and they have a viable starting player on their bench... the highest scoring viable replacement on their bench should be plugged in. The positive that would come from this minor thing (that would only come into play very seldom) FAR EXCEEDS how much negative can come from when quitter teams ruin the competitive integrity of a high stakes fantasy league.
Occasionally people talk about this or mock this problem like it is really no big deal yet the issue comes up every single year. Why? Because this is a huge problem that truly turns off people in events when the stakes are high. If it was not a legit problem this exact conversation would not be found on this forum numerous times from 2005 until now.
I have to believe there are enough smart fantasy football (and computer) minds here on this forum for us to at least come up with some good ideas. Maybe this could be policed from within each league if the NFFC could come up with a rational way to do it. Maybe owners in a league can bring a quitter team or situation to the attention of others in the league and a consensus is made on a replacement. With a "for the good of the game" approach like MLB has allowing executive decisions to be made.
I am just throwing out ideas. The topic is ABSOLUTELY worth discussing. I also do not think that making changes that result in steadily streamlining this (or any) event to constantly make it an improving entity is a bad thing. This isn't change for the sake of change.. this is change for the betterment of the event. This is something that would further separate the NFFC from typical fantasy leagues. It would in no way make comparing season to season a problem.
This makes the NFFC more professional.
I would also make an announcement on this topic before every draft in every city reminding people this isn't a typical yahoo league where if your season goes bad you quit. That in and of itself would help too.
[ November 02, 2009, 11:40 PM: Message edited by: Renman ]
-
sportsbettingman
- Posts: 1805
- Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2005 6:00 pm
what is the policy regarding inactiveness
All I see are a bunch of yearly rotating cry babies whose teams suck, and they need major help to get back into the H2H race.
These VERY SAME FOLKS will argue that POINTS are where it's at. (Yet their only shot in hell at a chance at the playoffs revolve around getting in via H2H record!) :rolleyes:
It happens right around this week every year...been here, read that.
Cry on, I mean carry on Walking Filibuster.
These VERY SAME FOLKS will argue that POINTS are where it's at. (Yet their only shot in hell at a chance at the playoffs revolve around getting in via H2H record!) :rolleyes:
It happens right around this week every year...been here, read that.
Cry on, I mean carry on Walking Filibuster.
"The first man what makes a move can count amongst 'is treasure a ball from this pistol."
~Long John Silver
~Long John Silver
what is the policy regarding inactiveness
Originally posted by sportsbettingman:
All I see are a bunch of yearly rotating cry babies whose teams suck, and they need major help to get back into the H2H race.
These VERY SAME FOLKS will argue that POINTS are where it's at. (Yet their only shot in hell at a chance at the playoffs revolve around getting in via H2H record!) :rolleyes:
It happens right around this week every year...been here, read that.
Cry on, I mean carry on Walking Filibuster. Hi Lance!
Count me as one of the "rotating cry babies whose teams suck and they need major help to get back into the H2H race. "
Except, my teams don't suck!!!
Quick look at those posting, offering solutions or asking this to be looked at again and I see 4 highly ranked Lifetime Standings members. Hmm, I don't think their teams sucked either!
Maybe something can be done about this, maybe not. Who really knows. But, what is pretty clear, since this "right around this week every year", is that indeed it is a problem.
-Jules "My NFFC Lifetime Standings would be higher, but despite numerous requests, my record breaking season continues to be left off" McLean
All I see are a bunch of yearly rotating cry babies whose teams suck, and they need major help to get back into the H2H race.
These VERY SAME FOLKS will argue that POINTS are where it's at. (Yet their only shot in hell at a chance at the playoffs revolve around getting in via H2H record!) :rolleyes:
It happens right around this week every year...been here, read that.
Cry on, I mean carry on Walking Filibuster. Hi Lance!
Count me as one of the "rotating cry babies whose teams suck and they need major help to get back into the H2H race. "
Except, my teams don't suck!!!
Quick look at those posting, offering solutions or asking this to be looked at again and I see 4 highly ranked Lifetime Standings members. Hmm, I don't think their teams sucked either!
