♦ [RED.ZONE.PERFECTION] ♦
__________The Future of Dynasty__________

You are not logged in. Would you like to login or register?



1/02/2013 9:57 pm  #11


Re: Adding roster spots

The only reason to eliminate negative QB points for sacks is that people don't want to do the work necessary to evaluate a QB's true value within the context of his team. It is easy to put forth the lame argument that sacks are the O-line's fault, however that argument is specious. When a defender comes free to the QB, it is as often the QB's fault as it is the lineman's. They fail to read the defense or they fail to spot a blitz. The QB holds the ball too long. The QB fails to spot the open receiver. The negative points for a sack reflect the difference in value between a great QB and a good one and between a good QB and a bad one.

Before we try to decide any rules changes, I suggest that we put up a poll to get an idea of how restrictive we want to be about rules changes. Unanimous, 7/8, 3/4, 2/3, or simple majority. Then have a vote between the two most popular opinions. If the requirement is unanimity, it will eliminate a lot of discussion. But, lets discuss and decide that first. Then we can tackle the other stuff and know the threshhold which must be achieved.

Last edited by rtretler (1/02/2013 9:59 pm)


Lorikeets 2013 8-6 1st Place Division 4
Lorikeets 2012 6-8 3rd Place Division 4
Does it matter which lemming is the leader?
 

1/03/2013 9:08 am  #12


Re: Adding roster spots

I don't believe our votes should require unanimity, for then 100% of the power lies in the hands of a single person.  Perhaps 7/8?  (or 14/16, in our case?)

Last edited by The Regulars (1/03/2013 9:09 am)

 

1/03/2013 9:54 am  #13


Re: Adding roster spots

I would want a 2/3 or 3/4 vote which would come in at 11 or 12


The answer to the question never asked is always NO.
     Thread Starter
 

1/03/2013 11:34 am  #14


Re: Adding roster spots

May we have a poll and then a vote?


Lorikeets 2013 8-6 1st Place Division 4
Lorikeets 2012 6-8 3rd Place Division 4
Does it matter which lemming is the leader?
 

1/03/2013 1:20 pm  #15


Re: Adding roster spots

I'd be good with 12.  Seems fair.

 

1/04/2013 1:40 pm  #16


Re: Adding roster spots

I'm not for adding more bench spots, let alone three bench spots, because it was a great challenge - that may have even been huge mistakes for some of us - to find a way to make room for those developmental players, or to leave them in the FA pool, because of lack of  room.

 

1/11/2013 11:33 pm  #17


Re: Adding roster spots

Galloping Ghosts wrote:

not trying to be a smart ass but If changes have to be unanimous . This first one isn't. Well you get the point

My thoughts on unanimous votes was for scoring rules only, I'm with with other things - roster size, trade deadlines, playoff format etc being either a majority or 2/3 votes as they don't necessarily have as large an impact on the personnel of the team

 

1/11/2013 11:34 pm  #18


Re: Adding roster spots

cretana wrote:

To me the roster size is more than enough...

I would like to propose the following rules:

- eliminate the negative points for sacks to a QB
- eliminate the +3 points for recovered fumbles to offensive players (I.e. QB fumbles but recovers the fumble then he is assigned +3 points for the play). Unfortunately this point adjustment will have to be done manually.

While I agree with this in spirit I am against any rules we make which would require manual adjustments each week to the scoring, I say we keep the scoring within the capabilities of NFL.com

 

Board footera

 

Powered by Boardhost. Create a Free Forum