|
Post by Baltimore Ravens on Mar 28, 2011 21:20:01 GMT -5
Why do we play Fantasy Football?
I can't speak for everyone,but I play because I love the game,and I enjoy the competition. So I've been thinking of ways to make the competition more fun and fair. Im gonna split it up into 2 or 3 posts to make it easier to discuss the individual ideas effectively.I think all of the ideas should be considered together to be effective,but would be too hard to discuss in one post. I welcome all constructive criticism.
I think that we should lower the max amount of years your allowed to sign players. I know this may be a touchy subject for some,but hear me out. We all look forward each year to finding that diamond in the rough and reaping the rewards of our research and scouting skills. But should you get exclusive rights to that person for probably half his career? If you take into consideration the use of contract extension,franchise tag and transition tags(which i will touch on later), that player could be unavailable throughout his entire career. For the sake of competition, i think players should hit the open market a bit sooner. At least make the original owner compete to keep him.
I suggest a 3yr max on drafted players, and 4yrs on free agents. What does everyone think?
|
|
|
Post by patsfan on Mar 28, 2011 22:59:44 GMT -5
Its clear you put a lot of thought into these ideas, the league as a whole should thank you for your efforts. challenging the way is the only way we can progress.
Many of your ideas have merit, but many of them also clash with our nfl mentality. I am obviously biased about contract length, so you may take my comments with a grain of salt, but the fact remains: we modeled this league mainly after the nfl, and in the nfl, contract length is very similar to ours. We also modeled our rookie salary scale after the nfl. in the nfl 1st rounders are mostly given 5,6 year deals, 2nd rounders - 4 year deals, and 3rd rounders - 3 years. Our rookie salary scale is not how it is by coincidence. The salaries are also as closely simulated to the nfl as possible (obviously qbs get paid more in the nfl etc). And free agency is also very similar. Nfl teams hand out up to 5 year deals to free agents as well. Changing contract length and removing the extension and the franchise tag would go completely against our nfl model.
The beauty of this league IMO is its similarity to the NFL. we are a very unique fantasy league (well we would be if we hadnt started cloning ourselves LOL JK) in that we have 32 "gms" who, many i believe, wish this wasnt just a fantasy but real life. We have structure ourselves as a fantasy "NFL" league, where competition is indeed tough, and dynastys can be skillfully assembled with the right moves. i for one, am confident that any team can be turned around very quickly with the right free agent acquisitions and draft picks. I dont believe competition is lacking at all. We just finished our first year, so we cannot yet know for sure whether competition is a problem. The best we can do is carry on our founding prinicples and model ourselves after the NFL, where competition is strong. So, in my admittely biased state, i truely believe that it would be rash to upset the structure on which the league was founded.
many of your other ideas have merit, however. i believe that it may in fact be a good idea to give compensation to a team losing a transition tagged player in free agency. Im not sure if it should necessarily be a cash compensation, i believe a draft pick would make more sense. I hope we can continue to model ourselves after the nfl. The nfl does in fact give compensation. Their transition tag differs quite a bit from ours. I think a change to the transition tag is indeed something worth discussing. Adding a draft pick if the player is lost may be possible. It also may not be such a good idea but i think it is certainly worth discussing. good point.
as for your third idea, forgive me for being blunt, but isnt that what RB is for? Im not sure if adding an additional penalty is necessary. I do hope, however, that we can continue to work on the idea of a practice squad and fine tune it for possible implementation. Your idea for the offseason limit and the p squad is interesting, i dont believe i have paid it enough attention to respond.
as a member of dynasty32 i appreciate your well-thought suggestions. we have this suggestion board for reason. if we all put as much thought into possible rule changes as you, this league would benefit tremendously. please do not take any of my comments as being absolute, I am but one of 32 owners. I hope you will understand that i am merely offering feedback and constructive criticism to a well-formulated suggestion.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 29, 2011 7:31:46 GMT -5
Thank you BAL for putting yourself out there with several well thought out suggestions. As a memeber of the STAFF I know many times it has been discussed that we want all the owners to put forth suggestions, hey D32 is about all 32 owners.
