NFFC Post-Season Hold 'Em Contest Rules

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Sun Jan 06, 2008 2:10 am

Originally posted by Diesel:
Greg,

I don't think I saw a definitive answer on how you would alter the prize money if it went over 150 entrants, but since you got more than 150, may I suggest a free entry or two into NFFC satellites for 2008? I doubt you'd get any nay-sayers on that proposal. Just a suggestion.

Marc I'll finalize this week. I need to talk with the Fantasy911.com folks to see how many paid entries we finished with and then we'll get it done. I'd gladly do that Marc and more.

Hard heads · Post by **Hard heads** » Sun Jan 06, 2008 3:46 am

C'mon Diesel, talk Greg into paying the day 1 leader something as after today I may be done LOL
I don't think I have ever led an online contest like this after 1 play before so this is cool.

Team Canada · Post by **Team Canada** » Sun Jan 06, 2008 5:05 am

I vote bump spots 2 and 3 as hard as possible with the extra loot...
2 teams both tied at 40.
Anyone else think seattle d was gold cause after rd 2 that's were i'll need a drop and they should lose to G bay I hope!

BillyWaz · Post by **BillyWaz** » Sun Jan 06, 2008 5:21 am

Originally posted by Team Canada:
I vote bump spots 2 and 3 as hard as possible with the extra loot...
2 teams both tied at 40.
Anyone else think seattle d was gold cause after rd 2 that's were i'll need a drop and they should lose to G bay I hope! Those who got points from Seattle this week should be happy, as they will be lucky to get more than 5 (10) next week as Seattle is a COMPLETELY different team on the road.

Hard heads · Post by **Hard heads** » Sun Jan 06, 2008 5:22 am

Agreeed, but did anyone see getting 30 from any other defense? 20 this week 5x2 next. 30 from a defense can make you a lucky winner, right Jules?

BillyWaz · Post by **BillyWaz** » Sun Jan 06, 2008 5:32 am

Originally posted by Hard heads:
Agreeed, but did anyone see getting 30 from any other defense? 20 this week 5x2 next. 30 from a defense can make you a lucky winner, right Jules? I'm sure the Jacksonville people maybe saw it coming.

Tampa could also do quite well today, and I could see them giving Dallas problems next week too!

Hard heads · Post by **Hard heads** » Sun Jan 06, 2008 5:36 am

Agreed, but who has a better chance of creating turnovers against there opponent, Jax or Seattle? I mean you underappreciated Seattle all together Billy.

Weren't they supposed to lose yesterday anyway? LOL I am just razzing you. This is absolutely the best postseason setup I have ever played in!

BillyWaz · Post by **BillyWaz** » Sun Jan 06, 2008 5:42 am

Originally posted by Hard heads:
Agreed, but who has a better chance of creating turnovers against there opponent, Jax or Seattle? I mean you underappreciated Seattle all together Billy.

Weren't they supposed to lose yesterday anyway? LOL I am just razzing you. This is absolutely the best postseason setup I have ever played in! All I know is in Week 15 on the road against Carolina and MATT MOORE

, Seattle couldn't get ONE sack OR turnover.

Seattle's defensive points this year AT HOME- 16.3

Seattle's defensvie points this year AWAY- 7.5

With the Jags return game, I honestly give them the edge next week.

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Sun Jan 06, 2008 5:47 am

I know I should start another thread for this one, but of ALL the NFL rules I disagree with the one where you can't advance a "muff" or whatever they called that kickoff fumble that Washington got is the DUMBEST rules they have. Why couldn't Washington score on that play to make it 21-13??? The kickoff wasn't fielded by Seattle and the Redskins picked it up on the bounce and ran it in for a TD. Why should they spot that at the point of recovery?

That would have been a totally different fourth quarter if it was 21-13 at that point. Forget about the missed field goal, the spotting of that kickoff recovery was the turning point.

Okay, I'm done.

Hard heads · Post by **Hard heads** » Sun Jan 06, 2008 5:51 am

Alot of dumb rules Greg!
I have never understood how the ground can't cause a fumble, but a WR has to control the ball all the way until he hits the ground for it to be a catch even when he clearly has two feet in. There is plenty of things that need tweeking. Anyone remember the tuck rule? LOL