 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted - 1/2/2024 12:14:17 AM |
 |
Can we bring back the Ragnarok Pro Bowl?
|
|
|
|
It existed only briefly once before but I think it’s another uniquely Ragnarok concept:
*Takes place in Week 18
*Rosters of all three teams in each division are combined into a super roster.
*The last place team in each division selects a starting lineup (could be the first place team, or second place team)
*The four conference all-star teams compete with a nominal amount of MB given to the three members of the winning divisional team, to be used the following season. Or it could even be 3 MB to the members of the winning division, 2 MB to the members of the second place division, etc.
Thoughts? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 9/25/2023 3:41:07 PM |
|
I can’t take credit for this idea.
|
|
|
|
| Full marks for the Gamblers, whose GM is an unabashed Swiftie. I knew you were trouble when you walked in. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 9/25/2023 3:39:03 PM |
|
Rules Proposal 26.8: Dating Taylor Swift is worth 12 pts per week for the player involved.
|
|
|
|
| Seems like a no brainer. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 9/6/2023 11:20:48 PM |
|
I vote yes as well.
|
|
|
|
| Zach should absolutely be able to change his franchise player. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 8/31/2023 3:12:41 PM |
|
I’ll do a breakfast
|
|
|
|
Blueberry pancakes, eggs, bacon, fruit.
Since the 147 frozen pizzas are already spoken for. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 8/29/2023 10:49:58 AM |
|
Schedule
|
|
|
|
| Hoping to arrive early afternoon Friday, leave fairly early Monday morning. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 5/4/2023 12:44:55 PM |
|
I appreciate everyone's research
|
|
|
|
| Can't find time to look too deeply into it myself right now, so I can't believe I'm going to say this, but I trust everyone's judgment and am happy with the consensus choice, regardless of location. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 12/7/2022 3:07:14 PM |
|
Arthur Andersen Rule expires at midnight!
|
|
|
|
Stat corrections have to be made (or at least submitted) by midnight tonight. That's midnight EST for those of you who foraged west of the Mississippi.
In a season where almost every team is still in the playoff hunt, and we're heading into an epic Week 14 Royal Rumble, every point matters--and could be the difference between getting in, or joining Billy on the golf course.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 11/30/2022 12:33:58 PM |
|
Makes sense to me.
|
|
|
|
| Eric has had many good ideas. Perhaps his best is one we haven't even done, which was the idea of drafting Ragnarok divisions. Absolutely brilliant. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 10/29/2022 7:33:42 AM |
|
Amazing trade!
|
|
|
|
| Kudos to both of you. Ragnarok fucking rocks! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 9/30/2022 11:25:52 AM |
|
Rational minds all around
|
|
|
|
What is this, the Twilight Zone?
My 2 Yuan:
The trade was fairly proposed and accepted.
Tua's injury was disturbing and calls into question a lot of things--none of which are pertinent to fantasy football.
Reversing the trade comes from a good spot, both in terms of Jeremy being willing to reverse it and Zach being willing to un-reverse the reverse. All class and both of you are good dudes.
Injuries in fantasy football suck, but they're a part of the game. I'm sure this wasn't the first time a player suffered a serious injury right after being involved in a trade, and it won't be the last.
Part of the reason we're sympathetic to Zach (or at least, why I am) is b/c of the significance of both the player and the seriousness of the injury. It feels unfair. But IMO, these are details that shouldn't factor into how this is handled--this should be a black or white policy. We either decide that once a trade is accepted it cannot be undone, or we decide that if a player suffers a serious injury within the first week he is traded then the trade is voided.
The problem with the void option is that it opens many more doors that are subject to interpretation, when the whole point is to have a rule that closes loopholes. What is considered a serious injury? What if we don't know the seriousness of the injury until later, etc.
My concern with reversing the trade is that it sets a precedent that puts future owners in a difficult situation. The next time this happens (and it WILL happen), what if the next person in Jeremy's role doesn't offer to reverse the trade? Is he an asshole? Or does he need to worry that people think he's an asshole? Each time this happens it puts two owners in an uncomfortable situation... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 9/20/2022 12:15:11 PM |
|
15 min of your time well worth it
|
|
|
|
In case you haven't seen Eli Manning try out as a walk-on at Penn State:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Na2hOcx4uX8
Chad Powers, baby! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 9/20/2022 10:43:05 AM |
|
Hate to miss it...
|
|
|
|
| I'll be in Charlotte with my son for Panthers-Niners! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 9/15/2022 10:37:40 AM |
|
Was there an error in Free Agency?
|
|
|
|
| Looks like the Blast were awarded Burkhead for 8 MB, but WRMC bid 29? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 9/9/2022 10:42:33 AM |
|
Draft day is (finally) here!
|
|
|
|
Even a "transitional" Ragnarok year is one to look forward to with an irrational level of excitement.
I thought I'd mentioned it--and maybe I did and it got lost in the shuffle of the riveting conversation about adding a fantasy punter--but I also will not be at the draft in person. Jeremy said it better than I could as to why.
I should be on the zoom link a good bit this evening (don't want to miss the noob's One Shining Moment), but tomorrow I'll probably be in and out.
Love this league! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 9/1/2022 6:48:57 PM |
|
Alex: time to step up to the plate!
|
|
|
|
Alex,
Sorry I'm late to the welcoming party, but as we enter the predraft homestretch (otherwise known as the longest days of the year), I wanted to let you know of a proud and longstanding Ragnarok tradition: the newb/rookie song and/or interpretive dance performance.
We've all had to do it. I recall my own performance of "Kung-Fu Fighting" back in 2004 which brought the house down (literally--I attempted a flying kick midway through and inadvertently knocked over one of Keith's bookcases).
I won't divulge anyone else's similar embarrassments at this time--suffice to say we've heard everything from rap to country to heavy metal, R&B, and even a cultural folksong; we've seen everything from wigs, leather pants, and sequins to feather boas, ten gallon hats, and even a lifesized cardboard cutout of WWE legend Randy "Macho Man" Savage.
Once you've added your own rendition to our pantheon of performance art, you'll be hailed as a true Ragnarokian (though one who has to fight and claw his way out of the Hel Division). Just as importantly, you'll then be able to view everyone else's brave performances--there's really nothing quite like it.
On behalf of the greatest league of all-time, I know I speak for everyone when I say that we can't wait to see what you come up with.
Most Sincerely,
Sean (Owner, Koo Dynasty) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 8/1/2022 7:55:53 PM |
|
Cool story, bro.
|
|
|
|
We all know UFOs aren’t real.
Signed,
Arrogant Mother Fuckers |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 4/2/2022 10:59:07 AM |
|
New beginning...
|
|
|
|
I'm all for figuring out a way forward, most definitely!
In terms of Keith's post--no way the Skullsplitters are changing their team name. I'm calling April Fool's. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 2/14/2022 4:57:57 PM |
|
Sad to see you go..
|
|
|
|
| But I get it. Was great getting to know you, 2 Straws. Best of luck with everything and continued good health for you and your family. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 12/8/2021 1:59:06 PM |
|
Jamboree is a great idea.
|
|
|
|
| Let's do it! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 10/31/2021 11:52:33 AM |
|
I can probably hop in for a bit
|
|
|
|
| For MNF. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 9/10/2021 5:19:10 PM |
|
If you want pick 1.1, let's have a chat.
|
|
|
|
| If you don't, let's talk about why. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 9/8/2021 12:29:30 PM |
|
Fucking Lockbox question
|
|
|
|
Can you draft your own Fucking Lockbox pick ahead of where you Fucking Lockboxed him?
Let's say I'm looking to cleverly lock up Bucs elite kicker Ryan Succop by Fucking Lockboxing him in the 14th round, only to watch him boot 6 50-yard field goals in Thursday's game as the Bucs storm past the Cowgirls 18-0. There's no rule preventing me from drafting Succop in the 12th round ahead of my own Fucking Lockbox pick (though by moving up my selection, I'd be forfeiting Succop's points from Thursday's game to ensure I drafted him). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 9/2/2021 7:37:35 AM |
|
I am indeed an AMF
|
|
|
|
| And proudly carry that banner. But I’m not enough of an AMF to think that I can bend the space-time continuum. The 7th is a Tuesday. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 9/1/2021 12:39:50 PM |
|
Got my test booked for Sep 7.
|
|
|
|
| See you fuckers next week. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 8/22/2021 9:45:22 PM |
|
The only failure here
|
|
|
|
| Would be to not play in week 17 at all, and this idea is a really good one. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 8/10/2021 12:36:39 PM |
|
Thu, Fri, Sat nights for me
|
|
|
|
| Counting the days! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 7/25/2021 4:53:20 PM |
|
Do you mean Kattan?
|
|
|
|
As in Chris Kattan? He'd make a pretty awesome draft MC so feel free.
I'd bring Oregon Trail, but we know everyone just dies of dysentery anyway... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 7/23/2021 9:35:04 AM |
|
Let's just change venues
|
|
|
|
| And all go draft at Stu's hotel. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 7/19/2021 4:37:20 PM |
|
So much vitriol...
|
|
|
|
...toward 2 QBs/Superflex. Next time just yell "Get off my lawn!" and it'll save you some keystrokes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 7/16/2021 8:02:56 PM |
|
Five, shmive…
|
|
|
|
| Anyone interested in the first pick, I’m always willing to listen! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 7/15/2021 1:20:51 PM |
|
Just like your typical math class...
|
|
|
|
| Two Asians at the top. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 7/7/2021 10:33:54 PM |
|
So, Josh Allen and Cole Beasley are anti-vaxxers.
|
|
|
|
| Combined with the winning culture that is the Buffalo Bills, there's no way this could go wrong, right? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 4/12/2021 9:49:06 PM |
|
My vote
|
|
|
|
1) Newland
2) Blowing Rock |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 4/11/2021 3:36:30 PM |
|
Think Stu nailed it
|
|
|
|
If we want to do something post-Week 16, the Pro Bowl would be fun.
