Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

The WIP Fantasy Charter Discussion Thread

Options
135

Comments

  • Options
    #62
    Dodge
    Registered Users Posts: 10,167 ✭✭✭✭Dodge


    Cam Newton wrote: »
    Just so you know, you can join more than 3 leagues. I'm in 4 at the moment.

    However I don't think additional leagues such as PPR should be restricted to NFL.com anyway. Only the main leagues which all need to follow the same format (Prem - Div 5) should.

    Hmmm, I must've ballsed up then. Thought I read it here too...

    Either way i agree with your main point


  • Options
    #63
    Dodge
    Registered Users Posts: 10,167 ✭✭✭✭Dodge


    Frisbee wrote: »
    I'd be more a fan of having any inactive players relegated and disallowed from competing the next season.

    Agreed. If they want to join back up, they should start at the bottom (if there's space) but preferably you wouldn't have them in any league


  • Options
    #64
    D3PO
    Registered Users Posts: 7,879 ✭✭✭D3PO


    Frisbee wrote: »
    Yeah of the 6 teams that make the playoff's it will be the last four in that get promoted.

    So then we'd have the 4 worst active players relegated. And any inactive players relegated also? I'd be more a fan of having any inactive players relegated and disallowed from competing the next season.

    To clarify my point,

    if you have 2 inactive players then its the 2 worst records relegated and the 2 inactives kicked totally

    that leaves 4 places for promotion. you promoite the 4 from the league below and so on and so forth.


  • Options
    #65
    Peyton Manning
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,658 ✭✭✭✭Peyton Manning


    D3PO wrote: »
    To clarify my point,

    if you have 2 inactive players then its the 2 worst records relegated and the 2 inactives kicked totally

    that leaves 4 places for promotion. you promoite the 4 from the league below and so on and so forth.

    The 4 promoted teams would only get replaced by 2 relegated teams though. Wouldn't work.


  • Options
    #66
    D3PO
    Registered Users Posts: 7,879 ✭✭✭D3PO


    Cam Newton wrote: »
    The 4 promoted teams would only get replaced by 2 relegated teams though. Wouldn't work.

    yes it would because as with any pyramid structure you work from the top down hence why the promotion / relegation stiuation needs to be more specifically called out.

    take the following scenario

    prem

    2 inactive kicked 2 worst records relegated.

    div 1

    top 4 promoted

    4 relegated or 2 relegated depending on what we agree on (need this to be specified in the charter)

    div 2

    if 4 relegated from div 1 then top 6 promoted
    if 2 relegated from div 1 then 4 promoted


    and so on and so forth if you say 4 go up tht has to be your starting point with a minimum of 4 going up and everything else should work top down to fit that that means some teams might get a reprieve from relegation but long term it is the ebst way of getting the top teams into the top tiers.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #67
    SSK
    Registered Users Posts: 948 ✭✭✭SSK


    Just a question...is there much inactivity in the leagues at present?

    I don't think I've seen any teams ignoring bye weeks in Div 3 and most games seem very competitive. I'm assuming the top couple of divisions are likewise.


  • Options
    #68
    D3PO
    Registered Users Posts: 7,879 ✭✭✭D3PO


    SSK wrote: »
    Just a question...is there much inactivity in the leagues at present?

    I don't think I've seen any teams ignoring bye weeks in Div 3 and most games seem very competitive. I'm assuming the top couple of divisions are likewise.

    check the owners link in your league to see the last owners login

    click league then owners

    In Division 1 we have 1 inactive for kicking out next Season everybody else has logged in in the past 6 days.

    Bobo's Clowns last active Thu, Sep 15, 8:50am


  • Options
    #69
    Spongey1975
    Registered Users Posts: 1,849 ✭✭✭Spongey1975


    If there is inactive players in whichever division (say 2 for example) then they are removed from the league and only 2 are relegated to lower division, The four promoted then will keep that division at 16. As for the division below as only 2 are coming down and four going up there leaves a shortfall of two. This can be fixed by only relegating 2 from that division and along with the four promoted teams will keep that division at 16. This goes on all the way to the bottom division.