Maybe something can be done about this, maybe not. Who really knows. But, what is pretty clear, since this "right around this week every year", is that indeed it is a problem.
-Jules "My NFFC Lifetime Standings would be higher, but despite numerous requests, my record breaking season continues to be left off" McLean
@RedRyder
what is the policy regarding inactiveness
Originally posted by sportsbettingman:
All I see are a bunch of yearly rotating cry babies whose teams suck, and they need major help to get back into the H2H race.
These VERY SAME FOLKS will argue that POINTS are where it's at. (Yet their only shot in hell at a chance at the playoffs revolve around getting in via H2H record!) :rolleyes:
It happens right around this week every year...been here, read that.
Cry on, I mean carry on Walking Filibuster. This post is a CLASSIC example of what I was talking about in my previous message.
For some unknown reason sportsbetting man is getting ANGRY (and literally, based on the tone of his post) that some DARE TO DISCUSS the idea of coming up with ways to deal with teams that quit and hurt the competitive integrity of a fantasy league.
What a horrible thing to do. How dare we?
Then, to DIVERT ATTENTION from the valid point and topic of discussion, he insults those who care to discuss it by implying they must be sub-par fantasy players.
For the record, regardless of how poor this season has been going, I will put up my career record in high stakes fantasy leagues up against most anyones and feel pretty good about it. The year I debated this the most I finished 5th overall in the event.
This has nothing to do with me "personally" because in all my years with the NFFC I cannot think of ONE TIME a quitter team has impacted me directly in a game or league. So your point about complaining about this because someone needs h2h help is nonsense, especially as it relates to me. However, just because it hasn't impacted ME YET doesn't mean it is a non-issue. See, I dont wait until things hurt ME PERSONALLY before I talk about them. If I see something that is a negative (no matter how small) on this event that I am fond of, I will likely talk about it.
This issue comes up EVERY SINGLE YEAR (as you accurately pointed out). But the reason it comes up every single year you are totally off base on. It comes up because it is a REAL ISSUE that turns a lot of people off and if there is a way we can lessen the problem shouldn't we at least discuss it among fantasy football experts?
Why is that a bad thing?
Jules,
Thanks for being a voice of reason. Am I nuts to feel this is a worthy topic to discuss? Mind you, it hasn't even impacted me in a high stakes event ever.
For the life of me I cannot think of a reason why THIS issue would be something anyone would be super sensitive about. Major rule changes (which this is clearly not) sure. I get it. Prize fund changes? Sure, I can see why people would be sensitive to that. But this? Is THIS issue that much of a hot button topic?
[ November 03, 2009, 08:14 AM: Message edited by: Renman ]
All I see are a bunch of yearly rotating cry babies whose teams suck, and they need major help to get back into the H2H race.
These VERY SAME FOLKS will argue that POINTS are where it's at. (Yet their only shot in hell at a chance at the playoffs revolve around getting in via H2H record!) :rolleyes:
It happens right around this week every year...been here, read that.
Cry on, I mean carry on Walking Filibuster. This post is a CLASSIC example of what I was talking about in my previous message.
For some unknown reason sportsbetting man is getting ANGRY (and literally, based on the tone of his post) that some DARE TO DISCUSS the idea of coming up with ways to deal with teams that quit and hurt the competitive integrity of a fantasy league.
What a horrible thing to do. How dare we?
Then, to DIVERT ATTENTION from the valid point and topic of discussion, he insults those who care to discuss it by implying they must be sub-par fantasy players.
For the record, regardless of how poor this season has been going, I will put up my career record in high stakes fantasy leagues up against most anyones and feel pretty good about it. The year I debated this the most I finished 5th overall in the event.
This has nothing to do with me "personally" because in all my years with the NFFC I cannot think of ONE TIME a quitter team has impacted me directly in a game or league. So your point about complaining about this because someone needs h2h help is nonsense, especially as it relates to me. However, just because it hasn't impacted ME YET doesn't mean it is a non-issue. See, I dont wait until things hurt ME PERSONALLY before I talk about them. If I see something that is a negative (no matter how small) on this event that I am fond of, I will likely talk about it.
