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

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



12/30/2013 9:53 pm  #11


Re: Rule Changes 2014 Season

Agreed with above  poster, lol.


Don't let your mouth write a check, you and your horse can't cash!
 

12/31/2013 6:23 am  #12


Re: Rule Changes 2014 Season

rtretler wrote:

An offensive player who puts the ball on the ground should lose three points regardless of who recovers the fumble. If he recovers his own fumble he gets three points so it is a wash. Do you think Belichek is okay with Ridley's fumbles if an OL recovers them. Putting the ball on the ground should cost the player who does it.

I think everyone feels this way but NFL.com does not have an easy way to settle this... 


rtretler wrote:

The two teams that made the final both manage their rosters so that they don't have empty starting spots. It seems clear to me that carrying injury prone players costs owners over the long haul as well as in the short term. I don't have a problem with an active owner who chooses to have empty starting spots, I think it is foolish, but I don't have a problem with it. I have a problem with inactive owners who have empty roster spots because they don't pay attention. If an owner  isn't going to pay attention to their team, they need to have a good - and TEMPORARY reason - or they need to be replaced.

Even though I mostly agree with this post Rich, long term isn't the same season but a couple seasons down the line so in all honesty saying 'carrying injury prone players cost owners...' is a bit premature.  

Last edited by Gert-Jan (12/31/2013 6:27 am)

 

12/31/2013 8:37 am  #13


Re: Rule Changes 2014 Season

When I said "over the long haul" I meant multiple seasons - the long haul. I had players in mind like Darren McFaddin, Percy Harvin. Astute owners recognize that some players get hurt more often than others, some players take longer to recover than others. Once a player has a concussion, they are more likely to have another and another and another, each one more debilitating than the last, each recovery requiring more time. The older a player is, the more likely they are to be injured, and their recovery will take longer than a younger player. There are rare exceptions like Adrian Peterson, but they prove the rule. Stating the obvious, that carrying injury prone players costs owners, isn't premature at all. It is, in fact, accurate.


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

1/03/2014 8:42 pm  #14


Re: Rule Changes 2014 Season

To start with the fumbling issue.  We can penalize the player that fumbles the ball with negative points {something we don't presently do}  But keep in mind that if we do then a fumble lost will be BOTH the fumble penalty and the existing fumble lost penalty.  A possible solution would be -2 fumble, -2 fumble lost, +2 fumble recovered.  That would completely eliminate the "glitch" of being rewarded for fumbling and increase the penalty for a lost fumble to -4 {otherwise a lost fumle is -6! which may be a bit too hefty a penalty}

I would only agree to lessen the penalties for sacks and incomplete passes as that would give the lesser QB's a better chance to be competitive.  Inreasing the value of TD's in addition to that simply makes the studs more "studly" and favors those with top passers.  Realistically we may be best off leaving well enough alone.

As far as forcing a team to start active players I say no.  I would be amenable to a rule that everyone must maintain a "complete" roster for the entire season {meaning enough players to fill the starting roster no matter the injury status}  So if you have 2 DL's, even if they are both on IR, as long as you maintain them on your roster you meet the requirements.

And what is fantasy football about?  Winning and having fun.  As long as someone is putting out a team that they think will be the most competitve and trying to win each week most of the rest should be up to them.  If they think their QB will score negative points that week and bench him, that's their business {I know all about having QB's give a team negative points btw! LOL}

I would agree on adding an IR slot thus having 2.  Furthermore I would simply say if NFL.com allows for a player to be put in that slot we should be fine with that {meaning IR or PUP}

Beyond all that, anything which requires manual adjustments to the scoring or excessive micro-management by LM's I am firmly against

{and Rich, until the end of last season Harvin would hardly count as "injury-prone" like McFadden!  If he comes back next year and gets hurt again then maybe I'd tag him with that label}

 

1/06/2014 7:38 am  #15


Re: Rule Changes 2014 Season

We could be having a productive, perhaps enlightening, discussion about roster management, the benefits and drawbacks of carrying lots of injured players on one's roster, the benefits and drawbacks of cutting injured superstars and keeping young talent. Instead, we now have two people who are more inclined to get wrapped around the axle regarding the definition of "long-term" or whether the "injury prone" label applies to Percy Harvin, rather than address the merits of the opinion posited. What does it due to a team's chances of winning if the owner insists on carrying injury (or criminally) prone superstars? If you want to pick at the edges, it's a waste. If you want a discussion of the question, I am interested. Did someone miss the playoffs this year because they carried an injured WR instead of adding Marlon Brown, Ace Sanders, Stedman Bailey, or some other WR who got picked up off waivers? How many more games could a team have won if they had picked up Rashad Jennings or Chris Ogbonnaya? The questions are valid. Will the superstar that got carried come back to their old form or will they be Kenny Britt, Fred Davis, or Darren McFaddin?