If not the Pro Bowl, on the surface I don't like the idea of TWO weeks where we're doing nothing. I don't think the argument that teams may be sitting their players after clinching really holds up for an extra week. And goddamnit, if the NFL is going to give us more football at the expense of their own employees' safety as a cash grab for their wealthy white owners, we should benefit by getting more fantasy football as well.
What if the championship round was extended to two weeks? I've seen some leagues make this change. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 10/29/2020 2:14:22 PM |
|
Can't say it any better, Billy..
|
|
|
|
| ...so I won't even try. Y'all are the best. Stay safe and healthy. Ragnarok-strong! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 9/8/2020 5:05:23 PM |
|
Hang in there, Kent.
|
|
|
|
| We're thinking of you, Alicia, and your families during these difficult times. If we can help in any way to ease your pain, please let us know. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 8/18/2020 12:21:43 PM |
|
I can make most times work, with advance notice.
|
|
|
|
| I'm guessing evenings are going to be best for those working (or with kids doing distance learning), though I know some of us work different hours and that may be oversimplifying. Personally, Tuesday and Thursday evenings and Sunday mornings aren't ideal but I can swing any of them if they turn out to be better for everyone else. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 8/11/2020 1:43:41 PM |
|
A nice treat:
|
|
|
|
| Season 3 of Norsemen just came out on Netflix. This is a seriously funny send-up of Viking life and I highly recommend it (just not tonight, when we're tuning in to watch the Canes beat the shit out of the Bruins in Game 1) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 8/8/2020 6:07:23 PM |
|
The fun thing about negative kickers
|
|
|
|
| Other than that it's hilarious, different, and an embodiment of Ragnarok awesomeness and creativity, is that the strategy for drafting kickers totally changes. Do you want a kicker from a terrible team so they have fewer chances to miss? Do you go for the most accurate? Who the hell knows, but that would be part of the fun. If SFAGFY is intended as a ray of sunshine in the midst of a world of crap, why not have some fun with it? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 8/5/2020 6:20:58 PM |
|
the only thing better than eliminating kickers
|
|
|
|
IMO is to make them only count negatively (so you WISH you didn't have a kicker).
I'm a fan of a more traditional starting lineup (+ superflex). Something like QB, Superflex, RB, RB, WR, WR, WR, TE, DT, Asshole Kicker.
We may want to have deeper benches to account for COVID issues? Or if we don't want to have a crazy big draft, maybe just a larger IR? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 8/5/2020 2:47:01 PM |
|
Scoring thoughts:
|
|
|
|
Not sure what the site allows, so feel free to scrap any of these offhand if they aren't possible anyway:
Superflex (and GFY). I'll fight anyone who objects. How we want to score the Superflex may be the bigger question.
.01 pts per reception: can't remember who suggested this--and maybe it was a joke--but I think it's hilarious, and we should do it.
Kickers only count negatively: another fun one. They're kickers, for Chrissake. Something like:
Made XP: 0 pts
Missed XP: -3 pts
Made FGs: 0 pts
Missed FG 0-29 yards: -3 pts
Missed FG 30-39 yards: -2 pts
Missed FG 40-49 yards: -1 pts |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 5/19/2020 11:13:21 AM |
|
Well said, champ.
|
|
|
|
I echo that it would be, frankly, gutwrenching to not be able to have our Draft Weekend. It's the best damn weekend of the year. And if that's what ends up happening, I have no doubt we'll find a way to make the best of the situation.
My question is this: at this point in mid-May, do we know for certain we cannot hold draft weekend in-person? We have the summer to see how the world progresses--does something such as a vaccine (unlikely to be that fast, I know), testing, climate-induced mitigation of the virus, or something else occur that makes the path toward an in-person gathering more comfortable?
On our Draft zoom, I remember us touching on this and the prevailing sentiment was that we could scramble to get a house, etc. fairly quickly if necessary. That would give us until late-Summer to hold off on making a decision one way or the other.
I agree that at this point, things look pretty bleak. And there's the added variable that everyone's situation--health, family, comfort-level, etc.--will be different when it comes to physical proximity. But I'm all for waiting as long as possible to punt Draft Weekend, while perhaps in the meantime discussing that virtual Plan B.
Billy's championship acceptance speech and eardrum-shattering "YOU'RE IN THE BLAST ZONEs" just won't be the same through headphones. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 2/26/2020 10:51:39 AM |
|
I can't overstate how much Ragnarok25 in Vegas would be incredible
|
|
|
|
| Speaking only for myself, I think it's an incredible idea and would definitely be in for this. But I don't want to be insensitive toward a variety of personal/familial/financial situations so if it cannot work, it cannot work. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 12/23/2019 8:10:59 AM |
|
We're all in the Blast Zone
|
|
|
|
Congratulations, Billy. Amazing season. That's two years in a row where the rebels defeat the Empire. Maybe there's hope in this world after all.
Can't wait for your predraft victory speech. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 12/11/2019 5:14:16 PM |
|
The beauty of it is...
|
|
|
|
We have a 90% shot of Billy or Dave playing for the Ragnarok 'ship. That's heartwarming.
(I say 90% b/c wouldn't it be just like Billy and Dave to somehow find that loophole that results in both of them losing to each other?) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 12/9/2019 4:12:49 PM |
|
Maybe the REAL answer...
|
|
|
|
...is a 3 QB league. Suck on that one, fantasy purists!
As always, regardless of outcome, it's really cool to see so many people passionate about Ragnarok fantasy football. And though we may not be able to agree on the QB issue, I think it's safe to say we all still fervently agree that Ragnarok is the best goddamn league on the planet. Nay--in the universe.
That's important context to keep in the back of our minds as we debate.
One thing I want to re-emphasize: suggesting changes to the QB position/scoring doesn't at all mean I think things are inherently wrong or bad. But just because things are "fine" doesn't mean they couldn't be improved upon or made even more fun. This mindset is at the core of what makes Ragnarok what it is--we don't sit back on our taut buttocks and indefinitely accept things the way they are, but rather, we're always looking at ways to improve... To make something great even greater. Sometimes I think that the "ain't broke, don't fix it" logic doesn't take this into account.
For the record, I do still think 2 QBs is the best solution--incorporating some of the suggestions already made. But I also recognize that a major change creates more major logistical obstacles. I won't rehash this argument b/c it's gotten tiresome for me to do (and I'm sure for you to hear or read).
I want to focus on the discussion about the QB scoring system, as I think it represents a more easily executable course of action. I think the idea behind separating QBs on winning teams from losing teams is spot on--but as has been pointed out, this doesn't necessarily tell the whole story (QBs on teams with bad defenses, etc.).
I've been thinking for awhile about the concept of "situational scoring--" something that we Asians have been ruminating over in our dankest, darkest opium dens for decades now. It's time the White Man get in on the action. Frankly, situational scoring could apply to all positions, but for the purposes of this discussion, let's use only QBs.
There's no question (in my mind, at least), that certain segments of NFL games are more important than others in terms of a pathway to an NFL team winning or losing. Two extreme examples:
*A first quarter passing TD is less valuable than a 4th quarter passing TD
*A passing TD that puts a team ahead by 6 is more valuable than a passing TD that cuts a 28-pt lead to 22-pts (or increases a 22-pt lead to 28-pts).
Of course, it's not as simple as making all 4th quarter yards/scores count more than 1st quarter yards/scores. Nor is it as simple as making yards/scores in all close game situations count more than yards/scores in blowouts. The answer would need to be some sort of hybrid of the two.
I fully admit to not knowing the answer here, or the "secret sauce" in terms of a scoring formula that could be applied. I'm only HALF-Asian, after all. But to me, a scoring system that more strongly weights yards and TDs (and amplifies the negative impact of turnovers) in game situations deemed to be more impactful to a team's chances of winning would be revolutionary.
It would go beyond the idea of simply adding points for wins or subtracting points for losses--which is well-intentioned, but has some holes. It would reward players making clutch/impactful plays. And if you really wanted to nerd out on it, one way to ensure that this system still rewards players on good teams more than bad teams would be to further weight scoring so that it's not a simple bell-curve--for example, a TD that cuts a 28-pt lead to 22 (e.g. garbage time) would not count as much as a TD that increases a 22-pt lead to 28 (e.g. killer instinct time).
Again, this is far from polished. I don't know if any other fantasy football league has tried something like this--I haven't seen any mention of it. But it would be a groundbreaking change--forward-thinking and awesome, in my opinion. Though some of you may just think it's batshit crazy, which is of course your right as a (mostly) law-abiding citizen. Fuck it, I don't know. Thoughts? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 10/29/2019 9:49:26 AM |
|
Scott...
|
|
|
|
First ever Ragnarok post from Kathmandu. Awesome.