This issue comes up EVERY SINGLE YEAR (as you accurately pointed out). But the reason it comes up every single year you are totally off base on. It comes up because it is a REAL ISSUE that turns a lot of people off and if there is a way we can lessen the problem shouldn't we at least discuss it among fantasy football experts?
Why is that a bad thing?
Jules,
Thanks for being a voice of reason. Am I nuts to feel this is a worthy topic to discuss? Mind you, it hasn't even impacted me in a high stakes event ever.
For the life of me I cannot think of a reason why THIS issue would be something anyone would be super sensitive about. Major rule changes (which this is clearly not) sure. I get it. Prize fund changes? Sure, I can see why people would be sensitive to that. But this? Is THIS issue that much of a hot button topic?
[ November 03, 2009, 08:14 AM: Message edited by: Renman ]
-
sportsbettingman
- Posts: 1805
- Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2005 6:00 pm
what is the policy regarding inactiveness
I never said the team owners suck...just their 2009 teams...otherwise they'd be in the hunt for points. Please read again.
How prevalent is quitting, really? How many teams truly would have made the playoffs had that team in question not quit? When you deduce this...is it based on maximising their bench? How many teams lose each week when they start the wrong players?
I've see this thread pop up every year for 8 years and nothing in this thread is a new idea.
Keep fighting to take away H2H like many threads do, and then all this fun of debating rules changes re: H2H will go away!
A little controversy is fun! Why do you think NCAA football doesn't do the playoff thing? They LOVE the buzz it creates with debate.
Hell...grant every-one's wish and make the ME a points only league. Heck...make it an auction league too! Then maybe the MB will be a ghost town with nothing but weekly updates of the 20 different leaders and weekly format winners, and Mr. Filibuster can write seven-paragraph posts to himself that could have been explained in one or two.
...and by the way...I wasn't angry.
How prevalent is quitting, really? How many teams truly would have made the playoffs had that team in question not quit? When you deduce this...is it based on maximising their bench? How many teams lose each week when they start the wrong players?
I've see this thread pop up every year for 8 years and nothing in this thread is a new idea.
Keep fighting to take away H2H like many threads do, and then all this fun of debating rules changes re: H2H will go away!
A little controversy is fun! Why do you think NCAA football doesn't do the playoff thing? They LOVE the buzz it creates with debate.
Hell...grant every-one's wish and make the ME a points only league. Heck...make it an auction league too! Then maybe the MB will be a ghost town with nothing but weekly updates of the 20 different leaders and weekly format winners, and Mr. Filibuster can write seven-paragraph posts to himself that could have been explained in one or two.
...and by the way...I wasn't angry.
"The first man what makes a move can count amongst 'is treasure a ball from this pistol."
~Long John Silver
~Long John Silver
-
sportsbettingman
- Posts: 1805
- Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2005 6:00 pm
what is the policy regarding inactiveness
Originally posted by RedRyder:
[QUOTE]-Jules "My NFFC Lifetime Standings would be higher, but despite numerous requests, my record breaking season continues to be left off" McLean Now THIS part I'll agree with! Get-R-Dun, Fanball!
Jules Rules!
[QUOTE]-Jules "My NFFC Lifetime Standings would be higher, but despite numerous requests, my record breaking season continues to be left off" McLean Now THIS part I'll agree with! Get-R-Dun, Fanball!
Jules Rules!
"The first man what makes a move can count amongst 'is treasure a ball from this pistol."
~Long John Silver
~Long John Silver
-
Old School
- Posts: 1084
- Joined: Sun Aug 10, 2008 6:00 pm
what is the policy regarding inactiveness
Originally posted by sportsbettingman:
I never said the team owners suck...just their 2009 teams...otherwise they'd be in the hunt for points. Please read again.
How prevalent is quitting, really? How many teams truly would have made the playoffs had that team in question not quit? When you deduce this...is it based on maximising their bench? How many teams lose each week when they start the wrong players?