  • Options
    #70
    D3PO
    Registered Users Posts: 7,879 ✭✭✭D3PO


    Spongey1975 wrote: »
    If there is inactive players in whichever division (say 2 for example) then they are removed from the league and only 2 are relegated to lower division, The four promoted then will keep that division at 16. As for the division below as only 2 are coming down and four going up there leaves a shortfall of two. This can be fixed by only relegating 2 from that division and along with the four promoted teams will keep that division at 16. This goes on all the way to the bottom division.

    Thats what I was trying to say albeit not very clearly :D


  • Options
    #71
    Frisbee
    Registered Users Posts: 23,562 ✭✭✭✭Frisbee


    Ok so are people happy to roll with the charter I've posted above with the changes for relegation modified to essentially what Spongey has put so eloquently above?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #72
    Frisbee
    Registered Users Posts: 23,562 ✭✭✭✭Frisbee


    Yes / No?

    The quicker we can all agree on a charter/rules the quicker I can get the forum open....


  • Options
    #73
    Raoul
    Registered Users Posts: 7,692 ✭✭✭Raoul


    Frisbee wrote: »
    Yes / No?

    The quicker we can all agree on a charter/rules the quicker I can get the forum open....

    Yeah!


  • Options
    #74
    D3PO
    Registered Users Posts: 7,879 ✭✭✭D3PO


    yes


  • Options
    #75
    Benimar
    Registered Users Posts: 7,778 ✭✭✭Benimar


    Yes!


  • Options
    #76
    SSK
    Registered Users Posts: 948 ✭✭✭SSK


    Yep


  • Options
    #77
    Spongey1975
    Registered Users Posts: 1,849 ✭✭✭Spongey1975


    Frisbee wrote: »
    Yes / No?

    The quicker we can all agree on a charter/rules the quicker I can get the forum open....

    I'd say it will do to get the forum open but the rules governing the boards league (prem to div 5) will need to more detailed than that but since they wont be in place til next season there is no rush with them


  • Options
    #78
    tallaghtoutlaws
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,067 ✭✭✭tallaghtoutlaws


    Yes.

    Throw up a work in progress charter for the leagues themselves and you can then throw up a discussion thread to get the final rules for the League nailed in place.


  • Options
    #79
    SSK
    Registered Users Posts: 948 ✭✭✭SSK


    Sorry I meant to mention one thing earlier.

    If the leagues are to remain as 16 team divisions then the idea of including a flex starter somewhere should be definitely discussed. Particularly during the bye week, putting out competitive teams is very tough. I do like the 16 team divisions though because of how competitive it is.

    Just something that can be discussed further down the line I suppose.


  • Options
    #80
    tallaghtoutlaws
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,067 ✭✭✭tallaghtoutlaws


    SSK wrote: »
    Sorry I meant to mention one thing earlier.

    If the leagues are to remain as 16 team divisions then the idea of including a flex starter somewhere should be definitely discussed. Particularly during the bye week, putting out competitive teams is very tough. I do like the 16 team divisions though because of how competitive it is.

    Just something that can be discussed further down the line I suppose.

    The flex position was discussed at length last July before the leagues were setup. Although I see no reason why it can't be brought up again.

    I for one would be against it. The only flex I would be half for would be WR/TE

    Also don't forget every team struggles with their bye week so its a level playing field.


  • Options
    #81
    adrian522
    Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 16,095 Mod ✭✭✭✭adrian522


    It was discussed before the season and a vote was taken, it was decided there would be no flex,

    I presume a fresh vote can be taken next year, but if there is a flex option and people are typically taking an additional RB then there will be very little RB's floating around on waivers.

    EDIT: What TO said.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #82
    D3PO
    Registered Users Posts: 7,879 ✭✭✭D3PO


    totalyl agree with Adrian and TO Im against flex but if in the interests of democracy it needs to be voted on again so be it.