Hey, since you're like 96 hours ahead of us over there, can you just tell us how this Sunday's games went? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 10/10/2019 7:45:46 PM |
|
Jeremy = Kissass
|
|
|
|
| But that aside, the Jew has a valid point. Keith really does deliver on what we pay him to do. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 9/28/2019 11:00:57 AM |
|
I'm probable for 10/6.
|
|
|
|
| Sounds great! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 9/24/2019 2:03:15 PM |
|
Or what?
|
|
|
|
| I'm all for 24.1. Get ready for a 7,500 word Ode To The Superflex. It'll be absolutely riveting. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 9/19/2019 8:21:34 AM |
|
Pirate Day!
|
|
|
|
| Another reason Ragnarok is the greatest fucking league in the world! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 9/4/2019 7:19:33 PM |
|
I'm bringing paper plates and toilet paper
|
|
|
|
| And some other random shit too. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 9/3/2019 8:42:39 AM |
|
so if we don't know the street address...
|
|
|
|
| ...do we just drive to Boone and then head toward for the mushroom cloud? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 8/19/2019 8:47:57 PM |
|
I'll be there Thursday to Sunday
|
|
|
|
| Will bring breakfast supplies, some snacks, and some liquor. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 8/16/2019 12:41:19 PM |
|
OK, I want in on the mockdrafting.
|
|
|
|
| Do I input the Ragnarok keepers myself or is that preloaded somewhere? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 8/14/2019 9:48:10 AM |
|
The 5-Time, 5-Time, 5-Time, 5-Time, 5-TIME champions declare...
|
|
|
|
| ...Alvin Kamara is franchise stud, and Royce "You Fucked Me Last Season But I'm a Sadist" Freeman as an 8th-round Rookie. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 7/31/2019 6:20:16 PM |
|
Love that we love the blazer idea
|
|
|
|
While it would be fun to have a set blazer (a la the Masters' green), I think this would likely be pricey and hard to coordinate. If the champions are responsible for getting their own blazers--and I bet there are some doozies at Goodwill--we could then create a standardized patch using the Ragnarok logo. And for this, it would probably be cheapest just to order in bulk now--perhaps 50, to cover the previous years and for the foreseeable future.
I don't know shit about pricing for patches but I'm happy to do some digging. Iron-on would seem to make sense, but not if it's a lot more expensive than embroidered or some other fucking method. Commish, if you want to send me the logo--preferably in some high-res format--I can get some quotes. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 7/31/2019 1:07:13 PM |
|
sorry for the bombardment--question about 23.5 (2 Marketplaces)
|
|
|
|
Did this rule pass? Or are we getting to it? I've been ungodly busy and so I may have missed if this came to resolution.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 7/31/2019 1:01:59 PM |
|
borrowing from The Masters in terms of the award
|
|
|
|
I think it would be hilarious for the winner to get an intentionally janky blazer with a Ragnarok patch sewn on the breast a la The Masters, with the previous winner presenting the blazer to the new winner in a pre-draft ceremony. This would also segue smoothly into the new winner's speech.
We could retroactively create these for all champions, which would also create the amusing scenario (at least, amusing in my opinion) of having all Ragnarok champions sporting blazers sporadically over the course of the weekend, and would add to the cache of new champions joining this exclusive "club."
Just a thought. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 7/31/2019 12:54:14 PM |
|
Some thoughts...
|
|
|
|
| I like the idea of this rule, just not the details. Getting into real money fines is a slippery slope, IMO, and not something to be taken lightly even considering that starting inactive players is a cardinal sin in fantasy football. I wonder if simply making the fine in megabucks, with the potential for the fine to carryover to the following season (if a fine is greater than a team's remaining megabucks in the current season) would be sufficient--at least as a first step to see if it curbs these offenses? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 5/7/2019 8:44:55 AM |
|
So let's run a muck...
|
|
|
|
| ...at Mountain #7? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 5/6/2019 12:17:17 PM |
|
I have the same three as Billy
|
|
|
|
| Any order, really--all 3 are good options IMO. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 5/5/2019 7:59:00 PM |
|
Not to complicate
|
|
|
|
I'd be fine with Pinehurst or Lake Norman. If this is the year in the rotation without the MN boys (you'll be missed!) and proximity to airports isn't as important, what if we also went out toward the mountains this year? That would throw a bone to Joe and Zach who've consistently had the longer drive. And the mountains are effin' sweet. Per night pricing ranging from $220-$330.
Mountain #1 $2105
Mountain #2 $2088
Mountain #3 $1830
Mountain #4 $2010
Mountain #5 bad link?
Mountain #6 $2025
Also totally fine by me if we stick with Central NC.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 5/5/2019 7:30:50 PM |
|
sorry for not chiming in sooner
|
|
|
|
I just spent a weekend on Hyco Lake--it's nice, but absolutely in the middle of nowhere. If we need a grocery store run, the nearest one could be up to 30 minutes away, depending on the house location.
I have an air mattress that I can bring if we like everything about a certain house except it doesn't seem to have enough beds.
Like Jeremy said, any of these options are pretty convenient for those of us in central NC compared to everyone else, so if any of these locations offer shorter travel times for others, I'm all for those as well. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 12/24/2018 7:15:50 AM |
|
Congratulations, Zach.
|
|
|
|
Truly happy for you. To say it was well-deserved would be a massive understatement. You've given hope to the world. Good guys can indeed finish first.
You have a little over seven months to work on your draft weekend acceptance speech. Given your award-winning theatrical background, we all expect something epic! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 11/30/2018 2:37:38 PM |
|
OK, ok. I yield.
|
|
|
|
For the record, my line of thinking here was the fact that it involves a 10+ win team this year (irrespective of whether that happens to be my own team or not) just provided a more extreme example of the general point--that seeding should be a product of overall record rather than division championships, regardless of the # of wins, or difference in # of wins.
It sounds like the league doesn't want to change this, and I can understand that line of thinking even if I don't necessarily agree it. Back to your regularly scheduled program. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 11/30/2018 8:40:10 AM |
|
I'm ok with going with the majority on this, but I need to be clear...
|
|
|
|
This is NOT about me and my chances this year. It never was. And if any of you got that impression, a) I must have done a shitty job of communicating, and b) you don't know me nearly as well as I thought you did, which would be incredibly disappointing (to me, at least). I don't mean that to come across melodramatically, but I have always had the best interests of the overall league in mind and never my own personal goals.
That's why I love bringing up new ideas and concepts--whether you think they're batshit crazy or worthwhile, and whether we make any changes or not (example: 2 QBs!), I do that because I love this league and its owners.
For the record, the redesigned draft order we've implemented that rewards teams 7-12? That was my idea. If I were in it for myself, in theory no one would stand to lose more from that than me, but that wasn't my objective. And the playoff seeding issue was actually something I mentioned to Keith in an email BEFORE this season started.
I worry that part of what has made the playoff seeding--and, from a broader perspective, the division realignment and parity issue--difficult to discuss objectively is that we're making it too personal. We have specific names and teams in mind regardless of which side of the issue you come down on. And frankly, we should be better than that, and give each other more credit.
And in a way, by calling me out (no other way to really put it, whether that was intended as such or not), I think this point is being proven. Go ahead and switch the names: because if it were the Splitters, Maulers, or Bass sitting at 11-2 or 10-3 and having to play a playoff game at a 5-8,6-7,or 7-6 Dynasty team, it would absolutely be just as wrong (to me, at least) as the present situation. On the flip side, if you're NOT willing to objectively look at this situation because it's my team in question, we ain't ever getting anywhere with this.
That's getting lost in the shuffle here--seeding playoffs according to W-L is not geared toward helping specific teams. It helps EVERYONE. EQUALLY. Consider this: the way things currently are, a 2nd place team in a division--ANY division--has no shot at a first round bye. Regardless of record, or how good that division may be in a given year. Next season, it could be the Hel division that has two teams with 10+ wins. And then it would be this second place Hel team having to play a road playoff game against a team from another division with fewer wins.
Look, we don't have to change this rule. Before this season's playoffs, or ever. If that's the way the league feels, I'm totally okay with that. But if we're not going to change it, let's not change it for the right reasons. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 11/29/2018 9:25:56 AM |
|
But divisions are still important, aren't they?
|
|
|
|
Even if we changed the seeding to be based on W-L record, divisions would still be important because the division winners, regardless of whether they are 12-1 or 5-8, are still guaranteed a playoff spot. In the event that 7-6 or 6-7 wins a certain division and guarantees a playoff spot when that exact record while NOT winning the division would not--is that not reward enough? That's a pretty significant benefit--especially when you factor in how we've reshuffled divisional configuration.
We're not talking about changing the criteria for MAKING the playoffs. In some ways, we've already done that with the new divisions (and draft order reshuffle) in the spirit of league parity. And as mentioned, the 4 division winners still get in. I'm just proposing that once those playoff teams are determined, the seeding be done based on overall body of work across the 13 weeks of the regular season.
I remember that Saints-Seahawks game, and it was indeed awesome. Not as awesome as the Matt Hasselbeck "we'll take the ball and we're gonna score" playoff game against the Packers, but still very awesome. However, the fact that it was awesome doesn't mean that the Saints should have had to play at Seattle, nor does it necessarily mean that if Seattle had played at New Orleans instead, the game wouldn't also have been awesome.
I guess I don't necessarily get the "mirror the NFL" perspective. The NFL doesn't form divisions by creating an algorithm that determines teams' overall success and then grouping them accordingly, so we're already significantly different in that way. And therefore, having a playoff structure that mimics the NFL isn't as possible anyway because the foundation is already different?