I've see this thread pop up every year for 8 years and nothing in this thread is a new idea.
Keep fighting to take away H2H like many threads do, and then all this fun of debating rules changes re: H2H will go away!
A little controversy is fun! Why do you think NCAA football doesn't do the playoff thing? They LOVE the buzz it creates with debate.
Hell...grant every-one's wish and make the ME a points only league. Heck...make it an auction league too! Then maybe the MB will be a ghost town with nothing but weekly updates of the 20 different leaders and weekly format winners, and Mr. Filibuster can write seven-paragraph posts to himself that could have been explained in one or two.
...and by the way...I wasn't angry.
A little controversy is fun! Why do you think NCAA football doesn't do the playoff thing? They LOVE the buzz it creates with debate.
Umm....wrong. It's because of $$$. 99% of folks would prefer the NCAA playoff format.
...and I'd hate to read a post where you ARE angry
I never said the team owners suck...just their 2009 teams...otherwise they'd be in the hunt for points. Please read again.
How prevalent is quitting, really? How many teams truly would have made the playoffs had that team in question not quit? When you deduce this...is it based on maximising their bench? How many teams lose each week when they start the wrong players?
I've see this thread pop up every year for 8 years and nothing in this thread is a new idea.
Keep fighting to take away H2H like many threads do, and then all this fun of debating rules changes re: H2H will go away!
A little controversy is fun! Why do you think NCAA football doesn't do the playoff thing? They LOVE the buzz it creates with debate.
Hell...grant every-one's wish and make the ME a points only league. Heck...make it an auction league too! Then maybe the MB will be a ghost town with nothing but weekly updates of the 20 different leaders and weekly format winners, and Mr. Filibuster can write seven-paragraph posts to himself that could have been explained in one or two.
...and by the way...I wasn't angry.
A little controversy is fun! Why do you think NCAA football doesn't do the playoff thing? They LOVE the buzz it creates with debate.
Umm....wrong. It's because of $$$. 99% of folks would prefer the NCAA playoff format.
...and I'd hate to read a post where you ARE angry
what is the policy regarding inactiveness
Originally posted by sportsbettingman:
I never said the team owners suck...just their 2009 teams...otherwise they'd be in the hunt for points. Please read again.
How prevalent is quitting, really? How many teams truly would have made the playoffs had that team in question not quit? When you deduce this...is it based on maximising their bench? How many teams lose each week when they start the wrong players?
I've see this thread pop up every year for 8 years and nothing in this thread is a new idea.
Keep fighting to take away H2H like many threads do, and then all this fun of debating rules changes re: H2H will go away!
A little controversy is fun! Why do you think NCAA football doesn't do the playoff thing? They LOVE the buzz it creates with debate.
Hell...grant every-one's wish and make the ME a points only league. Heck...make it an auction league too! Then maybe the MB will be a ghost town with nothing but weekly updates of the 20 different leaders and weekly format winners, and Mr. Filibuster can write seven-paragraph posts to himself that could have been explained in one or two.
...and by the way...I wasn't angry. Sportsbetting,
-In the post Jules and I were refering to, you said nothing about 2009. Having said that, how good or bad someones team is or isn't doing has absolutely zero to do with the discussion. Hence this being a perfect example of my point that some try to create distractions from the point by taking the discussion off on tangents.
-How prevalant is quitting in these events? Prevalent enough to be an irritant to some people every single year that fantasy football has been in existance, and prevalent enough to be brought up every single year during the NFFC season since this event started. Thats pretty prevalant.
-Who cares about teams who lose by starting the "wrong" players. This is another "distraction" that has nothing to do with the point. This is about teams who start players on BYE or players listed as OUT for a game. Nothing more, nothing less.
-I have fought FOR keeping H2H against those who want to turn this event into a total points sprint or an all-play event where the essence of "a" game "versus" another team goes away. Again, you are wrong regarding my motives.
-Controversy is good in gimmicky lower level yahoo leagues where people can argue over how good, bad, or fair trades were. Controversy is NOT good for the NCAA, a steadily growing number of people continue to get more and more turned off by the NCAA's current gimmick format and I assure you we will see a playoff sooner than you think.