In the past some have chosen to send PM's to STAFF because they just dont like posting (not everyone is a wordsmith:) and STAFF has then put those ideas forward, but ultimately having owners step up with ideas such as thiese helps lead and guide the future of this league.
Great ideas come from everywhere so other owner PLEASE be encouraged to comment on BAL suggestions and make your own. It is rare that any idea is actually implemented as first proposed~so dont be discouraged by others suggesting tweaks or differing opinions~ that is all part of the process to achieving good changes.
|
|
|
Post by Commish on Mar 29, 2011 18:20:40 GMT -5
I kinda like this idea, i've thought about it myself, it would be going away from the idea of following the NFL so closely but it would yield a higher turnover rate which fantasy tends to be about.
definately a topic of disscussion
|
|
|
Post by Baltimore Ravens on Mar 29, 2011 18:50:55 GMT -5
I agree with some of your points Houston, with regard to following the nfl model, but where the competition lacks for me....If we are truly following an nfl model, then how realistic is it for one player to really stay with one team, granted it does happen. I find it is way too easy to keep everyone from your team year to year...in the nfl players refuse to sign, or get lured away by another teams offer. Obviously we can't mimick every aspect,but I feel my ideas put more realism into our policies ,and chances for teams to lure talent from someone at the top. The Compensation idea, is a way to see to it that one player can't kill another's talent pool. The way we have it now, a star 1st rounder is unavailable for 5-6 years, then toward the end of their contract, all you have to do is extend,franchis or transition tag them til they retire.(franchise being the last resort) I appreciate your comments, it helps the brainstorming session get started . I look forward to more comments from other owners also.
|
|
|
Post by Commish on Mar 30, 2011 18:32:09 GMT -5
lowering the length of contracts is something i have been wondering about, at first 5 seemed good but now it does seem alittle long, what does everyone else think?
|
|
|
Post by ktownsteelers on Mar 30, 2011 19:02:24 GMT -5
I think 5 is fine.You got to remember if you pick someone up for 5yrs and he falls off and has a RB you are still on contract to pay it.So yes it goes both ways as for the reason to keep it or change it.When you sign someone for 5 yrs you are stuck with it.Theirs nothing that says you have to sign for 5yrs.If you want to have them players on your team that are great for yrs to come do the work and get them.Thats why we have trades and drafts.Do the work and it will show down the road.I don't think you punish a team that is willing to do the work then lose the player because someone that does not put in the work doesn't think it fair.Thats just my 2 cents worth.
|
|
|
Post by patsfan on Mar 30, 2011 19:15:25 GMT -5
ya in the nfl some free agents/draft picks get up to 7 or 8 year deals (mcnabb once got 12). so i think we have a nice balance. too much turnover wouldnt be wise, this is a dynasty league after all.
|
|
|
Post by ktownsteelers on Mar 30, 2011 19:25:08 GMT -5
well said houston
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 31, 2011 7:37:40 GMT -5
I think 5 years is too long for contracts in our fanatasy league...3 would be good,,,4 perhaps,,,but 5 is just too long. Come one guys which do you think would make for more exciting fantasy play~and actual competition? If you are a good owner you can rebuild too, and not be so dependent upon long term contracts and the many protections we offer for contracts ending. Jmy2c
|
|
|
Post by patsfan on Mar 31, 2011 11:29:05 GMT -5
again just IMO lowering contract length wouldnt be a good idea. look at draft picks. if we lowered the first rounders to less than 5, and the second rounders to less than 4, and the third rounders to less than 3, by the time players finally break out they will be free agents. thats probly what guys like the jets would like since they dont like building with the draft, but for the many owners that do (myself included), it would be a terrible mistake. The rookie draft in a big dynasty league like this should be a big event, it should be the main focus of the offseason (as it is in the NFL). lowering contract length would completely devalue the draft, as by the time you can get any serious value from your picks, they will be lost to free agency. lets not forget, that this league is supposed to be a dynasty, not redraft. the draft is a great way for teams to evaluate talent and rebuild. I think changing contract length, and removing any tags, would completely change the dynamic of the league and would turn it more into redraft auction then dynasty. There are plenty of ways to acquire talent either by trade or smart pickups in fa, the competition will not be lacking if we keep our structure the way it is. Personally, and i kno thats just me, i love the way our league is structured. It is structured so any team can make the playoffs with the right fa pickups or draft picks. While maybe part of the fact might be that i just won the championship, i truly believe we have a great system in place. Teams can easily turn their franchise around with a nice draft, or skillful waiver wire maneuvering. lets not forget that this is a 32 team league, so not everyone can win it all or even come close each year. i think it would be a mistake to throw away the whole structure that we have worked towards the past year, the structure that makes unique, the structure that models us after the nfl, with the purpose to restore competition that IMO is not at all lacking.
