OK...I'll stick to the subject.
"Plug in highest scoring replacement players"
OK...do you meant average weekly score? (because that could be a player who filled in for a TE week 5 and got 14 points, and is now back to his bench roll.)
Do you mean the player with the highest total score? (he could be doubtful or questionable for the coming weekend, or have lost his job completely after a hot start/fill in start.)
As far as weekly prizes...
Now you either lower the league prizes for the real winners, or you increase the league entry and not give it to the ones who come in first. Not a fan of that, and highly doubt that a $100 weekly prize would be enough to sway a team that quit. Not to mention increased book keeping and check writing.
The guys who join Perry are usually not the quitter types.
As far as completely re-programming auto filled rosters pre-kickoff...it sounds like a bunch more overhead and money out the window.
Maybe because I've never in all my years been in a league with quitters who fail to set rosters...or maybe I'm very superstitious, often waiting until Sunday morning to set my lineup and would not want a computer setting it for me and influencing me.
What about when there are no replacements for the BYE week players on the bench? Does a big error occur? Does it crash, or simply alert the team via e-mail or blinking or red notice that they have an invalid lineup.
Would you program it to bid on free agents to fill the bye week spots? Who would you program it to drop? Relax...I'm being silly.
Would I go bonkers if I saw a Tuesday morning lineup set for the coming week that I didn't set? I doubt it. Are there really enough quitters to justify spending who knows how much money to set those lineups automatically? I have no idea how much it would cost to program, nor it the new programming would make errors, nor if it would select the right players to have enough impact to do anything but stop folks from going bonkers when they see opponents with bye week starters.
What about when good players want to save their bench and start bye week players on purpose?
Would that cause big errors?
Just brain storming Renman and KJ...that's all.
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
Sportbettingman,
No, that isn't the "subject" as it relates to your and my exchange, though it may be the subject of the thread... the SUBJECT is if it is VIABLE and REASONABLE to have a DISCUSSION about this topic without guys like you getting mad about it and disparaging those who care to have this discussion.
THAT is the subject/point.
I am perfectly fine with you playing devils advocate on ideas brought up to address this CLEAR and REAL problem. As a matter of fact I believe that is necessary to help create good ideas. Though I would ask why you seem to be so passionately fighting AGAINST any remedy to address quitter teams. You do it with such passion that it seems like it is a practice you are fond of. Are you?
As for your post. I am "relaxed" and I know you are being silly, which only further proves my previous points about how you are taking the simple/basic point off on tangents.
I think it is a good thing if we have an open thread where people and throw out ideas to address this problem that is so clearly a problem. Is it a HUGE problem? No. Last I checked we can still fix or improve on smaller problems to make something better.
With regards to some of your points. I don't see how any of the minor adjustments would cost much of anything, let alone require "major expense" as you seem to be outlining. All I am saying is there has to be a way to protect a league from a quitter team.
I will make up something of a remedy right now...
Maybe there is a "quitter team hotline" or thread here where a league member can report his concern (get it on record) that someone for an upcoming game is going to start a player(s) listed as OUT or on BYE with a viable starter on the bench. Maybe the other league members can be notified and vote on the proper viable option on the bench to be plugged in for the sake of competitive integrity. This decision is made.. the games kickoff, if that owner had not adjusted his team by kickoff the bench player that the league voted on ahead of time gets plugged in.
More often than not the bench player isn't going to be a serious fantasy option anyway. Or maybe this is a 1-8 team who just left a stud or 2 on bye that should be in his lineup.
Now that is a RAW idea that I just made up off the top of my head so don't bother nitpicking it because given 3 minutes I could probably pick it apart too. My point is we should be having discussions here among top level fantasy football minds to address this issue and very possibly a good/great idea could emerge.
I am not sure why having that discussion bothers you. It makes me ask why you seem so passionate about making sure occasional quitter teams can still hurt a fantasy football league and experience.
[ November 04, 2009, 08:34 AM: Message edited by: Renman ]
No, that isn't the "subject" as it relates to your and my exchange, though it may be the subject of the thread... the SUBJECT is if it is VIABLE and REASONABLE to have a DISCUSSION about this topic without guys like you getting mad about it and disparaging those who care to have this discussion.
THAT is the subject/point.
I am perfectly fine with you playing devils advocate on ideas brought up to address this CLEAR and REAL problem. As a matter of fact I believe that is necessary to help create good ideas. Though I would ask why you seem to be so passionately fighting AGAINST any remedy to address quitter teams. You do it with such passion that it seems like it is a practice you are fond of. Are you?
As for your post. I am "relaxed" and I know you are being silly, which only further proves my previous points about how you are taking the simple/basic point off on tangents.
I think it is a good thing if we have an open thread where people and throw out ideas to address this problem that is so clearly a problem. Is it a HUGE problem? No. Last I checked we can still fix or improve on smaller problems to make something better.
With regards to some of your points. I don't see how any of the minor adjustments would cost much of anything, let alone require "major expense" as you seem to be outlining. All I am saying is there has to be a way to protect a league from a quitter team.
I will make up something of a remedy right now...
Maybe there is a "quitter team hotline" or thread here where a league member can report his concern (get it on record) that someone for an upcoming game is going to start a player(s) listed as OUT or on BYE with a viable starter on the bench. Maybe the other league members can be notified and vote on the proper viable option on the bench to be plugged in for the sake of competitive integrity. This decision is made.. the games kickoff, if that owner had not adjusted his team by kickoff the bench player that the league voted on ahead of time gets plugged in.
More often than not the bench player isn't going to be a serious fantasy option anyway. Or maybe this is a 1-8 team who just left a stud or 2 on bye that should be in his lineup.
Now that is a RAW idea that I just made up off the top of my head so don't bother nitpicking it because given 3 minutes I could probably pick it apart too. My point is we should be having discussions here among top level fantasy football minds to address this issue and very possibly a good/great idea could emerge.
I am not sure why having that discussion bothers you. It makes me ask why you seem so passionate about making sure occasional quitter teams can still hurt a fantasy football league and experience.
[ November 04, 2009, 08:34 AM: Message edited by: Renman ]