NFFC Rules Discussion For 2013

[kjduke]

I've adjusted to the FAAB setup, I'd leave it as it is this season. Adding player points to return TDs is ok.

[King of Queens]

Would bridge the gap between those that want more time(which is a big reason for wanting the Thursday players only system for many) and still allowing for conditional bids to be made properly like many others want.

Bigger issue is not knowing your specific team needs on Wednesday due to questionable statuses or late-week downgrades. It's been a problem for owners almost every week this season. Unfortunately, under the current system, almost all of the decent replacements are gone by Wednesday.

For me, the question each week is partially "who do I bid on?", but much moreso "who do I cut?" and/or "what does my team need?" I don't think I have all the answers on Wednesday or even Thursday. Heck, I may not have them on Friday, either -- but I certainly know a lot more today than I did two days ago.

Making the primary waivers as late as possible, while still allowing sufficient time for lineups changes, should be the priority here.

[Shrink Attack]

Would bridge the gap between those that want more time(which is a big reason for wanting the Thursday players only system for many) and still allowing for conditional bids to be made properly like many others want.

Bigger issue is not knowing your specific team needs on Wednesday due to questionable statuses or late-week downgrades. It's been a problem for owners almost every week this season. Unfortunately, under the current system, almost all of the decent replacements are gone by Wednesday.

For me, the question each week is partially "who do I bid on?", but much moreso "who do I cut?" and/or "what does my team need?" I don't think I have all the answers on Wednesday or even Thursday. Heck, I may not have them on Friday, either -- but I certainly know a lot more today than I did two days ago.

Making the primary waivers as late as possible, while still allowing sufficient time for lineups changes, should be the priority here.

+1 (That's all you get because I'm on my way to a poker game)

[Cocktails and Dreams]

Would bridge the gap between those that want more time(which is a big reason for wanting the Thursday players only system for many) and still allowing for conditional bids to be made properly like many others want.

Bigger issue is not knowing your specific team needs on Wednesday due to questionable statuses or late-week downgrades. It's been a problem for owners almost every week this season. Unfortunately, under the current system, almost all of the decent replacements are gone by Wednesday.

For me, the question each week is partially "who do I bid on?", but much moreso "who do I cut?" and/or "what does my team need?" I don't think I have all the answers on Wednesday or even Thursday. Heck, I may not have them on Friday, either -- but I certainly know a lot more today than I did two days ago.

Making the primary waivers as late as possible, while still allowing sufficient time for lineups changes, should be the priority here.

Being able to bid on all teams players at the same time should be the priority so you can set up your team how you want. You don't know who you are going to win on Friday, so you have no idea what to bid on the Thursday players. Even worse, then you don't know if you need to start them if you get them, as you don't know who you will get on Friday. While it sounds well and good at first glance, it would be a very flawed system. Far rather just not allow bidding on anyone Wednesday than only that game, not that I would want that. Everyone is gaining information all week, not just you. I think it is a skill to try and read into situations. And I have made plenty of bad drops on Wednesday by the way, including Redman last week in the diamond. But I would far rather have to make solid educated guesses and be able to make conditional bids than have no idea who you will get in the future when figuring out what to do with the Thursday guys. Surprising that a majority of games have always done them by Thursday. Wonder why their clients didn't demand more information.

[Don Draper]

I've adjusted to the FAAB setup, I'd leave it as it is this season.

This.

[BillyWaz]

I've adjusted to the FAAB setup, I'd leave it as it is this season. Adding player points to return TDs is ok.

+1 for me.

I like having my Friday nights freed up. The "not having enough info on Wednesday" hasn't burned me, so I like it how it is. Last year I voted for "Wednesday players only on Wednesdays", but honestly, getting everything done by Wednesday is kind of a relief.

As for the player getting the special teams points, I am ALL FOR IT!!! Nothing worse than hearing your guy is now gonna start returning kicks or punts and you don't have their team defense. THERE IS NOTHING GOOD THAT CAN COME OUT OF THAT SITUATION....ONLY INJURY!!!!

Maybe I am still a little bitter when I lost a game a few years back (2010?), where I had Eddie Royal. I led going into the game by I think 14 points. Royal had ZERO CATCHES, and ZERO POINTS. However, he returned TWO punts for TD's, my opponent of course had the Denver defense, and I think they had 18 total points that night, and beat me by 4!

So in essence, my OWN player cost me the game. Didn't like the rule in 2004, HATED it that night, and still despise it today!

[Jack_Bauer]

It is really a tough choice and good debate. I have also adjusted to the current system and have yet to be burned bad Having said that, I totally get the point being made by Cocktails in that your 3rd preferred WR may play Thursday and you would want to make that person a conditional bid but only have one player on your roster you want to cut. It puts you on a tough spot.

Can someone clarify the DOWNSIDE to running a full faab Friday night or Saturday night (even better) and limiting Thursdays faab to Thursdays players? I just want to get thoughts on what the downside is to that so I can make a better educated decision on this.

[ChiTwn]

Another question I would like the survey is regarding Team defense points.

My team defense shouldn't be punished for a pick 6, safety, or offense fumbling ball away for a TD. In other words, change it to points against defense not the whole team. The current logic makes zero sense to me. If my defense isn't even on the field why the hell are they getting points deducted against them.


Also, I am for Friday FAAB. As I got burned by the Bills rbs getting injured in week 3, picking up Tashard Choice for a ridiculous amount on wed ($400), because I had no idea of injury severity. Then come Friday both F jax and Spiller suited up. Essentially, wasting a ton of my FAAB $$ which in turn has basically prevented me from bidding higher on other players I needed for injuries etc.

[Coltsfan]

This is my wish list and I understand some of it might not be "on the table"

*Partial waivers on Wed with full on Friday. (No system is perfect but this affects decisions the least)

*Kickers score 3 points per field goal with a .1 bonus for everything over 50.

*Quarterbacks score 4 points per passing td.

I like everything else the way it is. I don't have strong feelings about the last 2 but I think it would balance out the scoring somewhat and make the RB's, WR's and TE's a bit more important and decrease some of the randomness.


Wayne

[Sandman62]

Can someone clarify the DOWNSIDE to running a full faab Friday night or Saturday night (even better) and limiting Thursdays faab to Thursdays players? I just want to get thoughts on what the downside is to that so I can make a better educated decision on this.

As Cocktails pointed out, splitting the FAAB runs could hinder our ability to get the players we really want.

For example, due to injuries and byes, I'm a bit short this week at WR. And looking at the entire player pool all at once on Wed., I knew I wanted to go after these WRs, in this order: Danario Alexander, Rod Streater, Laurent Robinson. So that's the order I bid on them (and ultimately got my 2nd choice, Streater). But I got to bid on all 3 at once, and had I missed out on the first 2, I still would've gotten LRob (who scored over 16 Thurs. night; but I still prefer the others longterm).

Now, if we had a split FAAB and I really didn't want any other WRs beyond these 3, I would've had to decide on Thurs:
"Do I want to be conservative and make sure I get one for this week?"
If so, I'd just bid on LRob and if I got him, I'd have no chance at what I consider better options on Friday.
OR
"Do I want to be aggressive and go after my top 2 choices?"
In that case, I wouldn't even bid on LRob on Wed. Of course, now if I'm outbid on my top 2 choices on Fri., then I'd end up not getting ANY WRs that week.

I'm pretty sure that's the point Cocktails has been making.