NFFC Message Boards

While I'm against it even in private leagues, if one team has to have the huge advantage of adding Denard Robinson, wouldn't you want it to be the highest scoring team (and thus most deserving team for what they accomplished for 13 weeks)? There's no question that the top scoring team should have that reward if someone has to. That's why I'm okay with Chad's proposal, even though I'm against playoff free agency idea in general.

I don't really buy into the contest needing to give more teams chances to win, I want the best team to win in a high stakes league.

Cocktails and Dreams wrote:If that seems like it would be too big an advantage(and most years a robinson situation probably wont happen) another option is to still give everyone a buck. However, if there are multiple bids on a player, then nobody gets the player. So in this case nobody would get robinson unless the other three already used their move. It also allows everyone to have a fallback emergency plan. I believe last year Santos went into diamond with 6 wides. Ended up with 2 healthy guys by the end. Just a miserable feeling not being able to do anything about it. Maybe this would be something you would be more comfortable with as the game operator. I know I would be more comfortable as a player with this in place, and it would not create a lot of extra work which some don't want. I think either option is better than ending it week 13 in contained leagues. Almost every league out there has free agency go through the end, and I think it should be considered here at the NFFC well Your contained leagues are really great already, and that minor tweak would improve them even more IMO.

Chad , maybe I am confused but if you need a rb and I need a kicker then what stops me from putting a bid on a guy like Robinson this week with a conditional bid on a kicker. This would block you and I would get my kicker.......just saying.

Everyone gets $1. The priority goes to the player ranked #1, then 2nd place, 3rd place. Etc. Multiple bids on one player gives the player to the higher ranked team, then contingent options are awarded the same way. With only one move available, I believe most would want to save their move for the position they need the most or save their move for the following week, if they really don't need someone. I dont believe there would be many who would use up their one move to block someone unless there is a stud who becomes available. I really don't think Denard Robinson would even be deemed a stud, with the possibility of only 1 week of playing time and other RB options available.

But if I am the #1 ranked team and I do decide to block someone, that is the benefit of being #1. Just like the end of the regular season, with the players that save their money to block teams they are battling with.

I think having the ability to fill a hole in the playoffs but only one hole, brings skill back into the equation because it would then be a choice of who they would want to use that move on.

Keep it as is.
I am not in favor of any team in a 3 week playoff run having a different player pool to draw from than any other team in the same playoff run.
We have 13 weeks to build our teams.

TOMDOG wrote:Keep it as is.
I am not in favor of any team in a 3 week playoff run having a different player pool to draw from than any other team in the same playoff run.
We have 13 weeks to build our teams.

We are talking about standalone leagues.

BLACKHAND wrote:

Cocktails and Dreams wrote:If that seems like it would be too big an advantage(and most years a robinson situation probably wont happen) another option is to still give everyone a buck. However, if there are multiple bids on a player, then nobody gets the player. So in this case nobody would get robinson unless the other three already used their move. It also allows everyone to have a fallback emergency plan. I believe last year Santos went into diamond with 6 wides. Ended up with 2 healthy guys by the end. Just a miserable feeling not being able to do anything about it. Maybe this would be something you would be more comfortable with as the game operator. I know I would be more comfortable as a player with this in place, and it would not create a lot of extra work which some don't want. I think either option is better than ending it week 13 in contained leagues. Almost every league out there has free agency go through the end, and I think it should be considered here at the NFFC well Your contained leagues are really great already, and that minor tweak would improve them even more IMO.

Chad , maybe I am confused but if you need a rb and I need a kicker then what stops me from putting a bid on a guy like Robinson this week with a conditional bid on a kicker. This would block you and I would get my kicker.......just saying.

I don't think you are confused, unless you would think that if you got a player, that your bids underneath would still block. They wouldn't if you already won a player. If we both needed those positions that bad then at the end of the day, we both would solve our problem. You would get a kicker. I would get some sort of running back, even though it isn't Robinson. It would be better than us both getting zero's in our lineup. Still think the original proposal I made is a little better. There are alternative methods to determine the tiebreaker order as well if we were to give it some thought. Giving the nod to the best regular season, would make those weeks matter a slight bit more. For those that play fantasy baseball, all those weeks matter a great deal. Not as much in fantasy football, so the edge of being able to get who you want if you did the best is a good thing the way I see it. I don't believe it would result in a deal like Robinson very many times anyway. Most times that top tiebreaker team would have a much more challenging decision.

It isn't that big of a deal though. These contained leagues are already great with the current rules. However, things should always be considered to make them even better. Greg and Tom usually do a good job giving new ideas some consideration. And the rare times that everyone wants something changed, they almost always change it in these contained leagues leagues it seems, unlike a particular fella across the street, who is just smarter than us minions, so he protects us from ourselves.

I hear ya.

JETS SB wrote:

TOMDOG wrote:Keep it as is.
I am not in favor of any team in a 3 week playoff run having a different player pool to draw from than any other team in the same playoff run.
We have 13 weeks to build our teams.

We are talking about standalone leagues.

Sorry,my bad.
I have no opinion on the stand alone leagues.

I might as well pile on and say totally against this.

Sabretooth wrote:I might as well pile on and say totally against this.

Do you even play in any stand alone leagues? If not, why do you care?