Maybe I'm in the minority on this. And given that I'm a minority myself, maybe that makes sense! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 11/28/2018 3:42:33 PM |
|
Keith, what do you think about restructuring the playoffs?
|
|
|
|
| We want our commish's thoughts! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 11/27/2018 8:49:14 PM |
|
Before Week 12 makes sense to me.
|
|
|
|
| But I think the trade deadline should be on that Thursday at 7pm before the first Week 12 game rather than at some point during the weekend, when it could get confusing with games going on. Whaddya think? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 11/27/2018 12:08:53 PM |
|
snow days rock
|
|
|
|
Enjoy it, Z!
I agree with Jeremy's point about the playoff seeding. With the divisions being weighted, and therefore the teams in the higher divisions playing comparatively more difficult schedules already, I think we would be swinging the pendulum too far if we were to make the 4 division champions automatically the top 4 seeds. We can use my team this year as an example--and it's more of an extreme one, given, as Zach noted, it's rare that a 2nd place team in a division also has 10+ wins--but the fact remains, this kind of thing could definitely happen again.
As it's currently configured, the 2nd place team in Asgard--already playing the toughest schedule--would get no higher than the #5 seed, and therefore have to play a road playoff game (which includes the home field advantage) against a team from a lower division that played a weaker schedule AND had fewer wins. That doesn't seem right, and I think it would make sense to make this change for the upcoming playoffs rather than wait until the following season.
Things are magnified this season because this happened in the Asgard division. But really, in theory wouldn't changing the playoff seeding really help across ALL divisions? In future years, what if the 2nd place team in Hel was 10-3? That team would deserve to be seeded higher than #5 as well.
Thoughts?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 11/27/2018 11:55:23 AM |
|
Trade deadline
|
|
|
|
Everything I saw was that the trade deadline was midnight yesterday, not Sunday. That still means this trade may have been confirmed afterward, so if we need to void it, I won't argue. I also don't want to speak for Billy--full transparency, I proposed it rather than accepted it, so I don't know when Billy accepted, how the site handled, etc.
What I WILL argue--politely, of course!--is that the timing of the trade deadline needs to be changed. I think it's at the right part of the season--after the week 12 games, but before week 13. But the deadline should be moved until either the Tuesday after the week 12 games (so that it doesn't conflict with a Monday Night game, which is weird), or even Thursday prior to that Thursday night Week 13 game (which would allow for one more free agency period).
What does the Rules Committee think in terms of this change for 2019? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 10/26/2018 9:15:18 PM |
|
Long live the Ragnarok Realignment Calculator
|
|
|
|
| Somehow the league gets even better! STU--batten down the hatches and circle the wagons! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 10/20/2018 3:41:43 PM |
|
So sorry, Billy.
|
|
|
|
| Thinking of you and your family. If there's anything your Ragnarok buddies can do, don't hesitate. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 10/17/2018 1:48:50 PM |
|
that sounds both very technical and borderline illegal...
|
|
|
|
| In other words, what we would all expect from Keith! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 10/6/2018 9:12:51 AM |
|
I'm a probably for 10/14.
|
|
|
|
| Great game and would be awesome to hang. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 10/2/2018 3:47:45 PM |
|
I may be late to the party with this one...
|
|
|
|
But as proud Ragnarok members, the Netflix series "Norsemen" should be required viewing.
Fucking hysterical. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 9/26/2018 9:12:14 AM |
|
Would love to.
|
|
|
|
| Sunday or Monday night easier for me than Sunday afternoon as well. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 9/6/2018 5:06:48 PM |
|
ETA 8ish
|
|
|
|
| Bringing an assortment of snacks, stuff for making french toast for breakfast one of the mornings, bottled water, extra toilet paper, and paper plates. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 8/21/2018 1:07:09 PM |
|
I'm Asian...
|
|
|
|
| So that basically rules me out. Would have had to start growing it out in 2014. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 8/14/2018 2:12:26 PM |
|
12:01am
|
|
|
|
| Is that EST? Or Hawaiian? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 8/8/2018 9:08:04 PM |
|
Thursday evening to Sunday evening
|
|
|
|
| Cannot wait, boys! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 7/2/2018 4:37:50 PM |
|
Love the debate
|
|
|
|
I get that no one obviously starts 2 QBs in real football. Even in China, football isn't played that way. However, in real football, no one would draft an elite QB after 20 RBs either. Purely on the surface--with the caveat of if we can find the right balance scoring-wise--I still think a Superflex brings a lot of fun to the table:
*More players are valuable at the top of the draft, which should increase parity in the first few rounds
*More players are valuable in free agency, which increases strategy and fun
*More players are valuable as trade assets, which increases strategy and fun
*Another starting slot becomes available, which is also one more slot where Zach can have a player suffer a catastrophic injury.
I really like the creativity represented by some of the ideas thrown out here, particularly in how to make the "best" QBs more valuable. I don't know what this solution would be, other than that I don't think it's as simple as increasing pts for TDs and making turnovers costlier--at least, not as the entire solution. I would definitely support this concept though.
But no matter what, this would still result in only 12ish QBs being important (albeit more important) out of 32. Given the state of the game, this doesn't seem appropriate (to me). And while I'm advocating (perhaps annoyingly so) for the Superflex, I wholeheartedly agree that we would want to do so with a "restrictor plate" on QB scoring. QBs should score more points in this slot compared to a RB3, WR4, or TE3, but not disgustingly so. We could cap scoring at a certain #, only have Superflex QBs score a certain % of regular QB pts, penalize if a Superflex QB doesn't reach a threshold or is outscored head-to-head at the Superflex by a non-QB player, etc. All sorts of cool possibilities. No?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/29/2018 9:39:11 AM |
|
Good stuff. Some random thoughts:
|
|
|
|
*Definitely wouldn't want franchise players to be affected in any way by a transition to a Superflex spot. I think the best way to do this would be to institute the Superflex at least 1--and maybe 2--seasons in advance. That way every team has adequate opportunity to shift their roster/franchise player if they want.
*We would want to distinguish between a Superflex and 2nd QB slot, as it would allow owners to start a RB/WR/TE in the event they didn't have a 2nd QB to play that week (whether due to injuries, bye week scarcity, or just general incompetence).
*If we're worried that the Superflex would tip the scales too far the other way in terms of QB importance, we could look at a diluted scoring system specifically for the Superflex QB. Because I'm Asian and can do math, I looked at the last Ragnarok season statistics to see what the difference in scoring would be for a Superflex QB (the average scoring of QB13-QB24) versus if someone were to start an extra RB (RB25-36), WR (WR37-48), or TE (TE13-24). Here's what I found:
Avg. QB13-QB24: 174 pts
Avg. RB25-RB36: 67.5 pts
Avg. WR37-WR48: 52 pts
Avg. TE13-TE24: 31 pts
So that would tell us that, in a vacuum, there would be a HUGE advantage to starting a 2nd QB over another RB/WR/TE, whereas ideally we probably wouldn't want it to be quite this big. In terms of scoring, perhaps that would mean something as simple as making Superflex QBs scoring a certain % of regular QB scoring--somewhere in the 50-75% range? Or someone could come up with a creative, outside-the-box system that would accomplish something similar but add more fun? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/28/2018 10:03:24 AM |
|
Seconded. QBs are an issue, but b/c they're already criminally UNDERvalued.
|
|
|
|
Love all the discussion, as usual. I've made so secret that I think the one major area where we're behind the curve is in terms of QB value. At last year's draft weekend (or it may have been the one before), I advocated for looking at a 2 QB format. While the reasons for this are still as sound as ever, in thinking about this more and discussing with some of you further, I think the right answer is more in the Superflex direction--that way the pendulum doesn't swing too far in the other direction, where teams are left without any QBs due to injuries or bye weeks.
It makes no sense to me that the most important position in football (and one that's only becoming even more important with every change the NFL makes) is so undervalued in fantasy that we typically see the elite QBs being drafted in the company of significantly less valuable players at other positions.
Consider that Aaron Rodgers, preseason QB1, is currently being drafted between Kenyan Drake (RB18) and Amari Cooper (WR14). Or that Deshaun Watson, preseason QB2, is being drafted between Mark Ingram (RB23 who's fucking suspended for 4 games!) and Ronald Jones (RB24, e.g. "WHO?"). That seems criminally unbalanced to me.
There are two reasons for this:
(1) QB AVAILABILITY: When only 12 of 32 NFL starting QBs are played in fantasy in any given week, their relative value becomes extremely diluted. Why draft one early if so many are available later in the draft or in free agency? Their trade value is also minimized--how important is it really to trade for a backup QB?
(2) QB SCORING: it's such that the difference between the first and last starting QB (e.g. QB1 vs QB12) is only 76 pts, whereas the difference between the first and last starting RB (RB1 vs RB24) is 165 pts, and the first and last starting WR (WR1 vs WR36) is 102 pts. With that little relative difference, of course it makes sense to wait on a QB.
Addressing QB scoring would be the easiest thing to do logistically, but I don't think it's the solution, given that QBs are already scoring more than the other positions (so it isn't that they aren't scoring enough, but that there's not much separation), and any changes made to QB scoring still wouldn't solve the issue that only 12 of them hold any real value.
So we're back to the first problem from above. We should (rightly) be proud that Ragnarok has been ahead of the curve--proactive and progressive--in virtually everything it does. But you have your head in the sand if you haven't noticed the fantasy landscape shifting toward 2 QB/Superflex formats, and with good reason.
One can even make the argument that making more QBs important would be a good thing for league parity/competitiveness, as it would increase the # of quality/important players available to draft.
