FA thought

Ted's Cracked Head · Post by **Ted's Cracked Head** » Tue Nov 07, 2006 4:56 am

One thing I like in one of the other "Big $$" challenges is the the following rule:

12. Available Players: Teams may acquire players not on any roster within their league, with one exception. Players cut during Week 9 free agent bidding (November 3, 2006) and Week 10 free agent bidding (November 10, 2006) may not be re-acquired by any team. This is done to minimize potential collusion. On occasion, the commissioners may remove a dropped player from the free agent pool if the commissioners think it is in the interest of upholding the integrity of the league or the event. I would like to see something like this in the NFFC as a safeguard.

D-Day Heroes · Post by **D-Day Heroes** » Tue Nov 07, 2006 6:40 am

I Second That Motion...! Its all about integrity..!

TURBOUGH · Post by **TURBOUGH** » Tue Nov 07, 2006 8:12 am

Though I have never really thought about it, I also agree.

Ted's Cracked Head · Post by **Ted's Cracked Head** » Tue Nov 07, 2006 8:28 am

This rule has NO downside to the players or competition.

For the NFFC, I would say that any player dropped including and after the week 10 waiver period should go on the "Unavailable List".

King of Queens · Post by **King of Queens** » Tue Nov 07, 2006 8:51 am

The biggest problem I have with this rule is that teams can pick up players and waive them with the intent of blocking others from ever picking them up. If certain owners got together, they could pick up a group of kickers in Week 10, then waive them for the remaining kickers in Week 11, then waive those kickers in Week 12 for whatever they wanted. If a kicker went down for some reason, there would be no one to pick up.

Quahogs · Post by **Quahogs** » Tue Nov 07, 2006 8:59 am

Originally posted by Ted's Cracked Head:
This rule has NO downside to the players or competition.

For the NFFC, I would say that any player dropped including and after the week 10 waiver period should go on the "Unavailable List". so as a strategy during week 9 faab I drop 3 marginal backups and grab 3 low level/backup qb's. Week 10 I drop those 3 qb's (which are now unavailable) and grab 3 more backup qb's. I do the same for weeks 11 and 12. Week 13 I drop the 3 qb's and look for legit backups. So all by myself I took 12 qb's - the J.Campbells, K.Holcombs, L.McCowns, V.Youngs, etc etc out of the free agent pool. All with the intent to supress point totals given the frequency of qb injuries and benchings. This just doesnt seem right.

Q

Quahogs · Post by **Quahogs** » Tue Nov 07, 2006 9:02 am

Originally posted by King of Queens:
The biggest problem I have with this rule is that teams can pick up players and waive them with the intent of blocking others from ever picking them up. If certain owners got together, they could pick up a group of kickers in Week 10, then waive them for the remaining kickers in Week 11, then waive those kickers in Week 12 for whatever they wanted. If a kicker went down for some reason, there would be no one to pick up. said with a bit more clarity than my example

Q

Ted's Cracked Head · Post by **Ted's Cracked Head** » Tue Nov 07, 2006 9:07 am

The biggest problem I have with this rule is that teams can pick up players and waive them with the intent of blocking others from ever picking them up. If certain owners got together, they could pick up a group of kickers in Week 10, then waive them for the remaining kickers in Week 11, then waive those kickers in Week 12 for whatever they wanted. If a kicker went down for some reason, there would be no one to pick up.
Another Example against my previous thought,

It is week 10, I have used my FA cash well and have more than anyone - I need to fill a void and "have" to drop someone I wouldn't normally drop but do so because I know that I have the $$$ to get him back next week. The rule above would make this impossible. A rare occurance but possible.

King of Queens · Post by **King of Queens** » Tue Nov 07, 2006 9:10 am

Originally posted by Ted's Cracked Head:
This rule has NO downside to the players or competition.Care to retract this statement?

Ted's Cracked Head · Post by **Ted's Cracked Head** » Tue Nov 07, 2006 9:17 am

Thoughts on "blocking",

1) If you have that much room on your roster to block someone, you are no threat. ( ref the 3 player example )

2) What you are suggesting sounds a lot like collusion.
Originally posted by King of Queens:
The biggest problem I have with this rule is that teams can pick up players and waive them with the intent of blocking others from ever picking them up. If certain owners got together, they could pick up a group of kickers in Week 10, then waive them for the remaining kickers in Week 11, then waive those kickers in Week 12 for whatever they wanted. If a kicker went down for some reason, there would be no one to pick up. 3) I should have said no REAL downside.

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Ted's Cracked Head:
This rule has NO downside to the players or competition.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Care to retract this statement?