Teams QUITTING in Week 4 already...

mikeybok · Post by **mikeybok** » Mon Oct 02, 2006 7:49 am

I remember, I fully supported it and came up with a generic way to at least get bye and IR guys out of the lineup. I don't understand why this doesn't get done. What possible reason does someone have for playing guys who can't score. It hurts the integrety of the contest.

joetreff · Post by **joetreff** » Mon Oct 02, 2006 8:15 am

Weird thing, Travis Henry was started in 2 local leagues that I am in. Seems like the typical guy with Travis Henry on his team might not be the most up-to-date owners out there.

I started Shockey on a bye this week and I am no slouch fantasy-wise. It was a satellite league for NFFC. I had only one obvious drop and I put a safe bid of $120 on Leon Washington, then I put 3 TEs under Washington, well the $120 bid went through so I got Washington and I was stuck with no TE.

Its possible to have a bye week player in on purpose, thats how.

renman · Post by **renman** » Mon Oct 02, 2006 8:27 am

Shrink,

I just read that discussion from that thread and found it interesting and at times hysterical. Who would ever start a player on a bye purposely? lol I saw the once ever 15 years gimmick circumstance where an owner thought it might be in his best interests to lose.. but that would not happen often.

I see nothing wrong with setting the system to default all bye week players to the bench and replace them with whatever the best average point per week scorer is available. This would happen tuesday and would allow all owners who are paying attention to their teams ample time to field the their team the way they see fit. The purpose for this is to lessen the affect of dead teams...

Seems like a no-brainer to me. What is the downside?

renman · Post by **renman** » Mon Oct 02, 2006 8:29 am

felix,

The idea shink attack is proposing would only come into play if you have a viable replacement on your bench. If you don't have one you get zero for the position.

Sound Advice · Post by **Sound Advice** » Mon Oct 02, 2006 8:30 am

Good thought.
Bad idea.
People should be able to play who they want, and pay attention to their team as much as they want.
The second scoring team last week had a player on a bye.
Is it for good teams, all teams, or just bad teams?
What if they want to avoid C Henry's karma, leave him on the bench for a bye player, and score 180?
Put in Henry, he might get 20 and the team might tank.
In other words, don't mess with it.

It's part of the game.

It would be sick if the team that won the overall had help setting their line-up.

The only idea I like is to award a free entry to whoever gains the most overall ground by the end of the year. That will keep the lower teams interested. Teams that start in the top 100 probably won't have a chance. Just whoever digs and claws from the bottom, most likely. That might help.

Roster moves are only OK if it is their idea.

I'd like to see some teams have all their guys put on byes. That would be nice. Like a handicap. lol.
Or to 'award' a bad MB post.

DOOMSDAY · Post by **DOOMSDAY** » Mon Oct 02, 2006 8:49 am

We had somebody bid over 100 and start Owen Daniels. Who is Owen Daniels you may ask... exactly! He may as well have played a BYE. At least he tried, and is out 100 to boot, HA!

King of Queens · Post by **King of Queens** » Mon Oct 02, 2006 8:52 am

Originally posted by renman:
Who would ever start a player on a bye purposely? lol I saw the once ever 15 years gimmick circumstance where an owner thought it might be in his best interests to lose.. but that would not happen often. Did you see my example on Page 4 of that thread where it actually made sense to lose my Week 12 game? These situations come up a lot more than you would think in leagues where H2H is the deciding factor. The bottom line is that the only way to win $100,000 is to get into the playoffs (Championship League). To me, anything that helps you get there -- including "throwing" a game -- is kosher.

richieprimo · Post by **richieprimo** » Mon Oct 02, 2006 9:03 am

Originally posted by King of Queens:
quote:Originally posted by renman:
Who would ever start a player on a bye purposely? lol I saw the once ever 15 years gimmick circumstance where an owner thought it might be in his best interests to lose.. but that would not happen often. Did you see my example on Page 4 of that thread where it actually made sense to lose my Week 12 game? These situations come up a lot more than you would think in leagues where H2H is the deciding factor. The bottom line is that the only way to win $100,000 is to get into the playoffs (Championship League). To me, anything that helps you get there -- including "throwing" a game -- is kosher. [/QUOTE]I think I remember that, Glenn. It was the 1st year of the NFFC and we were in the same division.

And I agree with your statement about doing whatever it takes to win...excluding the threat of violence toward your opponent, which has been considered around my neighborhood.

King of Queens · Post by **King of Queens** » Mon Oct 02, 2006 9:06 am

Originally posted by Primo:
quote:Originally posted by King of Queens:
quote:Originally posted by renman:
Who would ever start a player on a bye purposely? lol I saw the once ever 15 years gimmick circumstance where an owner thought it might be in his best interests to lose.. but that would not happen often. Did you see my example on Page 4 of that thread where it actually made sense to lose my Week 12 game? These situations come up a lot more than you would think in leagues where H2H is the deciding factor. The bottom line is that the only way to win $100,000 is to get into the playoffs (Championship League). To me, anything that helps you get there -- including "throwing" a game -- is kosher. [/QUOTE]I think I remember that, Glenn. It was the 1st year of the NFFC and we were in the same division.

And I agree with your statement about doing whatever it takes to win...excluding the threat of violence toward your opponent, which has been considered around my neighborhood.

[/QUOTE]It happened in 2004 as well as 2005. As stated, more often than some would think.

Don't worry about riff raff, Richie. Just grab an old hoagie roll and start swinging!

richieprimo · Post by **richieprimo** » Mon Oct 02, 2006 10:29 am

Don't worry about riff raff, Richie. Just grab an old hoagie roll and start swinging!

Nah, Glenn. The roll isn't menacing enough, even with nails poking out of it.

The proven method is placing their hand near the Berkel slicer and pretending it's a capacola with fingers.

[ October 02, 2006, 04:30 PM: Message edited by: Primo ]