I'd love to hear an argument AGAINST some sort of Superflex format. The only two I can think of are (1) we've decided to be 1 QB "traditionalists" when we aren't that way for anything else, or (2) it would be complicated to make this transition based on franchise/rookie rules, etc.
If you're against it because of the first reason, you're stubbornly holding onto antiquated policies and backward ideologies. In other words, you're basically a Trump supporter.
And if you're against it because of the second reason, you're not looking at this from a macro perspective. Ragnarok--the league in general and our group of owners--is as strong as it's ever been. We just celebrated year #25, for fuck's sake. So even if it takes one season where things are a little different to make this transition, that's merely a blip on the radar.
I don't claim to have the answer as to exactly what this change would be. My purpose in rambling at length here is to generate support for the general idea--if more of us are in favor of such a change and willing to think about cool ways we could implement a Superflex in a truly Ragnarokian way, the better our chances of arriving at a solution.
Word to your mother. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 5/3/2018 12:02:52 PM |
|
Post of the year. Decade. All-Time.
|
|
|
|
| Haven't stopped laughing all day. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 3/15/2018 11:11:19 AM |
|
Great research
|
|
|
|
Lots of appealing options.
I rank them:
Lake Gaston 2
Kerr Lake
Lake Gaston 1
Though they're really 1a, 1b, and 1c--all three look great.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 12/26/2017 4:22:17 PM |
|
Fuck Duke.
|
|
|
|
| But congratulations to Keith and the Jottunheim Todd Gurleys on a well-deserved championship. The better team came out on top. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 12/20/2017 11:53:08 PM |
|
That's awesome! One question though...
|
|
|
|
| Did you all get high as fuck? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 11/28/2017 7:48:16 AM |
|
Taste the Paste is back!
|
|
|
|
| Favorite ad ever. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 11/20/2017 7:29:08 PM |
|
What's our target dollar amount for a rental house?
|
|
|
|
| Happy to help with some research if I know what our bottom line is. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 11/16/2017 12:55:04 PM |
|
Wish I could be there.
|
|
|
|
| Good luck to you and your squad. Break a leg! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 11/7/2017 7:41:59 AM |
|
Hey, Oleg Olafson:
|
|
|
|
| 奧列格·奧拉夫森，數字謊言，你的系統壞了。下一次，僱用一個亞洲人。 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 11/7/2017 7:37:20 AM |
|
22.2 sounds great.
|
|
|
|
| I'm down! It might make the most sense to put a fairly low ceiling on how many MB can be earned or lost each week as you mention. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 10/29/2017 11:08:05 AM |
|
How was the show?
|
|
|
|
| Sorry I missed it. Did Keith get high as fuck? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 9/5/2017 1:46:42 PM |
|
what's the house address again?
|
|
|
|
| Word. Hoping to arrive somewhere in the 8-9pm range on Thursday. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 8/31/2017 10:41:15 PM |
|
Stu, I believe you left off House Rule #18.
|
|
|
|
I read the fine print so I'll copy it here:
18. The TENANTS agree to replace, at their own expense, or to reimburse the LANDLORD/OWNER for all losses, breakage or damage that occur to screen doors during their stay, including losses, breakage or damage resulting from Dick Moves that may exceed the damage deposit. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 8/31/2017 10:36:17 PM |
|
I have a UE Boom (bluetooth speaker).
|
|
|
|
| Works well enough to blast some music. I'll bring it. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 8/18/2017 11:35:44 PM |
|
Josh and Tim want no part of us!
|
|
|
|
| Ragnarok. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 8/15/2017 8:32:00 AM |
|
Also...
|
|
|
|
| There doesn't appear to be a way to know which round the rookies we're declared, and the Thunder are shown as keeping two players plus a rookie... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 8/5/2017 9:02:42 PM |
|
Thursday evening through Sunday evening. Can't fucking wait.
|
|
|
|
| Also, the first pick is officially on the table! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 7/18/2017 10:33:30 PM |
|
Happy Birthday, Commish!
|
|
|
|
| That is all. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 7/3/2017 2:55:49 PM |
|
Any division name changes...
|
|
|
|
| ...that result in the termination of Gaping Buttholes is a travesty. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/28/2017 2:43:55 PM |
|
3/4 and 5/6
|
|
|
|
Good points made here. It does seem like we should either change the payout or the draft preference for 3rd vs 4th and 5th vs 6th just to keep things uniform.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/28/2017 2:34:19 PM |
|
Agree on waiting
|
|
|
|
| There seems like a logical sequence to implementing divisions this season and draft order the next, as opposed to both at once. Though Keith's point is appreciated too! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/18/2017 10:16:25 PM |
|
big congrats, Keith.
|
|
|
|
| Can't wait to try it out! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/18/2017 9:06:18 AM |
|
I second Dave about slowing things down, and here's why:
|
|
|
|
The Weighted Realignment did not pass by a 6-3-3 margin. It passed 6-5-1--the narrowest of margins, which may include one of the 6 "for" votes being only because the Revised Draft Order wasn't included as an option. That some owners changed their minds over the course of the debate is immaterial--all votes count the same at the end. BUT-if the poll itself was not representative...
Personally, I would pause at implementing any rule--but especially one this major--that had a 6-5-1 vote, and that would include the Schoolyard Draft, Revised Draft Order, etc. if they passed by this margin. That would hardly seem to indicate a gung-ho consensus.
Another reason to pause here? By comparison, the Revised Draft Order has apparently generated unanimous approval and therefore seems like a less polarizing move forward--ESPECIALLY if you believe that the Revised Draft Order DOES have a lot in common with the Weighted Realignment as they both are meant to address competitiveness. I've explained (probably at too much length) why I think this is the case, but I have yet to see an explanation from someone as to WHY they consider the two completely separate issues (only that they DO consider them separate, which isn't the same thing).
That I think this would be a huge mistake is basically irrelevant at this point, as I've stated those reasons to no end in previous posts. However, I DO think the next league poll is an important step, and should be as follows:
"In the spirit of improving overall league competitiveness/parity, do you prefer:"
A) Weighted Realignment only
B) Revised Draft Order only
C) Both
D) Neither
Here's why: I love the revised draft order idea and think it's a no-brainer, as others have said. However, I would vote AGAINST it if Weighted Realignment is officially happening because I think that, together, it would shift the league focus/emphasis way too far AGAINST the better teams. If they're going to play in tougher divisions each year--and we're going to define the divisions in this way--I think these teams should still have the benefit of the top draft preferences. Implementing both--to me--is far too extreme.
I'm certain others feel this way, but I don't know to what extent, which is why I think the above vote would be fair.
And if some of you think I'm only against this because I've had some success as an owner and am protecting my own interested, let me remind you that the Revised Draft Order was my idea. Hopefully I'm just howling at the moon here though as that's not who I am at all.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/14/2017 7:26:00 AM |
|
Comparisons to the NFL
|
|
|
|
| ...but the NFL doesn't group divisions by team success, doesn't reconfigure divisions every so often, etc. And most importantly, the NFL doesn't structure its playoff system so that one of its lower teams makes the playoffs. If we're going to use the NFL comparison as a reason FOR the Weighted System, it's only fair it be used against it as well. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/13/2017 8:49:13 PM |
|
And oh yeah, I'm in favor of the Schoolyard picks.
|
|
|
|
| Obviously. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/13/2017 8:47:19 PM |
|
OK, thanks for the reply, Keith and Zach.
|
|
|
|
Just needed to hear that.
For the record, I DO think that Weighted Realignment has EVERYTHING to do with the Revised Draft Order, because, as mentioned, they both have been suggested to solve the problem of competitiveness/parity. Implementing both--to me--would be going too much to the other extreme.
Just think: currently, the Ragnarok champion plays in generally top-to-bottom equal divisions and gets the #1 pick the following season. Suddenly, with Weighted Realignment AND Revised Draft Order, the Ragnarok champion would be playing in a division with the two other "best" teams AND pick 12th the following season? At some point, would we not think the emphasis has been placed TOO strongly on the bottom teams?
As Dave mentioned, we don't want to punish owners simply for being good, and this would be going quite a bit overboard in my opinion.
And as I've mentioned, the Revised Draft Order would bring parity to each team at the BEGINNING of the season, and therefore parity to each team's initial chances at the playoffs. That's really the only point in the season I think we should control--and that's what the revised draft order would accomplish.
Just think--we could have an owner who totally fucks up his team over the course of the season. Makes dumb trades, poor free agent acquisitions, starts Matt Barkley over Tom Brady, but because he's been grouped with the two other "weakest" teams, he still wins his division (really meaning he finishes 10th out of 12 overall) and qualifies for the playoffs. Why are we rewarding that?
The main point here is that if every roster is deemed equal enough that all 12 teams have a reasonable chance at the playoffs before the season starts, there is no need to have weighted divisions in the first place.
Just think about this: One of the main points from the weighted division proponents is that because rosters have become so unfairly balanced (e.g. the champion gets 1st pick while the 12th place finisher gets the 12th pick), divisions should be grouped accordingly.
IF ROSTERS ARE MORE EQUAL, DIVISIONS DON'T NEED TO BE WEIGHTED. And moreover, they actually shouldn't be.
The Revised Draft Order addresses--and solves--the problem at its source. The Weighted Divisions proposal is an after-the-fact reaction.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/13/2017 7:33:21 PM |
|
Option D: revised draft order. Sorry--not going to let it drop.
|
|
|
|
Why is this not included? And I'm still waiting for someone in the Weighted Divisions camp to explain to me how it is a better solution to competitiveness/parity than the revised draft order.
