NFFC Message Boards

In our 11 years of running the NFFC, we have rarely if ever pulled free agents out of the player pool. Even in the national contests, we have allowed leagues to play out.

That being said, if ever there was a situation where we would err on the side of caution it is the Adrian Peterson situation right now. This is such a fluid situation that even the Minnesota Vikings don't know what they are going to do from day to day. One day they are suspending him, the next day they are reinstating him and the day after that they are putting him on something called the Commissioner's Exempt List. It's too fluid of a situation for the good of our contests and the way the Vikings are handling this leaves the door open for any possibility going forward.

With that said, as the 3rd overall player selected in NFFC drafts we will allow NFFC owners to cut Adrian Peterson going forward but we will NOT allow him to be picked up via free agency. Again, we have decided to err on the side of caution and let leagues play out without the third overall pick going into the free agent pool. We believe there is no guarantee that Peterson will miss the rest of the season and we want our national contests decided on level playing fields. Having some leagues with Peterson available in Week 3 free agency and not in all leagues just doesn't seem like a fair or even platform. Because of that -- and because nobody knows for sure if Peterson will be out 1 more game, 4 more games, 8 more games or the whole season, or if he will be cut in all leagues, no leagues or just a few leagues -- we've decided to take him out of the free agent pool if cut in the NFFC at anytime going forward.

We will continue to monitor this situation and all cuts going forward and make decisions that are best for all contests and to keep a level playing field for all NFFC leagues. We hope this makes sense before you have to make your cuts tonight. Good luck everyone going forward.

Perfectly handled as always...

I've argued this before, and pulling a player out of the pool is being aggressive, not conservative. Conservative is let the league play out.

As for the level playing field argument, I disagree with that too. Keeping him out of the waiver pool means that he will be rostered in some leagues (where not dropped), and not rostered in other leagues. That creates an uneven playing field from league to league, not a level one. A level playing field would mean Peterson is on someone's roster in each league rather than in purgatory in some and rostered in others.

kjduke wrote:I've argued this before, and pulling a player out of the pool is being aggressive, not conservative. Conservative is let the league play out.

As for the level playing field argument, I disagree with that too. Keeping him out of the waiver pool means that he will be rostered in some leagues (where not dropped), and not rostered in other leagues. That creates an uneven playing field from league to league, not a level one. A level playing field would mean Peterson is on someone's roster in each league rather than in purgatory in some and rostered in others.

Not trying to argue, but as far as him being rostered on some teams....... Well yeah he will be on the teams that drafted him in the 1st round

The Franchise wrote:

kjduke wrote:I've argued this before, and pulling a player out of the pool is being aggressive, not conservative. Conservative is let the league play out.

As for the level playing field argument, I disagree with that too. Keeping him out of the waiver pool means that he will be rostered in some leagues (where not dropped), and not rostered in other leagues. That creates an uneven playing field from league to league, not a level one. A level playing field would mean Peterson is on someone's roster in each league rather than in purgatory in some and rostered in others.

Not trying to argue, but as far as him being rostered on some teams....... Well yeah he will be on the teams that drafted him in the 1st round

... so if he comes back quickly, it will be harder to win leagues where he wasn't dropped. If he doesn't come back, those leagues will be easier to win. Makes the contest uneven league to league.

I can't imagine people dropping AP yet but this is probably the right call to remove him from the player pool. And I agree that this is much different than Gordon.


Wayne

kjduke wrote:

The Franchise wrote:

kjduke wrote:I've argued this before, and pulling a player out of the pool is being aggressive, not conservative. Conservative is let the league play out.

As for the level playing field argument, I disagree with that too. Keeping him out of the waiver pool means that he will be rostered in some leagues (where not dropped), and not rostered in other leagues. That creates an uneven playing field from league to league, not a level one. A level playing field would mean Peterson is on someone's roster in each league rather than in purgatory in some and rostered in others.

