Week 6 Drops

Quahogs · Post by **Quahogs** » Sat Oct 20, 2007 4:46 am

Originally posted by Raiders:
Greg, Why are you not taking Eli off the roster in question?
Go by the rest of the bids. Means NOTHING that He got Eli and now you remove Eli.
Leroy's Aces had no idea that He would get Eli.
So remove Eli and go by the rest of the bids.

Pretty easy if you ask me.

You can't do that. Bids were constructed, faab strategies formulated with E.Manning in mind. Taking Eli out and moving to the next free agent doesnt change the fact that MANY bids were created with the knowledge he was available.

Leroy's Aces · Post by **Leroy's Aces** » Sat Oct 20, 2007 4:47 am

Originally posted by Raiders:
Greg, Why are you not taking Eli off the roster in question?
Go by the rest of the bids. Means NOTHING that He got Eli and now you remove Eli.
Leroy's Aces had no idea that He would get Eli.
So remove Eli and go by the rest of the bids.

Pretty easy if you ask me.

It is because if Eli was removed from the player pool prior to waiver processing, I would have bid on Leftwich and Boller at QB, gotten a better bye week defense than the Lions (due to having more dough), bid on Michael Bennett, Priest Holmes, and Ted Ginn, Jr. I had $369 left and would have gotten Bennett, Leftwich, Boller and a better defense like Seattle if Eli Manning were not available.

Dave
Leroy's Aces

[ October 20, 2007, 10:47 AM: Message edited by: Leroy's Aces ]

mkrucek · Post by **mkrucek** » Sat Oct 20, 2007 4:49 am

Originally posted by Raiders:
Greg, Why are you not taking Eli off the roster in question?
Go by the rest of the bids. Means NOTHING that He got Eli and now you remove Eli.
Leroy's Aces had no idea that He would get Eli.
So remove Eli and go by the rest of the bids.

Pretty easy if you ask me.

Do you really not get how everyone in the league would have bid differently with Eli not available? It's over, move on.

mkrucek · Post by **mkrucek** » Sat Oct 20, 2007 4:50 am

Originally posted by Leroy's Aces:
quote:Originally posted by Raiders:
Greg, Why are you not taking Eli off the roster in question?
Go by the rest of the bids. Means NOTHING that He got Eli and now you remove Eli.
Leroy's Aces had no idea that He would get Eli.
So remove Eli and go by the rest of the bids.

Pretty easy if you ask me.

It is because if Eli was removed from the player pool prior to waiver processing, I would have bid on Leftwich and Boller at QB, gotten a better bye week defense than the Lions (due to having more dough), bid on Michael Bennett, Priest Holmes, and Ted Ginn, Jr. I had $369 left and would have gotten Bennett, Leftwich, Boller and a better defense like Seattle if Eli Manning were not available.

Dave
Leroy's Aces [/QUOTE]Dave, when you say "better defense" and "Seattle" it does nothing to bolster your case.

Sebadiah23 · Post by **Sebadiah23** » Sat Oct 20, 2007 4:53 am

Eli Manning happened to have a great week 7, but before that, before he was dropped, he really wasn't doing anything special. He was a backup QB for many people.

Week Date Opp Score QBRat Comp Att Yds Y/A Lng Int TD Att Yds Y/A Lng TD Sack SackYds Fum FumL
3 Sep 23 @ WAS W 24-17 63.7 21 36 232 6.4 33 2 1 1 -1 -1.0 -1 0 2 13 1 1
4 Sep 30 PHI W 16-3 65.4 14 26 135 5.2 19 1 1 3 -5 -1.7 -1 0 1 6 0 0
5 Oct 7 NYJ W 35-24 86.4 13 25 186 7.4 53 1 2 4 17 4.3 13 0 0 0 0 0

It's very easy to complain after he has a great game that bumps him back into QB1 status.

renman · Post by **renman** » Sat Oct 20, 2007 4:54 am

In an ironic twist, that owner who picked up DeAngelo Williams last year in the main event was able to pick him up AGAIN this year, this week, in an auction league... Obviously not an issue due to it being an isolated league where all owners had the same access to said player... just an odd bit of irony.

Regarding "manning-gate" 2007. Anyone who has been a part of fantasy football for many years (that includes most here) understands that our game is always a work in progress. 3 years ago would anyone be able to see how great KDS/3RR would be? This is a constantly changing entity. New issues will pop up from year to year that put great pressure on a commissioner to make rulings and ultimately mold league rules and formats to protect and improve the product.