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

1/15/2014 5:21 am  #16


Re: Rule Changes 2014 Season

rtretler wrote:

We could be having a productive, perhaps enlightening, discussion about roster management, the benefits and drawbacks of carrying lots of injured players on one's roster, the benefits and drawbacks of cutting injured superstars and keeping young talent. Instead, we now have two people who are more inclined to get wrapped around the axle regarding the definition of "long-term" or whether the "injury prone" label applies to Percy Harvin, rather than address the merits of the opinion posited. What does it due to a team's chances of winning if the owner insists on carrying injury (or criminally) prone superstars? If you want to pick at the edges, it's a waste. If you want a discussion of the question, I am interested. Did someone miss the playoffs this year because they carried an injured WR instead of adding Marlon Brown, Ace Sanders, Stedman Bailey, or some other WR who got picked up off waivers? How many more games could a team have won if they had picked up Rashad Jennings or Chris Ogbonnaya? The questions are valid. Will the superstar that got carried come back to their old form or will they be Kenny Britt, Fred Davis, or Darren McFaddin?

Rich if one of those two "people who are more inclined to discuss long-term" is me, I already gave two lenghty detailed posts about my opinion about all the points Cretena mentioned so... Dredd also gives a lengthy post about his opinion (not only about long-term but also the other points...).

Only four people are posting in this thread were is the rest?

 

Last edited by Gert-Jan (1/15/2014 5:26 am)

 

1/15/2014 5:56 am  #17


Re: Rule Changes 2014 Season

I don't know...
 


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

1/15/2014 6:09 am  #18


Re: Rule Changes 2014 Season

I posted it on FB hopefully some more people will read/react

 

1/15/2014 2:43 pm  #19


Re: Rule Changes 2014 Season

1- Eliminate fumble recovery points for offensive players. I just find it mediocre that offensive players are being awarded with positive points by recovering their own fumbles or another teammate's. NFL does not permit to make the distinction that only defensive players get the points that is why I offer myself to make the adjustments weekly to each game if this situation presents. - Im not happy with amending a scoring play that requires one person to need to manualy amend individual scores.  Its not a trust thing as I have faith that no one would try and amend things to the detriment of another manager, but things like this open up the possibilities of manual error.  As far as Im concerned once the game has finished on a Monday night, thats the end.  I dont like scoring amendments after the fact by NFL, so Im not in favour of amending scores ourselves.  In addition, if you fumble you lose points, if you recover it, you dont lose points.  Players are penalised if they drop and dont recover it.  Im happy with Dredds solution if others are in favour and we get a majority decision.

2- Change QB scoring:

- Remove negative points for sacks and incompletions.
- Remove positive points for completions.
- Increase TD positive points to +6.
- Increase INT negative points to -4.


If we remove the negative points and positive points, I cant see how this will bring the lesser QBS closer to the better QBs?  You are taking away from both sides. You would need to remove the negative points to try and level it out more.  However I cant see why we would look to change this after two years of it working ok.  Again I will be happy to change if we have a majority vote.


THE REAL CHAMP IS HERE
 

1/15/2014 2:55 pm  #20


Re: Rule Changes 2014 Season

3- Make a rule that every week each owner MUST start an ACTIVE player:

1 x QB
1 x RB
1 x WR 
1 x FLEX
1 x K
Complete Defense. 

This season marked a low on owner activity and trading. Many owners played without active players on their lineup. A case can be stated that still by not playing active players the team still won, well that is not what Fantasy Football is about. It is to manage your roster as best as possible, either by picking up on waivers, trading or finding hidden value on a player. I will agree with owners that say that their team was plagued with injuries and didn't want to drop a player for their dynasty value. That is why I give the following change:


4- Add rhe following roster options:

a) IR spot goes from 1 to 2. This spot can only be use for non-designated players for return. 
b) Add 1 spot for IR designated to return/PUP. Like NFL rules this can only be used for 1 player per year.
c) Add 1 Practice Squad spot. This spot will be handled the following way:


After the draft is over and team rosters are set, an owner can choose one player to stay in this spot for the whole year, this player can not play until the following season. It is sort of a development spot but locks the player from playing throughout the season. 


Im in partial agreement with this to the point that everyone should try to start a full team..... HOWEVER, I cant see any reason to make it a rule that everyone must start a player in every position.  As long as a manager is active and putting forward a competitive team, I dont see why he should be forced to drop an injured player from his squad to pick up a DL who may get 1.5 points and force him to lose someone he would rather keep.  Managers should be free to manage exactly how they want and this is something I feel strongly about.  If someone chooses not to play a kicker thats the risk they take.  Like wise with a defensive player. I cant see the reasoning to leave yourself short at RB/WR/Flex but all positions shoudl be treated the same.

I have noticed that there have been more injuries this year then last and I agree with the solution to add additional IR spots, but I think we would be fine with an extra 2 spots and making all IR spots open to anyone desginated on the NFL Fantasy site listed as IR, be it PUP or IR.  I think this will limit the number of teams missing an active player.  However people would need to ensure once the player returns and is no longer designated they are moved to the line up, bench or dropped if needed.

In terms of the practise squad, I feel this would need to be something that would be done and monitored manually as its not an option on the NFL site, therefore I am against this.
 


THE REAL CHAMP IS HERE
 

Board footera

 

Powered by Boardhost. Create a Free Forum