Not trying to argue, but as far as him being rostered on some teams....... Well yeah he will be on the teams that drafted him in the 1st round

... so if he comes back quickly, it will be harder to win leagues where he wasn't dropped. If he doesn't come back, those leagues will be easier to win. Makes the contest uneven league to league.

This is why this is a game of decisions; you win or lose based on your managerial decisions. This just happens to be a top 3 draft selection in a situation that has never been experienced before.
I don't own him anywhere; however, if I was an owner, I certainly wouldn't drop him tonight or even next week. I would wait for more information. I can't predict what will happen in this case and that is why I wouldn't drop him yet. IMO, unless you have terrible depth at RB, dropping him is a mistake. If dropped, he should not be locked and someone else would need to make a decision on what they want to do.

I am not in any of the national contests, but if I were, I would be very happy with this decision.

By not allowing him to be picked up, the team most affected is the team that decides to keep him or not to keep him.

It takes another level of luck out the contest.

If Peterson does play again, it removes the good/bad luck of being in one of the leagues in which he was dropped and then played.

If he doesn't play again, and someone blew all of their bidding dollars on him, it removes the good/bad luck of playing in a league that had one less team bidding for Free Agents the remainder of the year while the other teams are able to add more/better Free Agents before competing against the other leagues.

No one wants to be in the league where Peterson is dropped, is won for only $200 in bidding dollars, and then starts playing in Week 4.

Everyone wants to play in the league where Peterson is dropped, is won for $1000 in bidding dollars, and then never plays. In the meanwhile, the other 11 or 13 teams (12 or 14 team leagues) get to bid for Free Agents for the remainder of the year against only 10 or 12 teams instead of 11 or 13 teams.

Both situations are high in the good/bad luck factor.

Less luck, whether good or bad, is a good thing.

In my opinion, not allowing Peterson to be picked up is a good decision.

Mark
Follow Me

[quote="moyer1313"]I am not in any of the national contests, but if I were, I would be very happy with this decision.

By not allowing him to be picked up, the team most affected is the team that decides to keep him or not to keep him.

It takes another level of luck out the contest.

If Peterson does play again, it removes the good/bad luck of being in one of the leagues in which he was dropped and then played.

If he doesn't play again, and someone blew all of their bidding dollars on him, it removes the good/bad luck of playing in a league that had one less team bidding for Free Agents the remainder of the year while the other teams are able to add more/better Free Agents before competing against the other leagues.

No one wants to be in the league where Peterson is dropped, is won for only $200 in bidding dollars, and then starts playing in Week 4.

Everyone wants to play in the league where Peterson is dropped, is won for $1000 in bidding dollars, and then never plays. In the meanwhile, the other 11 or 13 teams (12 or 14 team leagues) get to bid for Free Agents for the remainder of the year against only 10 or 12 teams instead of 11 or 13 teams.

Both situations are high in the good/bad luck factor.

Less luck, whether good or bad, is a good thing.

In my opinion, not allowing Peterson to be picked up is a good decision.


agree very much. let's call it as it is......no matter how greg decided on this you were not going to make everyone happy. he made a decision that causes the least amount of problems down the road. he realized there was a choice to make and took care of it. can't ask for anything more.

Very happy with the quick decision Greg....although I am not in another companies contest this year, I did receive their email message today....I found it quite bizarre that they kept talking about skill involved and adding bidding on him or dropping him was skill.
To me, having him in the pool available for bidding is pure luck and speculation, not much skill involved at all. It would penalize guys that drafted for depth and someone gets lucky cause they took a chance and bid a bunch of $$ on one guy? seems like the right thing to do to me.

I am in a couple of other smaller online ones with ww after faab and as I was doing my NFFC drafts guys started picking up Josh Gordon on pure speculation of the news reports. Again, appears like a lot of luck involved.

Sometime you have to be lucky to be good, but you also have to be good to be lucky