Quitters ruin this contest....
Quitters ruin this contest....
Good postings here. Most of you seem to be in agreement that "something" needs to be done and that making some improvement is better than doing nothing. For the record my team is awful this season (satelite league) but it only takes 5 minutes a week to set the lineup and I continue to do it. I have zero tolerance for quitters, especially when you are playing for the big bucks in this contest.
I never lost a game. I only ran out of time. Bobby Layne
Kid....if you're going to make it in this league, you're going to have to learn to drink. Bobby Layne
Kid....if you're going to make it in this league, you're going to have to learn to drink. Bobby Layne
Quitters ruin this contest....
Originally posted by sportsbettingman:
I think the "initial auto lineup setting" running at 9am on TUE would be the best step...but I also think there would still be plenty of moaning and groaning next year...pointing out all the flaws still remaining.
If the programming and implementation is reasonably cheap...why not.
I just feel it will still give some teams assistance and other teams less, and the crying would be damn near the same next year around the same time, as teams have to go through the denial part before the acceptance part of understanding they had a poor fantasy season (or team), and letting go.
Ramping up for next season as we speak! A moaner/groaner could have the system setup EXACTLY the way they wanted, get screwed because of the changes they wanted, and complain they would of made it "if this" or "if that" happened.
You'll never get rid of the moaners and groaners.
That I GUARANTEE!
I think the "initial auto lineup setting" running at 9am on TUE would be the best step...but I also think there would still be plenty of moaning and groaning next year...pointing out all the flaws still remaining.
If the programming and implementation is reasonably cheap...why not.
I just feel it will still give some teams assistance and other teams less, and the crying would be damn near the same next year around the same time, as teams have to go through the denial part before the acceptance part of understanding they had a poor fantasy season (or team), and letting go.
Ramping up for next season as we speak! A moaner/groaner could have the system setup EXACTLY the way they wanted, get screwed because of the changes they wanted, and complain they would of made it "if this" or "if that" happened.
You'll never get rid of the moaners and groaners.
That I GUARANTEE!
Quitters ruin this contest....
Have you noticed that Greg and Tom and stayed away from this topic. That kind of tells me that they do not have any interest in changing anything with the contest. Honestly, I'm fine the way it is. The H2H component of the NFFC doesn't come into play most of the time as the team that wins typically is one of the top teams in points as well. (There will be some exceptions.) It will alwalys be a problem and I don't see a solution that won't be griped about just as much as the original problem. Just my 2 cents.
Wayne
Wayne
Quitters ruin this contest....
Originally posted by Gekko:
Ren – Let’s explore the idea you like.
At what point in the week would you have bye week players replaced with non-bye week players? Tuesday at 9am? After Wednesday FAAB? After Friday FAAB? Sunday at 1pm?
Suppose an owner has Reggie Wayne in their lineup and Wayne has a bye week. Also suppose the owner has 3 WR’s, 2RB (Leon Washington and Larry Johnson) and 1TE (Owen Daniels) on his bench. How do you determine which player gets started? Does the player fill the flex spot?
What if the owner WANTS to start a bye week player? Gekko,
You could have ended this post at one sentence when you said "lets explore this idea..."
That is all I want to do. Lets explore this (and many others) idea that could address what is obviously a problem that gets brought up every single season.
I am not sure how to do it or what could even be done from an automated league site standpoint. I am likely the least knowledgable computer person on this forum. Maybe the computer on Tuesday could plug in the highest scoring projected lineup that the roster has and then the owner of the team can manipulate his starting lineup any way he wants. If an owner purposely changes his lineup to start bye week or injured players we have an entirely different matter to deal with. This is more to deal with people who abandon a team in the stretch run for the league title.
Ren – Let’s explore the idea you like.
At what point in the week would you have bye week players replaced with non-bye week players? Tuesday at 9am? After Wednesday FAAB? After Friday FAAB? Sunday at 1pm?
Suppose an owner has Reggie Wayne in their lineup and Wayne has a bye week. Also suppose the owner has 3 WR’s, 2RB (Leon Washington and Larry Johnson) and 1TE (Owen Daniels) on his bench. How do you determine which player gets started? Does the player fill the flex spot?
What if the owner WANTS to start a bye week player? Gekko,
You could have ended this post at one sentence when you said "lets explore this idea..."
That is all I want to do. Lets explore this (and many others) idea that could address what is obviously a problem that gets brought up every single season.
I am not sure how to do it or what could even be done from an automated league site standpoint. I am likely the least knowledgable computer person on this forum. Maybe the computer on Tuesday could plug in the highest scoring projected lineup that the roster has and then the owner of the team can manipulate his starting lineup any way he wants. If an owner purposely changes his lineup to start bye week or injured players we have an entirely different matter to deal with. This is more to deal with people who abandon a team in the stretch run for the league title.
Quitters ruin this contest....
