Roster Size...

JB · Post by JB » Fri Sep 24, 2004 1:35 pm

That would not be a MINOR change. If you allowed QBs to be used in the flex spot, they would be drafted just as fast as running backs and all the starters would be gone by the 5th or 6th round. I'm not saying it would be bad (I'm in a league that does this and almost everyone uses a QB at flex), but expect a very different draft!!

Originally posted by FresnoFanatics2:
My small two cents worth....leave it all alone!!! It was set-up to not be easy...ie Hard...leave it that way for now and the future. THe only thing I have seen that looks interesting is the change of flex...I mean we can have a wr, rb or te why not add qb, k, and def also making it a true flex and allowing everyone to use their best available in their opinion player. If not this minor change then leave it alone....good luck all

FatPerez · Post by **FatPerez** » Fri Sep 24, 2004 2:29 pm

Sorry Gekko, but there's no way I'm changing a pair of your dirty John Deere drawers.

DIESEL02 · Post by **DIESEL02** » Fri Sep 24, 2004 3:57 pm

It seems as if everyone wants to change the rules...they are what they are..everyone knew the rules and everyone knew that a fourteen team league would be hard if not difficult to win especially if an injury were to occur to their team...it is what it is...I just think that maybe everyone should realize this isn't their hometown fantasy football league where you have your name engraved on the trophy atleast three times or having a ten or twelve man league where you have owners (suckers) who walk into the draft with a book with the top 200 players and having them pick their team....
If you weren't happy with your draft postion..may I suggest an auction league where you can always get the player you want or maybe a salary cap league where you can drop the deadwood you drafted and pickup a stud (oh wait that's a mulligan)..but then again..what would be the excuse for a poor team besides injury...could it be a poor draft ? Not with all these experts in the league , imagine that !!!

Gordon Gekko · Post by **Gordon Gekko** » Fri Sep 24, 2004 11:56 pm

Originally posted by UFS:
My favorite saying still applies, bad owners will make bad picks.can good owners make bad picks?

TamuScarecrow · Post by **TamuScarecrow** » Sat Sep 25, 2004 4:16 am

Hi, Ponch. I see you're looking forward to Dorsey starting against Seattle. Do you wish you had Feeley this week?

Nag' · Post by **Nag'** » Sat Sep 25, 2004 4:22 am

Originally posted by Gordon Gekko:
quote:Originally posted by UFS:
My favorite saying still applies, bad owners will make bad picks.can good owners make bad picks? [/QUOTE]Usually not, but it also depends on your definition of a "bad" pick.
The same exact player can be drafted by a 2 owners, but one can be considered a better pick than another. Besides the round that player gets drafted, other important variables should be considered like the development of the draft and the availability of other players, and team "need" for the team drafting that player.
An example can be Brandon Lloyd or P.Burress this year. If a owner started with a RB/QB-heavy draft and then chose one of them to be his #2 (or in some cases a #1) WR, that would be a bad pick because they would both considered high risk picks and good owners build their teams around steady, prooven performers, and take chances in the later rounds. So the owner who drafted these players as his #3 WR did NOT make a bad pick, even if neither lives up to expectations, because he is not relying on them to carry his team.

ultimatefs · Post by **ultimatefs** » Sat Sep 25, 2004 7:15 am

Originally posted by Gordon Gekko:
quote:Originally posted by UFS:
My favorite saying still applies, bad owners will make bad picks.can good owners make bad picks? [/QUOTE]all the time. A good owner is doing well if 60% of his FA choices pan out. A bad owner will consistently miss 90% on his FA choices.

FatPerez · Post by **FatPerez** » Sat Sep 25, 2004 9:53 am

Tamu, we are not at all looking forward to starting Dorsey against Seattle, but it's a predicament we put ourselves in. However, if you're wondering if we'd rather have that gutterball Feely, the answer is a resounding NO!!! If you are indeed the same cat who happened to "land" grievous Feely for $150 in Las Vegas League #3, then my condolences go out to you. You shouldn't feel too bad though, folks have also spent money on pet rocks, land plots on the moon, etc.

Gordon Gekko · Post by **Gordon Gekko** » Sat Sep 25, 2004 3:57 pm

Originally posted by FatPerez:
You shouldn't feel too bad though, folks have also spent money on pet rocks, land plots on the moon, etc.

. nice one. maybe some owners still have their pet rocks? keep up the good work.

TamuScarecrow · Post by **TamuScarecrow** » Sat Sep 25, 2004 4:37 pm

Ponch, you just wish you had the depth I have. Enjoy your last week of having two running backs.