Yes, fully aware this falls under "other commentary."
I think the vote should be as follows:
A) Weighted Divisions
B) Revised Draft Order
C) No Preference
And if B) wins out above, then a 2nd vote for or against the schoolyard realignment.
These would be apples-to-apples votes. Weighted Divisions and Revised Draft Order both directly address competitiveness. The Schoolyard Realignment was not thought of to address competitiveness, but rather to potentially add an element of fun. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/12/2017 9:50:53 AM |
|
Less interested in looking backward, more interested in moving forward
|
|
|
|
I don't know that anything good/productive can come out of analyzing forum posts vs. the poll vs. individual conversations. The likely outcome from this would appear to be emotional responses, accusations, miscommunications and misinterpretations, and ultimately hurt feelings. If that could lead anywhere positive, it'd be one thing, but so far that doesn't seem to be the case here.
Bottom line, what can be said and done moving forward to bring about improvements we can all get behind, for a league we all love?
As far as I know, the weighted realignment concept was brought about to address concerns about league competitiveness. Addressing league competitiveness appears to have unanimous support, whereas weighted realignment does not. League competitiveness is the issue for us to resolve, and weighted realignment is only a part of this issue, not the issue in its entirety. Can we all agree on this so far?
Being "competitive" is also not only about being the champion, and not only about winning. It's also a mindset and a work ethic, and most importantly, it's about one's standing relative to the entire league, not just the top owner or two. When I think about what a "competitive league" means, I think about a league where all 12 teams BEGIN with reasonably similar chances of success. I use "begin" because once the season begins, free agency, trading, and lineup decisions become each owner's responsibility--we cannot, and should not control those in-season factors, but we absolutely can make each season's starting point more equitable for all teams.
To do this, we should be talking about ways to START each season at a more competitive and fair level. At its purest form, this would involve doing away with franchise players and rookie keepers and simply reversing the draft order so the champion drafts last and the last place finisher drafts first the following season. However, I don't think this is advisable due to the following reasons:
a) this would remove a significant degree of strategy and fun--from franchise/rookie selection strategy to draft strategy to trade strategy to roster management, etc.
b) this would make tanking a far too viable option
c) this would make our league like most other leagues
I'm reasonably confident most of us would feel the same way about this, though I could be wrong.
However, there is still a way to vastly improve competitiveness at the beginning of each season while still keeping franchise players and rookie keepers, discouraging tanking, and doing so in a uniquely "Ragnarok" way. To rehash:
1st pick: 7th place finisher
2nd pick: 8th place finisher
3rd pick: 9th place finisher
4th pick: 10th place finisher
5th pick: 11th place finisher
6th pick: 12th place finisher
7th pick: 6th place finisher
8th pick: 5th place finisher
9th pick: 4th place finisher
10th pick: 3rd place finisher
11th pick: 2nd place finisher
12th pick: 1st place finisher
This method would give all 12 teams something to play for. The losers' bracket would be motivated to win because they're all playing for high draft picks. The winner's bracket would still be motivated to win because of eternal glory and cash rewards. And the end result would be a draft order that prevents tanking while still taking significant steps toward leveling the playing field from year to year.
Therefore, before we rush to institute major changes, I've yet to hear anyone (other than my boring self) address this point about weighted realignment:
the best teams are still going to draft first, still get the best franchise players, etc. Under weighted realignment, the bottom teams don't get better--we're simply letting one of them make the playoffs (with what will still be an inferior roster with a lower chance of winning, as by definition they'd be coming out of the lowest division). We'd be slapping lipstick on a pig here--again, in my opinion.
I'm not married to the idea of revising the draft order as a way of addressing competitiveness, but I a) strongly prefer it compared to weighted realignment for reasons previously stated, and b) I'd scrap the revised draft order concept in a heartbeat if someone else suggested a better alternative.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/11/2017 11:40:30 PM |
|
You're not missing anything, Kent.
|
|
|
|
But I don't think both would be necessary to solve the problem, and in fact implementing both could swing the pendulum to the other extreme--to the point that we wouldn't even know what worked/didn't work to begin with.
But the biggest reason I can think of: there's only the need to implement one of these concepts, because only one of these concepts actually addresses the issue it's meant to address. Can you guess which one I think that is? :) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/11/2017 11:27:41 PM |
|
Hahaha... Really?
|
|
|
|
ok. even if we're going to ignore the poll and dclare a victory for the weighted system, can we not pump the brakes and consider the (*cough* more appealing *cough*) option that i brought up (and that several people seemed to support)?
i would say that we should do the following poll:
"to address league competitiveness, which would you rather do:
(a) weighted divisional realignment
(b) revised draft order
but i'm not sure how definitive the polls are anymore.
seriously, people. the weighted divisional realignment does.not.solve.the.problem. under this change, the best teams are still going to draft first, still get the best franchise players, etc. under this change, the bottom teams do.not.get.better. we let one of them make the playoffs (with what will still be an inferior roster) and suddenly we've addressed competitiveness?
i'm a broken record at this point, but i'm not sure enough people have been listening to the music skipping. if we want to make the league more competitive, give parity to how the rosters are drafted by changing the draft order. this actually addresses the issue at the source. under this change, rosters are more equally-and fairly-balanced, and there would be no need to group divisions by success/ability/recent results.
i'm speaking especially to those listed as pro-weighted in the most recent message: if given the choice between weighted realignment and revised draft order, would you honestly still choose the former?
look--i'm not trying to be difficult, or be a dick, etc. and i didn't want to say this because i'm honestly uncomfortable doing so, but based on recent results, no one stands to lose more by changing the draft order than me. and you know what? i'd be 100% fine with that because having a competitive league with a fair playing field is infinitely more important to me than winning or getting the #1 draft pick.
if it's time for me to shut the fuck up about this, feel free to let me know. if there's one thing we do appear to all agree on, it's about being passionate about ragnarok. that in itself is pretty awesome, and that's all i'm doing here. for what it's worth (and that may not be much), my personal opinion is that we would be making a big mistake moving forward with weighted realignment, at least when a better, simpler option (in my opinion) could be available. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/10/2017 9:38:43 PM |
|
I (respectfully) disagree
|
|
|
|
If anything, I think the opposite is true. The schoolyard system is based on the "bottom" four divisional captains drafting according to their own criteria, which could differ from each other, and differ from year to year. As such, waiting 3 years wouldn't necessarily accomplish anything from an analytical standpoint b/c the factors influencing the process would be changing. Resetting this more often--even every year--would make some sense.
On the other hand, the weighted approach does have a tiered approach, where to really understand if the overall process works, we'd need a longer experiment. For example, what happens to the winner of the Teams 10-12 division in year 2? Does he continue to rise or does he return to the bottom? The only way to know if this system is accomplishing what it is intended to is to stick with it for a longer period of time.
Maybe that's just me, though? I may be on my own island on this, but as I've said, I do think the weighted realignment is still the wrong answer to potentially the right question (competitiveness). From a macro perspective, grouping teams according to performance doesn't actually improve the quality of those bottom teams--it just gives one a chance to make the playoffs. Changing the draft order WOULD improve the PARITY of ALL teams--and to me, this would solve the problem in a much simpler, tidier manner (and still allow us to do the schoolyard draft if we want!).
Again, just my two cents. Or about twelve cents by now. A rip-off no matter what. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/8/2017 11:50:28 AM |
|
Let's muddy the waters!
|
|
|
|
Last thoughts on this. Read at your peril.
If league competitiveness is an issue, why not simply reconfigure the draft order? Is that not a more simplistic solution? Consider:
*Most leagues (especially franchise/keeper leagues) reverse the draft order so that the winner picks last.
*If we want to mirror the NFL--as has been used in various forms of support for the Weighted Realignment proposal--the league winner would pick last. The Patriots did not pick #1 in this year's NFL draft--they picked last.
*This would do a LOT more to fundamentally level the playing field than the Weighted Realignment, because it would even the quality of each team's roster so that each team would in theory have a much more even chance at making the playoffs. The Weighted Realignment would still result in the top teams drafting first, and therefore having a better chance at both the stronger rosters and best franchise players. We'd be giving the bottom teams a guarantee that one would make the playoffs, but that team would still (in theory) have a weaker roster than the other qualifying playoff teams.
*I was not in Ragnarok when our current format of having the winner draft first was implemented, but I'd imagine that one of the reasons for it was to prevent tanking. If we can trust the integrity of all 12 owners to compete the whole way through, is the possibility tanking a preferable issue to a lack of competitiveness?
In true Ragnarok fashion, we could even come up with an original way of establishing draft order that would help to ensure roster quality but not overly reward the last place team with the first pick. Someone smarter than me would probably be able to come up with a better solution, but something like:
1st pick: 7th place finisher
2nd pick: 8th place finisher
3rd pick: 9th place finisher
4th pick: 10th place finisher
5th pick: 11th place finisher
6th pick: 12th place finisher
7th pick: 6th place finisher
8th pick: 5th place finisher
9th pick: 4th place finisher
10th pick: 3rd place finisher
11th pick: 2nd place finisher
12th pick: 1st place finisher
This method would give all 12 teams something to play for. The losers' bracket would be motivated to win because they're all playing for high draft picks. The winner's bracket would still be motivated to win because of eternal glory and cash rewards. And the end result would be a draft order that prevents tanking while still taking significant steps toward leveling the playing field from year to year.
