|
Holy poo poo, I thought I won!? I looked at the score at some point last night and thought everyone had played and I was ahead. Seriously, I've had awful luck on matchups.
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2014 23:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 15:16 |
|
|
Anybody wanna trade a good RB/WR for Kenny Hill
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2014 00:43
|
|
|
HOTLANTA MAN posted:Anybody wanna trade a good RB/WR for Kenny Hill How good?
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2014 01:05
|
|
|
Taxes posted:How good? Good enough to start every week. I'm kind of thin. I'll have to look around
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2014 01:06
|
|
|
HOTLANTA MAN posted:Good enough to start every week. I'm kind of thin. I'll have to look around I have quite a few players that are good options for weekly starts - Let me know if anything on my roster interests you.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2014 01:32
|
|
|
My first loss of the season The sign of things to come? 
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2014 14:02
|
|
|
Of the 5 undefeated teams, 4 of them are facing off against each other this week My team, The Bryce is Right, faces Swickles's Will Muschamp's Therapist with the winner moving to 4-0. LeeMajors's undefeated squad takes on Kayakyakr's bye-riddled 3-0 team. It's SHOWDOWN SATURDAY
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2014 20:41
|
|
|
The Piper posted:Of the 5 undefeated teams, 4 of them are facing off against each other this week Not just byes, but injuries... I'm starting a guy with a broken ankle... Wish there was a injured reserve...
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2014 21:34
|
|
|
The Piper posted:Of the 5 undefeated teams, 4 of them are facing off against each other this week They're all fighting for second fiddle 
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2014 23:49
|
|
|
The Piper posted:Of the 5 undefeated teams, 4 of them are facing off against each other this week ITS GOING DOWNNNN I miss being undefeated
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2014 01:41
|
|
|
Taylor Martinez's broken spirit, you have a trade offer.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2014 17:51
|
|
|
I'm worried about losing my big matchup with Swickles now that he has Jameis Winston... wait, he's suspended? for saying what?! 
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2014 19:00
|
|
|
The Piper posted:I'm worried about losing my big matchup with Swickles now that he has Jameis Winston... This is why college football rules.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2014 21:54
|
|
|
We've got a unique situation unfolding regarding kayakyakr's team and editing league rules to conform to a request. Kayak would like to have the min/max number of active/reserve players adjusted so that a player can set less players on Active and more on Reserve. An example of this would be, for example, dropping an active DST to picking up an additional WR/RB to sit on the bench. As it stands now, we have a 9 player (min and max) limit for starting active rosters. Anything less than 9 is set up as an illegal lineup. In addition, any reserve lineup greater than 5 is also an illegal lineup. Want to give your opinion? Submit your opinion here (on the SA thread) and in the Doodle: http://doodle.com/gnm29wakxc7vr6gr
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 16:21
|
|
|
Basically, I knew my week 4 was going to be a problem going in, but I'm trying my best to not give LeeMajors a free win.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 16:54
|
|
|
I voted no because I have no need for it, but I really have no opinion RE: the rest of the league, so either way works for me
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 17:27
|
|
|
I voted no since we've always been doing it this way and have had to deal with it. Suck it up.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 17:58
|
|
|
That seems as abusable re: collusion as the Penn St - James trade.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 18:10
|
|
|
I don't really see how it's abusable. Being able to not play a kicker or defense or tightend is common in most fantasy football leagues I've done.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 18:12
|
|
|
I guess as long as there's a gentleman's agreement to keep it sensible (Something like you have to have at least 1 starter at each position, and no carrying like 8 QBs) I'm fine with it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 18:15
|
|
|
TheFlyingLlama posted:I guess as long as there's a gentleman's agreement to keep it sensible (Something like you have to have at least 1 starter at each position, and no carrying like 8 QBs) I'm fine with it. I'd be a lot more comfortable with this change if we had every unowned player on WW, which I plan on implementing next year (and forgot to do in the preseason this year). Keeping all FAs on the WW evens out the playing field for those who are not as active on games, Fantrax stats, or player news.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 18:18
|
|
|
This is a pretty major rules change that shouldn't happen mid-season if it passes.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 18:25
|
|
|
jabro posted:This is a pretty major rules change that shouldn't happen mid-season if it passes. Pretty much this. I have no opinion about the rule, but we can change it after the year is out.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 18:32
|
|
|
Yoshifan823 posted:Pretty much this. I have no opinion about the rule, but we can change it after the year is out. This, pretty much. Make this a rule in 2015, not halfway through 2014. It's a pretty significantly different strategy if we can do this.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 18:43
|
|
|