  • Options
    #83
    SSK
    Registered Users Posts: 948 ✭✭✭SSK


    I know it was discussed prior to this season but I think this season is the first that most people have played 16 team leagues and that peoples perspective may have changed.

    I really don't think that it would impact the amount of players on the waiver wire. All of the best players are rostered at the start, decent players only pop up on the waiver wire due to injuries etc. Perhaps drafting strategy would change slightly but the players drafted wouldn't really change imo.

    That said, its just another issue that should be raised prior to next year. Personally I can see the pros and cons of both flex and no flex.


  • Options
    #84
    Peyton Manning
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,658 ✭✭✭✭Peyton Manning


    I'd probably vote for WR/TE flex for next season when the discussion arises tbh.


  • Options
    #85
    D3PO
    Registered Users Posts: 7,879 ✭✭✭D3PO


    SSK wrote: »
    I know it was discussed prior to this season but I think this season is the first that most people have played 16 team leagues and that peoples perspective may have changed.

    I really don't think that it would impact the amount of players on the waiver wire. All of the best players are rostered at the start, decent players only pop up on the waiver wire due to injuries etc. Perhaps drafting strategy would change slightly but the players drafted wouldn't really change imo.

    That said, its just another issue that should be raised prior to next year. Personally I can see the pros and cons of both flex and no flex.

    16 team leagues are complex enough as it is and you definatly change the dynamic by having a flex starter aswell. Im happy to vote on it again and I expect that most people would agree Flex is a bad idea.


  • Options
    #86
    Johnny_Fontane
    Registered Users Posts: 3,093 ✭✭✭Johnny_Fontane


    Why not reduce the number of wr's to two and then introduce a flex....


  • Options
    #87
    Frisbee
    Registered Users Posts: 23,562 ✭✭✭✭Frisbee


    Ok I've opened the forum so we can use it this year. I've also outlined a fairly rough charter and set of rules in the charter thread

    This thread will be for the discussion of rules and guidelines so we can have an airtight charter and set of rules going into the 12/13 season.


  • Options
    #88
    tallaghtoutlaws
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,067 ✭✭✭tallaghtoutlaws


    Johnny_Fontane wrote: »
    Why not reduce the number of wr's to two and then introduce a flex....

    Well thats what normally happens when you use the flex. It was voted on last July and No Flex won by a landslide. The next one closest to it was WR/TE flex.


  • Options
    #89
    eagle eye
    Registered Users Posts: 37,556 ✭✭✭✭eagle eye


    Cam Newton wrote: »

    Inactivity shouldn't be punished on the forum, but given the circumstances, those who are inactive should move to the back of the queue for all divisions for the following year.
    I just came on to read this thread but I really don't have time to be posting about FF on here with any regularity anymore. I do post occasionally in the AF forum and I always update my team on the NFL site. I don't think there should be anything regarding posting in this sub-forum moving you to the 'back of the queue' stuff. I was against this forum from the outset if you remember as I think FF will not be as popular on here because of it.


  • Options
    #90
    Peyton Manning
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,658 ✭✭✭✭Peyton Manning


    eagle eye wrote: »
    I just came on to read this thread but I really don't have time to be posting about FF on here with any regularity anymore. I do post occasionally in the AF forum and I always update my team on the NFL site. I don't think there should be anything regarding posting in this sub-forum moving you to the 'back of the queue' stuff. I was against this forum from the outset if you remember as I think FF will not be as popular on here because of it.

    Nothing to do with this forum, I'm talking about inactivity as in not managing your team, not activity on the forum. Surely you didn't think I meant the latter?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #91
    eagle eye
    Registered Users Posts: 37,556 ✭✭✭✭eagle eye


    Cam Newton wrote: »
    Nothing to do with this forum, I'm talking about inactivity as in not managing your team, not activity on the forum. Surely you didn't think I meant the latter?
    Yes I did, it wasn't clear.


Advertisement