I'd much rather we do something like this than fundamentally change how our divisions are grouped and how playoff teams are selected. And it's a much easier solution.
Maybe I'm too late to the game for this, but thought I'd throw it out there nonetheless. Or take Jeremy's solution and just kick me out of the league.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/7/2017 11:12:52 PM |
|
Can't we have both
|
|
|
|
If the issue is not necessarily the grouping realignment but, from a larger perspective, overall competitiveness, couldn't we satisfy both sides by doing the realignment draft AND coming up with a way to improve competitiveness?
(Again, that's if the majority of the league feels that competitiveness is an issue) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/6/2017 11:00:27 PM |
|
some more thoughts...
|
|
|
|
Sounds like we need to put this to a vote?
I’ll admit my initial reaction to grouping by “level” was a no. I’ll also admit that I find the rationale put forth by Keith, Zach, Erik, and Dave is well thought-out and logical (shocking, I know). I’m still on the side of the schoolyard bully draft, but if the majority of the league prefers this other idea, I’m definitely more comfortable with it than I was before.
Having said that, I do think it’s worth defending the realignment draft a bit more, as I disagree with some of the arguments against it (and some of the arguments for the other idea can also be applied to this one).
Candidly, the most surprising mindset against the realignment draft (at least to me) is the notion that people’s feelings could get hurt. At the risk of sounding insensitive and, well, bullyish, we’re all grown men here (to varying extents, I know), every one of us has made fun of someone else in Ragnarok for some reason or another every year, and trash talking and fantasy football go together like Keith and racist tattoos.
No matter what we do, someone is always going to finish last. To use one of Keith’s State of the League one-liners, that’s pretty much a constant. And unless I’m missing something, we don’t worry about the feelings of the 12th place finisher at the end of each season, but suddenly the chance that that person could be selected first in a realignment draft has us concerned for his emotional well-being?
But here’s the thing: I don’t think people’s feelings are even in play here, because, as has been discussed, there’s absolutely no guarantee that a realignment draft would be done in order of “owner ability.” In fact, as others have stated, it’s likely people will be using different strategies/criteria for selecting division-mates, which is both what makes this idea awesome and unpredictable, and removes the notion that the special kid in the corner is going to always be drafted last (or in this case, first). To me, at least, it’s a total non-issue.
The argument that the fallout of a realignment draft would be worse because it lasts multiple years also doesn’t hold water to me—if we wanted, we could hold the realignment draft every year, right? That way divisions would be kept fresh—as with the other idea. There’s no rule stating that we would have to wait a certain # of years each time, is there? And if it’s as fun as I think it could be, that just adds another element of fun to look forward to at draft weekend each year. Or every two years, or whatever we decide.
But again, I think the most compelling reasons in FAVOR of the realignment draft need to be restated: a) it’s an original idea that no one else is doing (and I wish I could take credit for it), b) it’s FUN, dammit!, and therefore c) it embodies everything awesome about Ragnarok—yes, even more than the other idea. Even our current methodology has a degree of randomness to it, and that randomness adds an exciting element each time we realign. Grouping by owner level removes that exciting element.
The most compelling reason in favor of grouping by owner ability would appear to be from a competitiveness standpoint—and that’s if you believe competitiveness needs to be addressed, which is an important first question to ask. If I remember correctly, the idea of the divisional realignment draft was brought up out of fun, whereas the idea of realignment by owner level has been brought up based on competitiveness.
To me, this is a separate issue, and one that may well warrant further discussion. By no means do I want to dismiss it. But changing realignment and (indirectly, but importantly) playoff criteria seems like an extreme move when there may be other ways to level the playing field, such as how draft order is determined, etc. Hell, even my (radical) two-quarterback proposal could easily be seen as a way to level the playing field, as none of us would have any initial clue what the fuck we are doing.
Look, to others’ credit, I do think we’re in a win-win situation, as both ideas are better than what we currently have in place. But in the spirit of a pre-Trump America, I think the right thing to do would be to put this to a league vote. And if grouping by owner level wins out, I’ll be happily on board.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 5/29/2017 3:57:01 PM |
|
So I guess I'm bringing
|
|
|
|
Rice-a-roni?
Love the idea, Z. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 4/7/2017 1:36:31 PM |
|
Not responding directly to Billy...
|
|
|
|
but letting Patrick Roy do it for me:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NaiN8HjEy74 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 3/30/2017 9:48:09 AM |
|
Some initial thoughts
|
|
|
|
I would hate to lose the entire concept of the realignment draft, just because it seems like not only a creative and brilliant idea, but one that embodies everything that makes Ragnarok unique. I'd rather look at ways to tweak the realignment draft rather than try something else entirely.
I do agree that when one "mocks" the realignment draft, the comparative strengths of the divisions do not seem even enough. I also agree that the second round reversal seems to remedy this problem quite well and would be in favor of this.
It's probably also worth noting that there are a LOT of unknown factors here with any of these options. For the realignment draft, we don't know what strategies the divisional captains would use when drafting their future division-mates (which is part of what I think makes this idea so neat), and even if they were to all decide to draft the weakest available teams, their criteria could be different (for example, how much weight would be placed on the owner vs the incumbent franchise/rookie keepers?). Would some owners ignore team strength altogether and draft their closest buddies? Would they draft their biggest rivals to get two games per season against each other? Or would some owners draft teams they haven't been paired with before?
My point is--there's no set formula for this, which is really fucking cool. If the divisional captains adopt different strategies--or even if they use the same strategies but their criteria are different--the entire scenario outlined in the mock divisions goes out the window. I'd argue this is more likely than not.
So to sum up, I'd vote for the REVISED IDEA, but I'm not necessarily against any of the three. If there is a league consensus for one of the other ideas--or even a fourth idea that hasn't been tabled yet--I'll happily go along with it. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 12/26/2016 11:49:06 PM |
|
I'll keep it brief.
|
|
|
|
Mostly because I know no one wants to read this anyway.
Condolences to Stu, who clearly had the best team this year. Zeke's game tonight was a twisted representation of WRMC's dominance: he was so good that Dallas shut him down midway through the 3rd quarter. Otherwise, it's pretty clear he would've gotten it done. Congratulations on a great season, Stu. Brown + Zeke + high 2017 draft pick = 2017 Ragnarok Champ?
To the rest of you, I know what you're probably thinking: First Trump, and now this. Fuck you, 2016.
I get it. And I'll love you guys anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 11/29/2016 9:49:51 PM |
|
What? AGAIN? I call shenanigans!
|
|
|
|
And you should too. It's a seriously great place to watch some football. Shenanigans Sports Pub (www.shenaniganssportspub.com).
They're back up and running after the fiasco caused by that rival sports bar across the street, Hayters & Company. (www.Haytersandco.com). Apparently Hayters was not happy when Shenanigans brought in a new chef to bolster their menu and tried to get said chef's employment overturned, even though all the proper documentation was completed and there was nothing illegal about the hire.
Everything seems to be sorted out now, though. Both sports bars realized a little friendly competition was totally fine. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 11/26/2016 5:50:08 PM |
|
OK, so maybe this is what we do:
|
|
|
|
Nullify the trade between Kent and myself. Whether I agree with the rule-and the intent of what the rule is actually meant to cover-are immaterial. As things are currently written, Kent cannot trade Kyle Rudolph at this time because Rudolph already played on Thursday. No one meant to break any rules here.
That said, I'll talk with Kent, and it's certainly possible that we just execute the same exact trade on Tuesday of next week. I find it pretty ridiculous this trade is even being put to a vote, for reasons already expressed.
If you're going to vote against this trade, please do so for the only plausible reason: you think the trade itself is so unfairly balanced that it should not be permitted. This has nothing to do with the specific teams involved or their respective places in the standings-if you would consider this exact trade fair if it were made between two similarly-placed teams rather than between one team in the playoffs and one team out, you're not being objective.
I'm fully on board for discussing this rule in the offseason, or even now in the context of next season. But let's not forget that there is no rule outlawing a team's ability to trade based on their place in the standings, and I think it would set the wrong kind of precedent to inact rules in the middle of the season. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 11/26/2016 1:57:47 PM |
|
True...
|
|
|
|
Though I don't think that's what the rule is meaning. That rule references not being able to start a player in a given week and then drop that player in favor of a free agent during the same week. Hence, why that language appears in the Free Agency section and not the Trading section. And I think if we're being honest, this rule was not meant to apply to trading-as long as no team is trying to start a traded player, there is no advantage gained, whereas you could argue differently for free agency.
That said-and though I would disagree-I would be open to nullifying the trade in terms of this week's games, though I think it should still be processed for next week. Is there historical precedent for a trade occurring (or not occurring) between Thursday and Monday, when players have already played? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 11/26/2016 1:02:49 PM |
|
Unless I'm missing something...
|
|
|
|
| There's no rule that says a player that has already played cannot be traded. It just means I cannot put Kyle Rudolph in my starting lineup because Kent already started him, nor can Kent start Martellus Bennett this week because he already played Kyle Rudolph... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 11/26/2016 9:07:00 AM |
|
Couldn't disagree more.
|
|
|
|
If you want to put this to a vote, that's your decision. But I think you're coming down harshly on Kent, and I'd say that even if I weren't involved in the trade (or one of the trades) in question.
A team makes a trade if he thinks it improves his team. Period. It doesn't matter whether that team is in the playoffs or not--and isn't the point of the Loser's Bracket to give all teams something to play for? There's still a difference between owning the 7th draft selection spot versus the 12th, isn't there?