ps- i actually think your other league, 4th and whatever, could be a nice place to test out these ideas. you guys just got started, why completely clone this league which has already played out, you guys could differ yourselves a little bit and apply some of these concepts. i just dont think it would be wise to completely uproot a league already embedded.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 31, 2011 12:11:41 GMT -5
I hate to agree with Houston, I kind of like the way it is now. It does limit the number of FA, but bidding does get crazy in this league. Just think about what would have happen if a real stud QB hit the market.
Houston, I think you have cried about the "other" league enough. Just move on.
|
|
|
Post by patsfan on Mar 31, 2011 12:13:44 GMT -5
i am not crying. i wouldnt have even joined as one league like this is more than enough. i am merely suggesting that a new startup would be a more suitable place to introduce such ideas.
|
|
|
Post by Baltimore Ravens on Mar 31, 2011 16:10:15 GMT -5
I appreciate your opinions, but lets focus on this league. Im not in that league and could care less about fixing it. I wanna discuss new ideas for this league. I think more competition is always better. I think a max 4 yrs is plenty enough time to enjoy the gains from a star player. It was said...that if i want a star player for 5 yrs then i need to just go out and draft one myself. Im in the belief that star players should be able to remain on a team for long periods of time, I just think that team should have to earn the right to keep him. I just want that period of time that you have him exclusively to be shortened by one year.
|
|
|
Post by Denver Broncos on Mar 31, 2011 17:51:53 GMT -5
Please don't take this post as disrespect Baltimore. I know everyone is entitled to their opinion, and I think you make some valid points. But why fix something that isn't broken? This league is awesome, and has been a source of constant entertainment for me for the past year. From what i can see there isn't anything being perverted or distorted for any one team. I think there is more than enough competition. Yes, Houston had a great team this year and will definitely be the team to beat, but something tells me he won't run the table this year. I honestly don't think much of anything needs to be changed in this league. Of course only my opinion and of course, like I said before, everyone is entitled to theirs.
|
|
|
Post by Commish on Mar 31, 2011 20:03:26 GMT -5
Im also a big fan of that whole if it's not broke, don't fix it theory. But hows this for an idea that could really meet in the middle on both sides.
Dont touch the length of rookies as rookies in real life can tend to sign longer deals then some (mainly not top tier) free agents. Then lower the free agent bids to either 3 or 4 years.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 1, 2011 4:25:30 GMT -5
I like the suggestion by the Commish. That was actually what I was going to suggest myself until I read his post.
|
|
|
Post by Baltimore Ravens on Apr 1, 2011 7:40:50 GMT -5
Maybe im just interpreting your post incorrectly, but let me be clear. I am not making suggestions because I think anyone unfairly won last year, or that competition was slanted. I like this league tremendously, thats why im trying so hard to promote new ideas. I had a great year last year also, I wouldn't make a suggestion just to help myself anyway. I just took a look at some things I felt could use some tweeking. I felt that the policies we currently have were consistently made or assisted teams in their ability to hold onto everyone they currently have with very little competition involved. The transition tag is the only way that a person can possibly get another player from someone else. I also feel that the contracts are too long, I think we should offer more opportunities for competition, not less.
