Greg - Roster sizes?

dgamblnman · Post by **dgamblnman** » Fri Nov 11, 2005 5:57 pm

Originally posted by Gordon Gekko:
quote:Originally posted by Vega$ Gambler$:
Are you losing this year GG? (crosses fingers) vg - i'm doing about the same as your best season. go figure [/QUOTE]Do you even know my best season??? If you did, you never would have made such a silly remark little boy...

dgamblnman · Post by **dgamblnman** » Fri Nov 11, 2005 6:01 pm

Originally posted by Gordon Gekko:
quote:Originally posted by TamuScarecrow:
GG makes a great point about more losers not making for a large amount of repeat business. nag (loser from last year) stuck it out and he's in contention this year. shows you a blind squirrel finds a nut once in a while

in phil's case, he was a loser from last year, and he threw in the towel for this year. who would have expected that?

[/QUOTE]Is Ms. Emma getting her panties in a bunch???

Has anyone noticed that since his partner left (probably is partners idea), Gordo just isn't the same.. who was the real brains behind last yera??? makes you wonder...

Gordon Gekko · Post by **Gordon Gekko** » Sat Nov 12, 2005 12:27 am

Originally posted by Vega$ Gambler$:
Is Ms. Emma getting her panties in a bunch???

Has anyone noticed that since his partner left (probably is partners idea), Gordo just isn't the same.. who was the real brains behind last yera??? makes you wonder... phil - you were a loser from last year, and threw in the towel this year, right? correct me if what i just posted is wrong.

i wasn't the brains behind anything. i was just along for the ride and netted a nice prize at the end. that makes the story even better. thanks.

Eddiejag · Post by **Eddiejag** » Sat Nov 12, 2005 2:05 am

I Like the roster just the way it is especially for a 14 team league. To lose another roster spot would be hard to manage.IF anything add an extra playoff spot , 3 teams get in . That would give more teams a chance to get in the playoffs , just in case 2 teams run away with it. You could have another 5 ,6, or 7 teams playing for that 3rd slot.
Just my opinion.
I find the ultimate and auctions more fun, cause theirs so many ways to get in.Last year i won my last 7 games in a row , in the main event ,but not good enough even to get a playoff spot.
IF you have a tough time early in the main event your done.

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Sat Nov 12, 2005 4:04 am

Originally posted by Route C:
Greg

Has much discussion been thrown around the office to reduce roster size on draft day?
I was curious because I've seen it mentioned by a few owners in different threads.

I'm sure the debate would be fierce on both sides of the fence. I know the current rules and believe me, I'm not trying to stir the pot.
I just wondered if you've ever thought that cutting down the rosters by one or two spots
would make the FAAB more strategic throughout the year. Thanks for your thoughts on this!

Jeff There is no thought on my part to go to 16-man rosters. That's a given, not with 10 starting lineups and the bye week management. Expanding one roster spot for the playoffs has more chance than cutting to 16 roster spots.

There's very little consideration to going to a 12-team format in the NFFC. This is our niche and it presents a difficult format. I suppose we could be more profitable and more mainstream with a 12-team format, but this is our niche. The NFFC maybe isn't for everyone, unfortunately, because it is so difficult. I suppose any change is possible, but I don't see this one right now.

The FAAB pickups have been more scarce this year as far as producing franchise-turning players like last year, but with so many injuries it's been just as important as last year. I hear the ideas about 16-man rosters making in-season management more relevent, but it would also make things more of a crapshoot.

Phil, I have to agree with GG on this one. I've allowed you to post on our boards even after what happened last year and now you're not even competing in our event and trying to ridicule our past champion. Pay your bill and get on the boat or act maturely on my boards.

dgamblnman · Post by **dgamblnman** » Sat Nov 12, 2005 6:00 am

Originally posted by Gordon Gekko:
quote:Originally posted by Vega$ Gambler$:
Is Ms. Emma getting her panties in a bunch???