e: ^^ is it that different and what does it allow you to do that you would actually want to do? Only thing I can see is it lets me absorb the injury a bit better. Gives me about a 20 point boost, on average, trading kicker for RB/WR. This is the first league I've been in where this is an issue. You have a limited number of players you can play, that doesn't change. Someone may try to stockpile WR's or QB's but that's not really doing them too much good because they can still only play 3. Also wouldn't be too much of an issue if there was an Injured Reserve. But basically, with the smaller reserve size, if you have a player that's going to be out 4-6 weeks, you are (ie I am) screwed if ever bye weeks line up while your player is out. I'll take my loss, I had planned on taking a loss this week anyway. I just don't anyone to be angry at me for not making an honest effort. Webbeh posted:I'd be a lot more comfortable with this change if we had every unowned player on WW, which I plan on implementing next year (and forgot to do in the preseason this year). Keeping all FAs on the WW evens out the playing field for those who are not as active on games, Fantrax stats, or player news. I'm ok with this as long as it's a quick turnaround WW. Clears at the end of the day or something like that. That way it does encourage people to be active, just doesn't give those that are very active a huge leg up. And while we're there, maybe just a simple max roster size and max active size, no limits otherwise? That way in case someone does need to drop their kicker in order to start a full bank of RB's, they can? kayakyakr fucked around with this message at 19:00 on Sep 18, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 18:52
|
|
|
I like injured reserve or just a slightly bigger roster for reserves I guess. Part of team building is managing byes and I drafted accordingly. I have every reserve player on bye this week and I dropped a Vols receiver when he got hurt but I hope to grab him again later if practice reports are favorable. I can see going with no kicker or tight end because of byes since they score lower on average. Anything past that is questionable.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 19:02
|
|
|
Needs a minimum active size too
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 19:03
|
|
|
JesustheDarkLord posted:I like injured reserve or just a slightly bigger roster for reserves I guess. Part of team building is managing byes and I drafted accordingly. I have every reserve player on bye this week and I dropped a Vols receiver when he got hurt but I hope to grab him again later if practice reports are favorable. I had it all set up to do that too, prior to my #1 RB going down. I don't trust you chucklefucks to not have someone pick him up if I dropped him. An injured reserve would help, though. JesustheDarkLord posted:Needs a minimum active size too If we're trying to prevent someone from benching their entire roster, I guess? But why would anyone do that?
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 19:20
|
|
|
To throw a game for playoff competition purposes, I guess. I don't think that anyone here would but I don't think that Komet was trying to tank his team with that trade either.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 19:27
|
|
|
JesustheDarkLord posted:To throw a game for playoff competition purposes, I guess. I don't think that anyone here would but I don't think that Komet was trying to tank his team with that trade either. Komet just really loving loses Penn State.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 19:30
|
|
|
I draft based on limiting the amount of byes that overlap, so its kind of not fair to change the rules mid season, otherwise I would have draftee a lot differently.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 19:34
|
|
|
I wasn't even aware we had a min active set up, but if it was a widely known thing I guess it doesn't make sense to change in the middle of the season. The reserve roster is small though, and I'd support next year either increasing it by one or adding 1 'injured reserve' slot if that's technically possible on fantrax.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 20:25
|
|
|
Fork of Unknown Origins posted:I wasn't even aware we had a min active set up, but if it was a widely known thing I guess it doesn't make sense to change in the middle of the season. The reserve roster is small though, and I'd support next year either increasing it by one or adding 1 'injured reserve' slot if that's technically possible on fantrax. It's possible. I looked to see if we had an injured reserve when my guy went down. I wouldn't be opposed to having an injured reserve slot at all. I do like the small reserve because I enjoy the roster churn. Means that aside from your key starters, everyone is usually forced to do a bit of free agency to make bye weeks work.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 20:38
|
|
|
Yeah, its weird to change midseason because someone has a bad situation on his roster--you just have to deal with it. I don't oppose this rule change if it happens next season. If you're afraid of losing your RB, you'll have to keep him on your roster and drop someone less important, I reckon.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 21:11
|
|
|
LeeMajors posted:Yeah, its weird to change midseason because someone has a bad situation on his roster--you just have to deal with it. It's only a problem because it lines up with my bye week for my top 2 receivers, #2 RB, defense, and QB. I could fix it with a trade, but I'm such a homer for these two receivers that I don't think I can bring myself to do it >_<.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 22:09
|
|
|
I was in the same situation for this week and I dropped Von Pearson, my top homer pick, because he was injured.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 22:18
|
|
|
The tribe has spoken. kayakyakr, DEAL WITH IT
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2014 23:15
|
|
|
JesustheDarkLord posted:I was in the same situation for this week and I dropped Von Pearson, my top homer pick, because he was injured. Except my homer pick is actually good.  e: Gonna celebrate that I'll now hold the lead for at least 36 hours in this matchup. kayakyakr fucked around with this message at 00:45 on Sep 19, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 19, 2014 00:08
|
|
|
If the Jameis yearlong suspension rumors are true, swickles got nothing for Penn State's defense. Ha ha.
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2014 13:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 15:16 |
|
|
JesustheDarkLord posted:If the Jameis yearlong suspension rumors are true, swickles got nothing for Penn State's defense. Ha ha. This would probably be the best possible course of action
|
|
#
?
Sep 20, 2014 15:21
|
|