|
|
|
Post by Baltimore Ravens on Apr 1, 2011 7:43:44 GMT -5
Didn't see commishs suggestion til after i posted...I like the suggestion commish. That seems pretty fair to me. Longer gains for good drafting skills, and more competition after the original contract is done. But in order for any of that to matter, the contract extension should be considered for removal. IMO
|
|
|
Post by Commish on Apr 1, 2011 16:32:02 GMT -5
extension would be a whole different story, we should just look at it one thing at a time starting now with the length idea here.
|
|
|
Post by San Francisco 49ers on Apr 1, 2011 20:41:57 GMT -5
Ya I think thats a pretty good idea too Kev also we gotta remember how many starters and bench spots we have, and how many tags we have...One Franchise (how many people actually used it?) only one extension, usually there are multiple people you could extend, but you can only do it with one. And one transition tag, not everyone uses it in the first place, and not everyone resigns afterwards...I'm talking about this year and last. I hear what your saying, but JMO three possible tags, aren't too much...and yes I'm aware I did use all three, but if that happens every year I'll be surprised...
|
|
|
Post by zippychippy on May 5, 2011 17:02:15 GMT -5
I'm all for lowering max years from 5 to 3 or anything else that get my team out of the crapper faster.
|
|
|
Post by patsfan on May 6, 2011 15:23:38 GMT -5
why would that necessarily help you? you should be looking to rebuild through the draft, and with only a 3 year contract most of those picks would be useless.....
|
|
|
Post by Tennessee Titans on Nov 11, 2011 13:04:16 GMT -5
If you want increased competition, lets put some money into it. For me thats the thing that gets me paying more attention.
I would say something like $10 a team, just a small amount because there are bad teams that will take time to recover.
If you make the playoff as Wild Card $10 * 4 = $40 Division Winners $20 * 8 = $160 Conference winners $30 * 2 = 60 Super Bowl winner $60
Total = $320, maybe pay the league cost out of this. So Super Bowl winner get $40 and Conference winners get $25 Division winners get $15
That leaves $70 to pay for the league.
Just my 2 cents.
|
|
|
Post by patsfan on Nov 11, 2011 15:43:18 GMT -5
im all for it, but it would have to be approved by a majority of the owners. and then what happens to the owners who dont agree with it? wed have to overhaul the league to a certain extent. it would be tough to do, especially when you think about how big and complex this league is and how ther will be teams in the dumps whose owners will quit after the year is over. perhaps most of all it makes it even harder (almost possible) to find replacements for a crappy team when you add in the fact that they would have to throw in 10 or 20 (to commit for 2 years) on top of it.
bottom line, id love nothing more, but you will have to convince the league that it is doable
|
|
|
Post by Tennessee Titans on Nov 11, 2011 16:47:04 GMT -5
Thats why I suggested $10, for me thats nothing but it will keep me interested.
I am willing to throw $20 away to rebuild for the fun of it. Maybe not everyone will?
|
|
|
Post by San Francisco 49ers on Nov 11, 2011 21:31:08 GMT -5
I'm not gonna sit here and say I would really want to, but it's not a totally bad idea either. I just don't see it happening, maybe this offseason we will see how many teams would be open to the idea...
|
|
|
Post by patsfan on Nov 14, 2011 11:30:07 GMT -5
ya after the season we will poll the owners and go from there
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 14, 2011 16:17:06 GMT -5
I think 5 year contracts are too long...i have always been for a 3 year max...along with an imposed limit on the amount of RB allowed into the bidding process. effectively lowering the years will help reduce the likelihood of crazy insane RB's that too severely limit a new owners ability to rebuild within a season or possible two.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 14, 2011 16:19:42 GMT -5
As for Skin in the Game....money payouts....i am concerned that it could raise some issues for owners that either for religious or 'gambling' reasons would have to exit the league.
Prizes are cool, but couldnt it be limited to things other than money. Like bragging rights in a top banner or something. or maybe even a trophy have seen this work in other leagues.
|
|