Anonymous
My feedback
8 results found
-
3rd ranked
An error occurred while saving the comment An error occurred while saving the comment Anonymous
commented
I don't want to join a league & then discover that the Commish is enforcing a roster limit on some position.
And I don't want to be in a league with a Commish who can impose a roster limit on some position at some point in the season.
Well, I guess maybe I'd be okay with it IF the players are allowed to remove the Commish after he imposes a roster limit and then we could return the league to sensible rules.An error occurred while saving the comment Anonymous
commented
I oppose this idea.
I want to keep a couple of good players on my bench at all times.
They are useful for injuries and byeweeks.
Limiting my bench will limit my ability to manage my team well.An error occurred while saving the comment Anonymous
commented
If this idea is accepted, how easy (how difficult) will it be to check the rules for each league to see whether a max has been put on to a position?
An error occurred while saving the comment Anonymous
commented
MaveROCK -- Perhaps you should add the chance-of-injury to your analysis. Although QBs do get injured, RBs are much more likely to be injured. So, having one reserve QB should be plenty enough most seasons to handle injury problems and bye week problems.
You are obviously correct that more starting WRs are in the NFL than starting RBs. However, with 3rd-down backs and change-of-pace backs, a surprisingly large number of RBs are available who score more fantasy points than most WRs.
In fact, several teams have a fullback who scores more fantasy points than some starting WRs.
I again suggest that the problem can be solved more simply by changing your league's settings. Add a second QB to each team's starting lineup, or add another receiver position (WR/TE) to each team's starting lineup. You may be surprised at how easily you shift the behavior of your managers.An error occurred while saving the comment Anonymous
commented
MaveROCK -- Do you ever follow "hand-cuff" recommendations? Many Fantasy Football magazines suggest that you draft your star RB's back-up player. An obvious example would be drafting RB Peterson of the Vikings, then drafting RB Gerhart of the Vikings as an insurance policy for when Peterson is unable to play -- which happened during four of Peterson's seven seasons in the NFL.
The hand-cuff strategy is well worn. It has proven to be a really really really good idea with RBs. I don't understand why you would want to eliminate this strategy in your league.An error occurred while saving the comment Anonymous
commented
I don't want to join a league & then discover that the Commish is enforcing a roster limit on some position.
And I don't want to be in a league with a Commish who can impose a roster limit on some position at some point in the season.
Well, I guess maybe I'd be okay with it IF the players are allowed to remove the Commish after he imposes a roster limit.An error occurred while saving the comment Anonymous
commented
It sounds as though you set up your league with some positions scoring a lot more points than other positions.
If you had set it up so that each position is valuable, then owners would have a reason to draft a good balance of players/positions.An error occurred while saving the comment Anonymous
commented
I don't see how a cap on the number of RBs or QBs or whatever that a team can draft would help in any of my leagues.
-
23rd rankedAnonymous
supported this idea
·
-
17th rankedAnonymous
supported this idea
·
-
15th rankedAnonymous
supported this idea
·
-
6th ranked
An error occurred while saving the comment Anonymous
commented
I agree -- Yahoo should not allow the commish to change roster positions after the draft.
An error occurred while saving the comment Anonymous
commented
Changing a league's "settings" (or rules) after the draft is cheating.
It should NOT be allowed.An error occurred while saving the comment Anonymous
commented
Changing a league's "settings" (or rules) after the draft is a form of cheating.
It should not be allowed. -
4th ranked
-
1st ranked
An error occurred while saving the comment Anonymous
commented
Sure -- Jose should receive a medal for "not commenting on this dumb idea."
And, Anonymous should lose at least a dozen medals for suggesting this "dumb idea."Anonymous
supported this idea
·
An error occurred while saving the comment Anonymous
commented
Should Jim should receive a medal for changing the wording on his comment?
We get medals for just about everything else.An error occurred while saving the comment Anonymous
commented
Maybe Yahoo could just give a medal to players each time they make a first down. I'd rather see the medals go there than to continue cluttering up my Yahoo account.
An error occurred while saving the comment Anonymous
commented
The Nov.30 comment from Anonymous seems sensible for the default.
Then, the commish of any private league should be able to modify it as he (or the league) desires.An error occurred while saving the comment Anonymous
commented
The idea of adding Punters to the game is a good one -- easy to implement and important to NFL football.
Coaches are important, but I worry that you'll pay **** for choosing any scoring system that uses coaches.
In real life, the home team wins about 60% of games. However, custom leagues have greatly varied scoring rules. I'm doubting that five points will matter in most of them. -
9th rankedAnonymous
supported this idea
·
I oppose this idea.
I want to keep some good players on my bench at all times.
They are useful for injuries and byeweeks.
Limiting my bench will limit my ability to manage my team well.