This ruling is BS from the NFFC

D-Day Heroes · Post by **D-Day Heroes** » Sun Sep 14, 2008 5:16 am

Please , Please .... I can't stand it when people CRY, " Can't You make this game safer for me ? " Crap ! Its not about having saftey nets , oh my bad, there is a saftey net , its called a " BENCH "! Should not have put all your apples in one Team. Thats why 10 Bench Slots are alloted . People that drafted a great bench , should not be punished for those that did not. If you want to ease your mind just make believe your Texans or Ravens Team Bus just drove off the road on the way to the stadium and all your playes broke thier Toe. Give me a Break , if you want SAFE, Play Yahoo !

BONGIZMO · Post by **BONGIZMO** » Sun Sep 14, 2008 5:44 am

I completely agree and am facing some zeroes myself, this was the right call and I hope we don't look to make drastic rules changes based on a one off event due to the usual vocal minority that complains when things aren't going their way.

Originally posted by Shrink Attack:
There's no perfect solution, but there is no better solution than the one offered by the NFFC.

And this is coming from someone who owns D. Mason, K. Brown, and Owen Daniels with no viable replacements.

Ted's Cracked Head · Post by **Ted's Cracked Head** » Sun Sep 14, 2008 4:41 pm

There was only one call to make in this situation and they got it right here.

Uncle Rico · Post by **Uncle Rico** » Sun Sep 14, 2008 4:56 pm

Look everyone. Excuse me and people in the same boat as me for feeling a little bitter.

But you know what? Enough with all the talk about putting the victims first and remembering what is important.

That's cheap BS. Of course my thoughts are with the victims of the hurricane. The problems with this are insignificant.

But you guys drawing comparisons between the two are being a-holes. There is no relation whatsoever. I am perfectly able of feeling badly for the folks in the path of the hurricane, and at the same time stating my case here in the NFFC.

Save the sermons for church. If anything, you trivialize the tragedy with your patronizing commentary.

TexasHeat · Post by **TexasHeat** » Mon Sep 15, 2008 2:17 am

It's not going to change no matter how much you cry.

mikeybok · Post by **mikeybok** » Mon Sep 15, 2008 4:08 am

Originally posted by Fudgie the Whale:
But you know what? Enough with all the talk about putting the victims first and remembering what is important.

That's cheap BS. Of course my thoughts are with the victims of the hurricane. The problems with this are insignificant.

But you guys drawing comparisons between the two are being a-holes. There is no relation whatsoever. I am perfectly able of feeling badly for the folks in the path of the hurricane, and at the same time stating my case here in the NFFC.
I agree with this. It was not mentioned in my response ... I was responding to someone who started a topic that calls out the NFFC ... over something that was handled the same way in every other contest I can think of.

For the record ... I also took a zero because of the storm on my main event team. Making new "special rules" in the middle of a high stakes event is bad policy and manipulative IMO

renman · Post by **renman** » Mon Sep 15, 2008 9:59 am

I personally think there is a difference between "making new special rules" and "doing what is best for the event to make it as fair as possible" even if it is not pre written in the rules... Doing what rotobowl did HURTS NO ONE and would have helped many (even if some were too lazy to pay attention to the opportunity they were given).

Just because something is not in the RULES does not mean we can't make sane decisions on the fly. There should always be something written in the "rules" that says the tournament organizers reserve the right to do whatever they want in the event of an unforeseen event..."

If the entire stats site crashed on Sunday morning and teams could not get their lineups properly adjusted should the people running the event make up a way to make things right even if it isn't written in stone in the rules? Or will people scream "hey, some of you should have had your lineups set Saturday morning in case the site crashed! Sometimes, in my opinion, it is ok to look at what is fairest and take the common sense route even if it is not clearly outlined in the rules. Unforseen things happen and will continue to happen over the years and our "rules" will be seeing additions as time goes by because of it.

This issue is now done... However we can still talk about it in an effort to continue to make the NFFC, already the best fantasy event in the market, even better.

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Mon Sep 15, 2008 10:12 am

Originally posted by renman:
I personally think there is a difference between "making new special rules" and "doing what is best for the event to make it as fair as possible" even if it is not pre written in the rules... Doing what rotobowl did HURTS NO ONE and would have helped many (even if some were too lazy to pay attention to the opportunity they were given).

Just because something is not in the RULES does not mean we can't make sane decisions on the fly. There should always be something written in the "rules" that says the tournament organizers reserve the right to do whatever they want in the event of an unforeseen event..."

If the entire stats site crashed on Sunday morning and teams could not get their lineups properly adjusted should the people running the event make up a way to make things right even if it isn't written in stone in the rules? Or will people scream "hey, some of you should have had your lineups set Saturday morning in case the site crashed! Sometimes, in my opinion, it is ok to look at what is fairest and take the common sense route even if it is not clearly outlined in the rules. Unforseen things happen and will continue to happen over the years and our "rules" will be seeing additions as time goes by because of it.

This issue is now done... However we can still talk about it in an effort to continue to make the NFFC, already the best fantasy event in the market, even better. James, you say the issue is now done and then keep bringing it back up!! I understand that you wish we would have just made up new rules on the fly for this one, but I'll say it again that legally I don't believe we could have done that and added a second FAAB period. The NFL made this decision about 18 hours before Sunday's kickoff and while you and others were on the boards and ready to jump in on any available free agents, I guarantee that not 100 percent of our participants would have had a fair shot at those available players. I'm not sure if 95 percent would have been a good number for you or 90 percent or whatever, but to constantly say that we should have gone outside our rules to take care of this rare occurrence is stating the same point over and over.

I'll say it again: Legally it was not possible to add a new set of rules to appease everyone who was affected by the NFL's decision to cancel Week 2's game at Houston. If you disagree with that, then let everyone know. But to keep saying we should have gone outside of the rules we all agreed to isn't really covering any new ground. Now providing input on how to have a repeat performance of this if the NFL decides to do this again, I'm all for that debate.

KOTRAX · Post by **KOTRAX** » Mon Sep 15, 2008 10:13 am

TO FURTHER THIS POINT ALL OF THE OTHER MAJOR HIGH-STAKES FANTASY OPERATORS MADE THE SAME DECISION AS WELL.

SO IT WAS THE RIGHT THING TO DO. IT WAS A TOUGH DECISION BUT NEVERTHELESS THE CORRECT ONE.

kapefear · Post by **kapefear** » Mon Sep 15, 2008 10:49 am

Greg ,your right.Renman all throughout the weekend you were posting your opionion and how you were shorthanded,but was going to plug on,but kept digging and digging.Greg made his decision and it STUCK.I got stuck with RICE off who has been and would of been my flex and ended up with 0.O well ff and life goes on.........