Originally posted by Coltsfan:
Have you noticed that Greg and Tom and stayed away from this topic. That kind of tells me that they do not have any interest in changing anything with the contest. Honestly, I'm fine the way it is. The H2H component of the NFFC doesn't come into play most of the time as the team that wins typically is one of the top teams in points as well. (There will be some exceptions.) It will alwalys be a problem and I don't see a solution that won't be griped about just as much as the original problem. Just my 2 cents.
Wayne I think Greg and Tom enjoy allowing the members of the NFFC debate and discuss things without giving their own personal opinions in a manner that might sway how people view the issue. I think this is an example of how in touch with the NFFC they are. I guarantee they are or have read this thread or other discussion on this issue.. I assure you they care about the issue and have opinions on the issue.
However, they also care about making the event as good as possible so I am certain they are open to good ideas that may be cultivated here like the one King of Queens brought up.
No one is saying that a change like this is going to 100% solve the problem of quitter owners. But it could help lessen this problem some and give the NFFC some protection from what could become an ugly situation when a quitter team hugely impacts the results of this event.
[ November 16, 2009, 12:14 PM: Message edited by: Renman ]
Have you noticed that Greg and Tom and stayed away from this topic. That kind of tells me that they do not have any interest in changing anything with the contest. Honestly, I'm fine the way it is. The H2H component of the NFFC doesn't come into play most of the time as the team that wins typically is one of the top teams in points as well. (There will be some exceptions.) It will alwalys be a problem and I don't see a solution that won't be griped about just as much as the original problem. Just my 2 cents.
Wayne I think Greg and Tom enjoy allowing the members of the NFFC debate and discuss things without giving their own personal opinions in a manner that might sway how people view the issue. I think this is an example of how in touch with the NFFC they are. I guarantee they are or have read this thread or other discussion on this issue.. I assure you they care about the issue and have opinions on the issue.
However, they also care about making the event as good as possible so I am certain they are open to good ideas that may be cultivated here like the one King of Queens brought up.
No one is saying that a change like this is going to 100% solve the problem of quitter owners. But it could help lessen this problem some and give the NFFC some protection from what could become an ugly situation when a quitter team hugely impacts the results of this event.
[ November 16, 2009, 12:14 PM: Message edited by: Renman ]
-
Gordon Gekko II
- Posts: 647
- Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 6:00 pm
Quitters ruin this contest....
Originally posted by Coltsfan:
Have you noticed that Greg and Tom and stayed away from this topic. That kind of tells me that they do not have any interest in changing anything with the contest. Honestly, I'm fine the way it is. The H2H component of the NFFC doesn't come into play most of the time as the team that wins typically is one of the top teams in points as well. (There will be some exceptions.) It will alwalys be a problem and I don't see a solution that won't be griped about just as much as the original problem. Just my 2 cents.
Wayne There will be whiners, complainers, quitters, hypocrites, luck/skill debates, deadbeat debates, who is more successful debates, injuries, system SNAFU’s; bad beats, etc… no matter what system is in place.
I’ve learned to accept this (sometimes it’s tough if it affects YOU directly), but I also look forward to the days of FF main events evolving into a more skilled-based game. Some people may not want that, and I understand why! IMO, Greg/Tom have done a good job at doing this (removing the importance of H2H).
Have you noticed that Greg and Tom and stayed away from this topic. That kind of tells me that they do not have any interest in changing anything with the contest. Honestly, I'm fine the way it is. The H2H component of the NFFC doesn't come into play most of the time as the team that wins typically is one of the top teams in points as well. (There will be some exceptions.) It will alwalys be a problem and I don't see a solution that won't be griped about just as much as the original problem. Just my 2 cents.
Wayne There will be whiners, complainers, quitters, hypocrites, luck/skill debates, deadbeat debates, who is more successful debates, injuries, system SNAFU’s; bad beats, etc… no matter what system is in place.
I’ve learned to accept this (sometimes it’s tough if it affects YOU directly), but I also look forward to the days of FF main events evolving into a more skilled-based game. Some people may not want that, and I understand why! IMO, Greg/Tom have done a good job at doing this (removing the importance of H2H).
Quitters ruin this contest....
Originally posted by Renman:
quote:Originally posted by Coltsfan:
Have you noticed that Greg and Tom and stayed away from this topic. That kind of tells me that they do not have any interest in changing anything with the contest. Honestly, I'm fine the way it is. The H2H component of the NFFC doesn't come into play most of the time as the team that wins typically is one of the top teams in points as well. (There will be some exceptions.) It will alwalys be a problem and I don't see a solution that won't be griped about just as much as the original problem. Just my 2 cents.
Wayne I think Greg and Tom enjoy allowing the members of the NFFC debate and discuss things without giving their own personal opinions in a manner that might sway how people view the issue. I think this is an example of how in touch with the NFFC they are. I guarantee they are or have read this thread or other discussion on this issue.. I assure you they care about the issue and have opinions on the issue.
However, they also care about making the event as good as possible so I am certain they are open to good ideas that may be cultivated here like the one King of Queens brought up.