Has anyone noticed that since his partner left (probably is partners idea), Gordo just isn't the same.. who was the real brains behind last yera??? makes you wonder... phil - you were a loser from last year, and threw in the towel this year, right? correct me if what i just posted is wrong.

i wasn't the brains behind anything. i was just along for the ride and netted a nice prize at the end. that makes the story even better. thanks. [/QUOTE]Well Gordo, you pushed it... I will respond but be prepared becuase you won't like my answer...

I'm guessing you're asking about "throwing in the towel?". Unfortunately, my financial matters lies with my 2 girls which I received custody in a seperation last year (May 19, 2004). In a county where 98% of custody goes to the woman, I have them. The woman doesn't do drugs or have any felonies .... How is that for character? (it's gotta say alot about me) The court which is primarily female (the judge is female) I was given custody. I gave up my life so my children can have thiers. So unfortunately, I am unable to participate in ventures I want to do because all of my resources goes to my children. Once everything is settled and I catch up on alot of things, I will be back.

You call that "throwing in the towel"... I call it being a "being one Hell of a father".

PS- I don't think you want to get into a character debate with me....

[ November 12, 2005, 12:04 PM: Message edited by: Vega$ Gambler$ ]

Route Collectors · Post by **Route Collectors** » Sat Nov 12, 2005 6:27 am

Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:
There is no thought on my part to go to 16-man rosters. That's a given, not with 10 starting lineups and the bye week management. Expanding one roster spot for the playoffs has more chance than cutting to 16 roster spots. [/QB][/quote]

Thanks for the answer Greg. Next time I have a question I'll send you a PM. An extra playoff spot would be nice. For the record, I love this competition the way it's set up. It's too bad we can't discuss ideas on this board without making the current format sound flawed. I trust you will make the NFFC as fun and competitive as possible moving forward. Thanks again.

Jeff

TamuScarecrow · Post by **TamuScarecrow** » Sat Nov 12, 2005 4:31 pm

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

There is no thought on my part to go to 16-man rosters. That's a given, not with 10 starting lineups and the bye week management. Expanding one roster spot for the playoffs has more chance than cutting to 16 roster spots. [/QB]Thanks for the answer Greg. Next time I have a question I'll send you a PM. An extra playoff spot would be nice. For the record, I love this competition the way it's set up. It's too bad we can't discuss ideas on this board without making the current format sound flawed. I trust you will make the NFFC as fun and competitive as possible moving forward. Thanks again.

Jeff[/quote]

Didn't mean that the current system is flawed because it isn't but it doesn't hurt to throw around ideas that MIGHT make it better. Decreasing rosters by 2 and starting lineup by 1 running back is just an idea that has been thrown around before and resurrected now for further discussion. If Gerard and I can run a little local league with 12 teams, 14 roster spots, and 8 starting lineup spots, certainly what is being proposed here is reasonable and would make the draft much more interesting than watching running backs dominate the first 3 rounds while improving the FA pool. I don't think anyone would dispute how interesting the draft would become with only one rb starter and 16 draft spots is more than adequate considering most teams are only drafting one D and one kicker. 14 players for 7 spots is the same ratio as we have now, 16 players for 8 spots. Chew on it a while, Greg, as this would certainly make those drafting in 12-14 spots feel as though they were on an even playing field not having to draft two rbs to be competitive and losing out on the top wr's and te's.

ultimatefs · Post by **ultimatefs** » Sat Nov 12, 2005 7:16 pm

Well....

I've run 14-team leagues for 20 years now.

18 is right for this event with the way FAAB is set up.

I've used 18 to 21 at different times over the years.

Anything over 18 means just covering the extra TE and/or K and/or Def that you don't have now in most cases.

The out-of-the-blue sleeper FA picks are about the same in 18 or 20. maening just about the same amount teams would have drafted M.Barber in either scenario.

16 is way too low with all the bye week players that need to be covered.

Route Collectors · Post by **Route Collectors** » Sun Nov 13, 2005 2:03 am

Originally posted by TamuScarecrow:
quote:quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It's too bad we can't discuss ideas on this board without making the current format sound flawed. JeffDidn't mean that the current system is flawed because it isn't but it doesn't hurt to throw around ideas that MIGHT make it better. [/QUOTE]I definately wasn't referring to you Rick! Your presentation is fine IMO.