-Your last paragraph again was an effort to divert attention from the simple, basic, obvious point at hand. I think you do this because if you stick TO THE POINT, you can't think of a logical reason to argue against it.
This is a worthy discussion to have with reasonable, expert level fantasy football minds whether you like it or not. Since you seem to NOT like it, has it crossed your mind to stay out of the discussion?
[ November 03, 2009, 02:36 PM: Message edited by: Renman ]
I never said the team owners suck...just their 2009 teams...otherwise they'd be in the hunt for points. Please read again.
How prevalent is quitting, really? How many teams truly would have made the playoffs had that team in question not quit? When you deduce this...is it based on maximising their bench? How many teams lose each week when they start the wrong players?
I've see this thread pop up every year for 8 years and nothing in this thread is a new idea.
Keep fighting to take away H2H like many threads do, and then all this fun of debating rules changes re: H2H will go away!
A little controversy is fun! Why do you think NCAA football doesn't do the playoff thing? They LOVE the buzz it creates with debate.
Hell...grant every-one's wish and make the ME a points only league. Heck...make it an auction league too! Then maybe the MB will be a ghost town with nothing but weekly updates of the 20 different leaders and weekly format winners, and Mr. Filibuster can write seven-paragraph posts to himself that could have been explained in one or two.
...and by the way...I wasn't angry.
Sportsbetting,-In the post Jules and I were refering to, you said nothing about 2009. Having said that, how good or bad someones team is or isn't doing has absolutely zero to do with the discussion. Hence this being a perfect example of my point that some try to create distractions from the point by taking the discussion off on tangents.
-How prevalant is quitting in these events? Prevalent enough to be an irritant to some people every single year that fantasy football has been in existance, and prevalent enough to be brought up every single year during the NFFC season since this event started. Thats pretty prevalant.
-Who cares about teams who lose by starting the "wrong" players. This is another "distraction" that has nothing to do with the point. This is about teams who start players on BYE or players listed as OUT for a game. Nothing more, nothing less.
-I have fought FOR keeping H2H against those who want to turn this event into a total points sprint or an all-play event where the essence of "a" game "versus" another team goes away. Again, you are wrong regarding my motives.
-Controversy is good in gimmicky lower level yahoo leagues where people can argue over how good, bad, or fair trades were. Controversy is NOT good for the NCAA, a steadily growing number of people continue to get more and more turned off by the NCAA's current gimmick format and I assure you we will see a playoff sooner than you think.
-Your last paragraph again was an effort to divert attention from the simple, basic, obvious point at hand. I think you do this because if you stick TO THE POINT, you can't think of a logical reason to argue against it.
This is a worthy discussion to have with reasonable, expert level fantasy football minds whether you like it or not. Since you seem to NOT like it, has it crossed your mind to stay out of the discussion?
[ November 03, 2009, 02:36 PM: Message edited by: Renman ]
what is the policy regarding inactiveness
Originally posted by sportsbettingman:
I never said the team owners suck...just their 2009 teams...otherwise they'd be in the hunt for points. Please read again.
Lance, I'm leading my league by a decent margin in points. That doesn't change my view that it's beneficial to keep all owners involved 'til the end of the season.
Perry's gridiron league is a great example; with a substantial weekly prize that runs all season I doubt that anyone quits bidding for players or setting lineups.
I don't see why the NFFC or the other high stakes contest wouldn't want to look into providing such an incentive to keep all owners fighting 'til the end.
I never said the team owners suck...just their 2009 teams...otherwise they'd be in the hunt for points. Please read again.
Lance, I'm leading my league by a decent margin in points. That doesn't change my view that it's beneficial to keep all owners involved 'til the end of the season.
Perry's gridiron league is a great example; with a substantial weekly prize that runs all season I doubt that anyone quits bidding for players or setting lineups.
I don't see why the NFFC or the other high stakes contest wouldn't want to look into providing such an incentive to keep all owners fighting 'til the end.