No one is saying that a change like this is going to 100% solve the problem of quitter owners. But it could help lessen this problem some and give the NFFC some protection from what could become an ugly situation when a quitter team hugely impacts the results of this event. [/QUOTE]renman,
I'm sure that Greg and Tom are reading these posts but it seems to me in the past when they were on board with or considering making a change to the nffc that they were actively involved in the discussion. When they aren't looking at making a change they allow the discussion to happen but don't address it. I may be wrong but that is just my impression of how it works.
Wayne
quote:Originally posted by Coltsfan:
Have you noticed that Greg and Tom and stayed away from this topic. That kind of tells me that they do not have any interest in changing anything with the contest. Honestly, I'm fine the way it is. The H2H component of the NFFC doesn't come into play most of the time as the team that wins typically is one of the top teams in points as well. (There will be some exceptions.) It will alwalys be a problem and I don't see a solution that won't be griped about just as much as the original problem. Just my 2 cents.
Wayne I think Greg and Tom enjoy allowing the members of the NFFC debate and discuss things without giving their own personal opinions in a manner that might sway how people view the issue. I think this is an example of how in touch with the NFFC they are. I guarantee they are or have read this thread or other discussion on this issue.. I assure you they care about the issue and have opinions on the issue.
However, they also care about making the event as good as possible so I am certain they are open to good ideas that may be cultivated here like the one King of Queens brought up.
No one is saying that a change like this is going to 100% solve the problem of quitter owners. But it could help lessen this problem some and give the NFFC some protection from what could become an ugly situation when a quitter team hugely impacts the results of this event. [/QUOTE]renman,
I'm sure that Greg and Tom are reading these posts but it seems to me in the past when they were on board with or considering making a change to the nffc that they were actively involved in the discussion. When they aren't looking at making a change they allow the discussion to happen but don't address it. I may be wrong but that is just my impression of how it works.
Wayne
-
jjsegura78
- Posts: 232
- Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 6:00 pm
Quitters ruin this contest....
How about this ? Maybe the NFFC (or members) can just create a "Wall of Shame", or "Call-Out " list that shows the quitters name and team name ? We can just go to the message boards and see the quitters last date of log on, last updated roster moves, and last transaction's. And if team is labeled a "quitter" one year, they can have themselves removed from the "list" if they complete a full season without quitting ?
Shaming is a great way to keep the recidivism rate low. Face it guys/gals, we might just to deal with the quitters...
Just another suggestion.
Shaming is a great way to keep the recidivism rate low. Face it guys/gals, we might just to deal with the quitters...
Just another suggestion.
Projection 2010: Either winning my Classic LV/Chicago Dual League, or making it to the Catalina Wine Mixer.
JJ Segura
JJ Segura
Quitters ruin this contest....
Maybe they should have to draft with a scarlet Q :rolleyes:
"No one cares about your team but you."
Quitters ruin this contest....
Most seem to accept the problem of deadbeat owners as something we just have to live with, with no good solutions and hopefully the luck of playing deadbeat teams will even out over time.
Here is my view. I would like to see Greg and Tom identify owners that start IR and bye week players in multiple weeks. These owners should be banned from future leagues. I know Greg and Tom do not want to turn away business in the future. But, more people may want to join the leagues at the NFFC if they know deadbeat owners are not tolerated here.
Making sure to not start IR and bye weeks players takes only a minute or 2 per week. If anyone does not have the integrity to do this when their team is going bad or they are busy, they do not belong in the leagues at the NFFC.
Another way to lessen the problem is to lessen the emphasis on head to head records. Owners giving up have a much smaller impact when playoff spots are determined by total points and/or all-play records. If you have a league with 4 play-off spots here is an example of how you could lessen the impact of owners not setting their line-up: #1 seed most toal points #2 seed best all-play record #3 seed next highest total points #4 seed best W/L record of remaining teams.
Not a perfect soulution, but having 3 of the 4 playoff spots determined by all/play records and total points would definitely lessen the impact of any owners deciding to quit.
I realize my suggestions are not perfect. But continuing to do nothing to address the problem of owners quitting would be very disappointing to me.
Here is my view. I would like to see Greg and Tom identify owners that start IR and bye week players in multiple weeks. These owners should be banned from future leagues. I know Greg and Tom do not want to turn away business in the future. But, more people may want to join the leagues at the NFFC if they know deadbeat owners are not tolerated here.
Making sure to not start IR and bye weeks players takes only a minute or 2 per week. If anyone does not have the integrity to do this when their team is going bad or they are busy, they do not belong in the leagues at the NFFC.
Another way to lessen the problem is to lessen the emphasis on head to head records. Owners giving up have a much smaller impact when playoff spots are determined by total points and/or all-play records. If you have a league with 4 play-off spots here is an example of how you could lessen the impact of owners not setting their line-up: #1 seed most toal points #2 seed best all-play record #3 seed next highest total points #4 seed best W/L record of remaining teams.
Not a perfect soulution, but having 3 of the 4 playoff spots determined by all/play records and total points would definitely lessen the impact of any owners deciding to quit.
I realize my suggestions are not perfect. But continuing to do nothing to address the problem of owners quitting would be very disappointing to me.