Auction rules gotta change

Gordon Gekko · Post by **Gordon Gekko** » Tue Oct 14, 2008 3:22 am

Originally posted by Route C:
Yes I disagree...if you want it to be meaningful then give all spots based on record. if it's gonna be combined then try to get the best 6 in. meaningful doesn't have to mean 100% record. if you make the change how you want it, then it will really just be for the most part a points league. i'm not saying that's a good or bad thing, but when the league setup is H2H, it doesn't make sense to me.

[ October 14, 2008, 09:24 AM: Message edited by: Gordon Gekko ]

Route Collectors · Post by **Route Collectors** » Tue Oct 14, 2008 3:32 am

Originally posted by Gordon Gekko:
quote:Originally posted by Route C:
quote:Originally posted by Gordon Gekko:
quote:Originally posted by Route C:
quote:Originally posted by Gordon Gekko:
quote:Originally posted by Ugly Yellow Tomatoes:
If you want H2H to be meaningful ... It needs to stay like it is. we have a winner!

[/QUOTE]Funny...when you're having a good season you go back to the "arrogant..I don't give a **** attitude about others concerns" but when your season sucks...you're full of ideas! :rolleyes:

You should try being open minded and having a positive discussion when it doesn't benefit you.

[/QUOTE]come on jeff - your post reeks of sour grapes.

back to your last comment, do you disagree with UYT and myself that "If you want H2H to be meaningful ... It needs to stay like it is." [/QUOTE][/QUOTE]sounds like you want to pass your "stress" on to others. as for hit and run, i think my initial post summed it up very well (see below). and i agreed with UYT, hence the winner comment. sorry if u are dealing with a lot of stress. i'm seriously not trying to add to it.

"No offense Jeff – But if a team can’t make it into the top 3 teams in points for a specific league, then maybe that team doesn’t deserve to be in the playoffs. In a H2H league setup, having the last two teams based on H2H record keeps more teams involved longer IMO." [/QUOTE]OK...yeah...that was my goal when I started this discussion...to pass out stress.

Look...when you've had ideas in the past I've been supportive...asked you questions and been a positive part of the discussion. you obviously don't feel the same way toward my idea so forget it.

I'm not going to be a part of some stupid pi$$ing match that detracts from the discussion.

I hope others will continue this in a positive way. I'm going to walk away now so that can happen.

Gordon Gekko · Post by **Gordon Gekko** » Tue Oct 14, 2008 3:41 am

Originally posted by Route C:
OK...yeah...that was my goal when I started this discussion...to pass out stress.

Look...when you've had ideas in the past I've been supportive...asked you questions and been a positive part of the discussion. you obviously don't feel the same way toward my idea so forget it.

I'm not going to be a part of some stupid pi$$ing match that detracts from the discussion.

I hope others will continue this in a positive way. I'm going to walk away now so that can happen. translation: if you don't support my opinion, don't post or else i'll call it a pissing match. :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

good idea on taking a breather. it sounds like you might need one.

bald is beautiful · Post by **bald is beautiful** » Tue Oct 14, 2008 4:05 am

As an objective reader of this thread, that is not the way Route C started this post at all. He did not say don't post your opinion - he asked you not to be arrogant, and that certainly is the way you are coming across. Sorry, but that is certainly how it reads.

I happen to agree with Jeff's point. Those last two spots should be on points rather than random win-loss records. I always want the last playoff spots in leagues to be on points rather than w-l records. It is much fairer.

Gordon Gekko · Post by **Gordon Gekko** » Tue Oct 14, 2008 4:24 am

Originally posted by bald is beautiful:
he asked you not to be arrogant, and that certainly is the way you are coming across. Sorry, but that is certainly how it reads. ROFLMAO

can you identify the parts of my posts which were "arrogant"? i'll try better next time, but need to know what you consider "arrogant"

Arrogant --> Having or displaying a sense of overbearing self-worth or self-importance.

mikeybok · Post by **mikeybok** » Tue Oct 14, 2008 4:29 am

Jeff ... I have your back here (although it might not sound like it).

If your going to have playoffs (I dislike playoffs) ... and your going to have H2H (I dislike H2H) ... and you want H2H to be meaningful, then you need a system that balances H2H with total points (Gekko worked out a system that is a good balance between the two). In order to be meaningful ... it needs to be able to have a top 6 H2H player knock out a top 6 total points player out of the playoffs (but not a top 3 points player).

