NFFC Message Boards

Originally posted by 4D:
Again, it doesn't matter anymore, and I didn't agree with the way it was handled. Having said all that, I'll be back. Do you trust Lenny and Emil to make the right decision next time?

ugly yellow tomatoes, i think you're really on to something. once you start a precedent you have to be consistent. what happens the next time? great post.

Originally posted by King of Queens:
quote:Originally posted by 4D:
But now the high bid can be higher than someone otherwise would have made knowing where the winning bid was. And if the original winner has less money? I guess we'll never know. Right, this is the ONLY owner that loses in this deal. Unless these owners were spending all their money in Week 9 (WCOFF free agency goes to Week 11, so not very likely), they would be free to amend their bids upwards. Or downwards. Or delete them altogether.

Really, how many people were affected by the above scenario?

Now how many were affected by not having access to all free agents? [/QUOTE]I don't know how many people were affected in any way in any event. Who could have been on the wire in each league that would help at this point? The number of bids that were processed both this morning and this evening weren't many anyway, at least in my leagues.

Originally posted by 4D:
I guess I'm stupid - I told you, UYT - but in your example he would have gone to the $181 bid, not the $61. If Lucky had bid $51 and Lizard $40, then saw Joe bid $181, rebidding would allow either to bid more. And if Lucky was out of moeny he wasn't too Lucky. Especially if Joe was playing Lucky that week.

Again, it doesn't matter anymore, and I didn't agree with the way it was handled. Having said all that, I'll be back. My original example was poor ... I fixed it ... please reread it. Sorry ... Thanks

I was one affected by not having an opportunity at all and it is crap! The fact that they allowed this to go through is what has led me here and based on the logical responses given by the NFFC owners and the lack of logic shown by 50% of the WCOFF members and 100% of the men in charge is what leads me to believe that this is the place to be. Seems WCOFF has gotten to big to handle and they are going down in flames if this ruling stands!

Originally posted by King of Queens:
quote:Originally posted by 4D:
Again, it doesn't matter anymore, and I didn't agree with the way it was handled. Having said all that, I'll be back. Do you trust Lenny and Emil to make the right decision next time? [/QUOTE]Right decision is relative in this case. Because I didn't agree with it, does that make it wrong? If Greg doesn't implement bbds, is he wrong?

Originally posted by 4D:
quote:Originally posted by King of Queens:
quote:Originally posted by 4D:
Again, it doesn't matter anymore, and I didn't agree with the way it was handled. Having said all that, I'll be back. Do you trust Lenny and Emil to make the right decision next time? [/QUOTE]Right decision is relative in this case. Because I didn't agree with it, does that make it wrong? If Greg doesn't implement bbds, is he wrong? [/QUOTE]In the example ... Lucky knows not everyone got a chance to bid ... he knows his bids not safe ... he can still increase it.

The injustice to Hard Heads under the current solution is much more unfair.

Originally posted by 4D:
If Greg doesn't implement bbds, is he wrong? BBDS has nothing to do with Fair or right or wrong. It is simple another choice like Auction or Draft Champions or Random or KDS. All formats are fair ... some are just perfered more than others ... but lets not bring that topic in here ... PLEASE.

Originally posted by Ugly Yellow Tomatoes:
quote:Originally posted by 4D:
quote:Originally posted by King of Queens:
quote:Originally posted by 4D:
Again, it doesn't matter anymore, and I didn't agree with the way it was handled. Having said all that, I'll be back. Do you trust Lenny and Emil to make the right decision next time? [/QUOTE]Right decision is relative in this case. Because I didn't agree with it, does that make it wrong? If Greg doesn't implement bbds, is he wrong? [/QUOTE]In the example ... Lucky knows not everyone got a chance to bid ... he knows his bids not safe ... he can still increase it.

The injustice to Hard Heads under the current solution is much more unfair. [/QUOTE]Not if Lucky hasn't got any more money. But enough of this. I have to work on overtaking you in the Super Satellite.

Originally posted by 4D:
quote:Originally posted by Ugly Yellow Tomatoes:
quote:Originally posted by 4D:
quote:Originally posted by King of Queens:
quote:Originally posted by 4D:
Again, it doesn't matter anymore, and I didn't agree with the way it was handled. Having said all that, I'll be back. Do you trust Lenny and Emil to make the right decision next time? [/QUOTE]Right decision is relative in this case. Because I didn't agree with it, does that make it wrong? If Greg doesn't implement bbds, is he wrong? [/QUOTE]In the example ... Lucky knows not everyone got a chance to bid ... he knows his bids not safe ... he can still increase it.

The injustice to Hard Heads under the current solution is much more unfair. [/QUOTE]Not if Lucky hasn't got any more money. But enough of this. I have to work on overtaking you in the Super Satellite. [/QUOTE]You do realize in the original example ... if all the bids had been turned in an process when they should have Luck wouldn't have got Daniels ... Joe Shmo would have for 181 ... lol. Lucky isn't supposed to get him ... Joe Shmo is ... Lucky only gets him if Joe doesn't get to turn his bids in.

Hey ... I think they forgot to process my bids in the Super Satellite!