This issue is one of them. I have always been one who has thought that league rules have to be as cut/dry and black/white as possible. Something like this has quite a big gray area that requires Greg/Tom to make arbitrary decisions that can be debated. Leroys Aces makes a great point comparing D. Garrard and his production this year to Eli Manning. When we get down to it should players be pulled from the player pool based on name, pedigree or past history? Who is more deserving of being pulled from the pool, M Bennett or L Maroney? D. Bowe or L Evans?

I think Greg did the absolute right thing by going back and looking at the overall transaction, by both the team who dropped Manning and the team who picked him up. Collusion is the main thing we are trying to keep out of the event with rules like this and Greg would have been able to see signs of it by investigating the move.

Maybe we can take this thread now and again improve this event by coming up with clearer cut ways to address this issue... I also think we can all get more professional on this board. I was personally attacked last year when I picked up DeAngelo Williams (who was not even a starter and was simply a well known name on everyone's sleeper list and had potential that has to this day still not been reached) and defended the move. This was when there were no rule in place for such drops. When money is involved and integrity gets called into question or mocking tone become the theme of posts things go bad. I for one know I have been part of a few of those exchanges and will do what I can to not be part of them going forward. Those kind of things turn me off to this board and I am sure others get turned off too. Hopefully we can do a better job of avoiding that here going forward.

Raiders · Post by **Raiders** » Sat Oct 20, 2007 4:54 am

Originally posted by Leroy's Aces:
quote:Originally posted by Raiders:
Greg, Why are you not taking Eli off the roster in question?
Go by the rest of the bids. Means NOTHING that He got Eli and now you remove Eli.
Leroy's Aces had no idea that He would get Eli.
So remove Eli and go by the rest of the bids.

Pretty easy if you ask me.

It is because if Eli was removed from the player pool prior to waiver processing, I would have bid on Leftwich and Boller at QB, gotten a better bye week defense than the Lions (due to having more dough), bid on Michael Bennett, Priest Holmes, and Ted Ginn, Jr. I had $369 left and would have gotten Bennett, Leftwich, Boller and a better defense like Seattle if Eli Manning were not available.

Dave
Leroy's Aces [/QUOTE]Gotcha. Now I see why Greg has to let it go.
Good Luck! Don't understand why Eli was cut, but maybe thats my problem. Holding onto Him.

Again Good Luck!

Leroy's Aces · Post by **Leroy's Aces** » Sat Oct 20, 2007 4:56 am

Greg, I apologize for getting upset over this issue. It is not fair to me as a fantasy player that a certain person publicly flames me and states that my team and somehow my integrity is now compromised because I followed the NFFC rules as a player and bid on a player available, as did my 13 leaguemates - without any complaint prior to doing so.

I do not think a mid-level QB like Eli should have been removed from the pool. There are still 5 starting QBs for this week available on my waiver pool. Granted Manning was easily the best of that bunch, but if QBs were so important, then they would be rostered.

If Eli truly should have been removed from the free agent pool, then, based on Eli's average PPG, Derek Anderson, Cleo Lemon and David Garrard are players that should be removed from the free agent pool going forward as long as they are healthy and starting. What PPG average is the baseline, 15 or so? Again, Garrard was cut and was available until last week, and he averages 20.3 PPG - Manning 21.

Good luck everyone this week.

Raiders · Post by **Raiders** » Sat Oct 20, 2007 4:56 am

Originally posted by 4D:
quote:Originally posted by Raiders:
Greg, Why are you not taking Eli off the roster in question?
Go by the rest of the bids. Means NOTHING that He got Eli and now you remove Eli.
Leroy's Aces had no idea that He would get Eli.
So remove Eli and go by the rest of the bids.

Pretty easy if you ask me.

Do you really not get how everyone in the league would have bid differently with Eli not available? It's over, move on. [/QUOTE]

Raiders · Post by **Raiders** » Sat Oct 20, 2007 4:58 am

Originally posted by Leroy's Aces:
Greg, I apologize for getting upset over this issue. It is not fair to me as a fantasy player that a certain person publicly flames me and states that my team and somehow my integrity is now compromised because I followed the NFFC rules as a player and bid on a player available, as did my 13 leaguemates - without any complaint prior to doing so.

I do not think a mid-level QB like Eli should have been removed from the pool. There are still 5 starting QBs for this week available on my waiver pool. Granted Manning was easily the best of that bunch, but if QBs were so important, then they would be rostered.

If Eli truly should have been removed from the free agent pool, then, based on Eli's average PPG, Derek Anderson, Cleo Lemon and David Garrard are players that should be removed from the free agent pool going forward as long as they are healthy and starting. What PPG average is the baseline, 15 or so? Again, Garrard was cut and was available until last week, and he averages 20.3 PPG - Manning 21.

Good luck everyone this week. Sorry I thought this was about Achie Manning.
My bad.