With that said ... the auction is about making it to the 6 team crap shoot and getting lucky in the playoffs (we are not lucky ).

I personally like to take the crap shoot out of the equation. Rather than watering down H2H for a total points 6 player crap shoot ... we should lobby to either get ride of H2H, reduce payoff teams, or eliminate playoffs all together.

Personally ... You guys are talking like you want to keep others involved all season (that is fine for a home league). Personally ... I want the ability to mathematically eliminate bad/average/good teams ASAP. I want everyone in my league to be disinterested in my league if I am dominate (I hate the thought of dominating my league to lose in a crap shoot to team #6 ... been there ... don't like it)

Like NO LIMIT hold um ... no re buys ... best player wins ... you can get knocked out on the first hand ... I am not trying to keep 14 teams in it or interested ... not even 6! If team #6 can win ... then team #1 can lose ... that sucks.

Ugly

[ October 14, 2008, 10:32 AM: Message edited by: Ugly Yellow Tomatoes ]

Gordon Gekko · Post by **Gordon Gekko** » Tue Oct 14, 2008 4:49 am

Originally posted by Ugly Yellow Tomatoes:
If your going to have playoffs (I dislike playoffs) ... and your going to have H2H (I dislike H2H) ... and you want H2H to be meaningful, then you need a system that balances H2H with total points (Gekko worked out a system that is a good balance between the two). In order to be meaningful ... it needs to be able to have a top 6 H2H player knock out a top 6 total points player out of the playoffs (but not a top 3 points player).
now how do i say i agree with all of this without sounding arrogant?

"well said UYT."

bald is beautiful · Post by **bald is beautiful** » Tue Oct 14, 2008 4:50 am

Originally posted by Gordon Gekko:
quote:Originally posted by bald is beautiful:
he asked you not to be arrogant, and that certainly is the way you are coming across. Sorry, but that is certainly how it reads. ROFLMAO

can you identify the parts of my posts which were "arrogant"? i'll try better next time, but need to know what you consider "arrogant"

Arrogant --> Having or displaying a sense of overbearing self-worth or self-importance. [/QUOTE]Thanks for the definition...as if 7 years of higher education were not enough for me to know what arrogant means. But since you want to go there, let's try this one from Merriam-Webster's Online Dictionary: "exaggerating or disposed to exaggerate one's own worth or importance often by an overbearing manner."

Overbearing is how you often post just so you can beat down differing opinions.

So here are your examples:

1.Originally posted by Route C:
IMO there would be equal interest and involvement fighting for the last 2 spots based on points. Again that's just my opinion.
________________________________________
Your response - "highly doubtful"

That's exaggerating, and overbearing. As if Jeff's opinion does not matter. Guess what - I agree with Jeff, so that's two people already.

2. Originally posted by Ugly Yellow Tomatoes:
If you want H2H to be meaningful ... It needs to stay like it is.
________________________________________

Your response - "we have a winner!"

As if only your opinion is the only one which can "win" and be correct. Exaggerating and overbearing to prove your own importance of being correct.

3. a) "sounds like you want to pass your "stress" on to others." b) "your post reeks of sour grapes."

Not arrogant. Just unnecessary and rude.

If you want to foster discussion of rule changes, football, etc. as you claim, and not have "venom", then simply disagree. 80%-90% of the message board posters do this.

Gordon Gekko · Post by **Gordon Gekko** » Tue Oct 14, 2008 4:51 am

Originally posted by SNAKE:
quote:Originally posted by bald is beautiful:
As an objective reader of this thread, that is not the way Route C started this post at all. He did not say don't post your opinion - he asked you not to be arrogant, and that certainly is the way you are coming across. Sorry, but that is certainly how it reads. ...a cancer, an absolute cancer to this MB and the biggest roadblock standing in the way of acheiving true MB peace and harmony...ladies and gents, The Serpent presents to you: GiGi Le Femme...SNAKE [/QUOTE]greg - just tried to call you regarding snake. i'll try again this afternoon. he is trying to instigate trouble on the MB AGAIN!

as we've discussed before, b4 you know it some of the key NFFC MB contributors could find a different MB to post on because of one reason...snake.