Do you think the trade is unfair? Because I don't, and I'd like to hear your justification if you do.
If you think there should be a rule about teams being able to trade once they're eliminated from the playoffs, and/or should only be allowed to make trades for potential franchise players, that's a different issue (and one that, as you note, is not currently in the rules). However, this is a slippery slope to climb, and one that personally doesn't make sense.
For example, as previously mentioned, why shouldn't a non-playoff team be able to trade if they're motivation in doing so is to improve their team? And if they can only trade for franchise players, how do we make a concrete rule about acquiring a franchise player--which is purely objective? Can an eliminated team mortgage their current season to trade for a franchise player who is out for that season and/or on IR?
It would only make sense (in my opinion) to put a rule like this in effect if we completely did away with the Loser's Bracket, which would be the worst decision of all. But if you did this--in giving an eliminated team nothing to play for--you could call "shenanigans" on any trades made. Is that worth it?
And another thing--I think we'd all agree that the high number of trades made each season is one of the cool things about Ragnarok. I love getting those email notifications that trades have gone down regardless of whether I'm involved--it's awesome to think that everyone is constantly thinking about Ragnarok, and how to wheel and deal. Do we really want to put a rule in place that tempers trading?
Bottom line--I don't think Kent did anything wrong. I don't think I did anything wrong. Or Stu, for that matter, if this applies to his earlier trade with Kent as well. You're welcome to your opinion, of course, and I'm all for discussing potential rule modifications if the league thinks it's necessary--in the offseason.
Happy to take this offline with anyone if that would be helpful.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 11/4/2016 10:53:11 AM |
|
Yes. The Cubs winning is a great thing.
|
|
|
|
I'm a Cubs fan, born from having a diehard Grandmother just outside Chicago who would take me to Wrigley as a kid. I was hooked. She passed away when I was in college, but was the first person I thought of when the final out was recorded early Thursday morning. I wish she could've seen it happen.
Over the years, I--like most of America, apparently--saw my interest in baseball wane. It is still "America's Pastime," but that has taken on a new definition: the sport is past its time. The season is too long, games are too long, players are paid too much, and there's far too much down time during a game to hold one's attention (just for starters).
I stopped following regular season baseball years ago--partly because of the above reasons, and partly because the Cubs consistently stunk. Last season, I only started following it in September as the divisional races wound down, and I didn't feel like I'd missed anything.
This season I started tuning in even later, as the Cubs had locked up the NL Central seemingly months ago. But I did manage to watch a significant amount of their series against the Giants and Dodgers, and then just about every minute of the World Series.
As a Cubs fan, you get used to the idea of your team not being relevant, and as such you focus more on the experience than the results. The "Lovable Losers" moniker was born from this philosophy. Of course, that philosophy was formed out of necessity rather than preference--what else do you do if your team sucks so badly every season?
This explains--at least, partially--why this World Series was so riveting, anxiety-inducing, and so goddamned gratifying when the Cubs won. I was surprised I cared so much, but as that glorious Game 7 unfolded, with all its dramatic twists and turns, I can't remember being that nervous as a sports fan in a long time.
Will the Cubs' victory change their reputation, behavior, and perception? Almost certainly, though the degree to which these things will change remains to be seen. While the Cubs are a big market team, they won this World Series largely with homegrown talent, developed through the draft (the Theo Epstein effect). The Cubs ranked 14th in MLB in team payroll. And their team is comprised mostly of young, likable players.
I don't expect the world to turn on the Cubs overnight, but sustained success--as the Cubs appear well-positioned to experience--will certainly lead to a continued shift in goodwill. And as a Cubs fan--I'm fine with that.
Fly the W. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 11/2/2016 7:24:28 AM |
|
What Scott really means...
|
|
|
|
| ...is that Kent's team is the only one he might still beat with his JV squad... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 10/27/2016 12:49:14 PM |
|
That is unacceptable. We can't live without Scribbles.
|
|
|
|
If need be, call someone and dictate to them over the phone.
I nominate Stu. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 10/24/2016 8:52:35 AM |
|
Agreed re: Tropic Thunder.
|
|
|
|
Didn't he get nominated for an Oscar for that role. Pretty much unheard of for a slapstick comedy..
It takes real acting chops to play an Australian man playing a Black man. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 9/21/2016 10:24:33 PM |
|
Anyone else not have their free agency bids process tonight?
|
|
|
|
| Or maybe that's Keith's way of keeping the Asians down.. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 9/20/2016 10:39:35 AM |
|
All precincts reporting.
|
|
|
|
10 of us are open to exploring the 2nd QB option in more detail. Only 2 of us said "Get off my lawn."
The next official step will be to get everyone's opinions on the various ways the 2nd QB spot could be implemented. It'll be important to do this both in terms of how we all view the ideas compared to each other, and which ideas we'd be comfortable with versus uncomfortable.
Given that Customized's polling engine is not nearly as advanced as the refresh-free draft rooms which blew everyone away over draft weekend, I'll eventually create a survey that will be sent to your email addresses.
Again, no one is committing to anything here--call this market research. So it will be important to get EVERYONE's opinion--including the Get Off My Lawn folks. Once we arrive at the most popular idea, I will create a Ragnarok poll where we can officially vote on this as a league (and do so anonymously). But this step is still a ways off.
However, before we can even do that, I want to open a conversation where everyone can toss out ideas for the 2nd QB rule. As I said at the draft (which may not have been audible over the boos, you fuckers), I want to get all of your ideas on this so that they can be included in the survey. If we can come up with a Ragnarok twist on this concept, it would be even cooler. So feel free to post your ideas here or email them to me--whatever you prefer.
Here are the ideas so far for ways to add a 2nd QB slot:
*Reduce the scoring for the 2nd QB by 50% of the existing QB scoring. Using 2015 as an example, QB13-24 would have scored 59-110 pts over the course of the season. This would be equivalent to RB9-36 or WR13-45, which feels appropriate to me, but we could make this % anything.
*Make the 2nd QB slot scoring plays only: TDs (rushing or passing), 2pt conversions, INTs, Fumbles lost.
*Keep scoring the same for the 2nd QB slot, but designate your QB1 and QB2 each week. If your QB2 outscores your QB1, you incur a certain # of penalty points.
*Make the second QB slot a Superflex, meaning you can start any positional player here (QB/RB/WR/TE).
*Make the second QB slot a Superflex, but if you start a QB and your opponent starts a RB/WR/TE and you are outscored at the slot, you incur penalty points (or your opponent is rewarded bonus points).
OK, I've rambled on enough. I look forward to your thoughts. I think. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 9/16/2016 9:49:52 AM |
|
That's because Keith left some pot for him on the kitchen counter
|
|
|
|
| Well-played, Keith! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 9/12/2016 12:14:33 PM |
|
League Pulse on the Two Quarterback Proposal
|
|
|
|
Thanks to everyone for hearing me out about this at the draft. I've created a poll with the sole intention of gauging rudimentary interest in increasing the importance of the QB position in Ragnarok. Again, just very general interest.
If the results of this poll indicate that the majority of us are traditional, "Get Off My Lawn" fantasy owners who view even the mere thought of a second QB as blasphemous, that'll be the end of it. However, if enough of us are interested in at least exploring/discussing this and seeing if we can create a customized, consensual change that would be both cool and in the spirit of Ragnarok, we can continue the conversation.
To be clear, saying "yes" to the poll does not mean you are in favor of the 2 QB rule change, but merely that you're open to the possibility. There will be additional things to discuss/poll on later--not only the details of the actual rule change, but also how/when to implement it fairly. If we were to get hung up on these steps to the point there isn't a good way forward, the end result will be the same.
So vote in the poll. And go fuck yourselves. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 9/12/2016 8:02:10 AM |
|
Hear, hear! Best goddamned weekend of the year.
|
|
|
|
Apologies to Christmas, birthdays, Labor Day, Halloween, etc. but it's true. None of them can compete.
Now we all have to deal with the emotional letdown that is the Week After, easily the longest week of the year immediately on the heels of the shortest one.
Thanks to everyone for not only pulling this off, but continually raising the bar. I have no idea how next year will be even better; I just know that somehow it will be.
Good luck to all this season.
Signed,
Winner of the 2016 Ragnarok Cornhole Singles Tournament ChampionSHIP. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 9/8/2016 7:57:50 AM |
|
I had a dream last night.
|
|
|
|
| That we were at the draft house, which had a coin-op arcade in the basement that some kids from the local town were allowed to use. Kent got into a brawl with one of them over a scoring dispute in Galaga. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 9/5/2016 7:34:18 PM |
|
I'll be there Thursday night. Leaving either Sunday night or Monday morning.
|
|
|
|
| These next few days always move soooo slowly. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 9/3/2016 11:05:12 AM |
|
I thought that was a headline from The Onion.
|
|
|
|
| Sadly, when the Vikings are concerned, it isn't. I bet the Eagles couldn't get Bradford out the door fast enough! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 9/1/2016 10:02:05 AM |
|
Mustaches
|
|
|
|
| Great idea. Sadly, I'm out. Not for lack of interest, but for lack of genetics. I would've had to stop shaving in 1997 to make this happen. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 8/31/2016 3:57:08 PM |
|
I'll take care of the paper products too.
|
|
|
|
| 2 24-packs of TP. 1 for Stu, 1 for the rest of us. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 8/31/2016 2:53:02 PM |
|
Any supermarket requests?
|
|
|
|
I'll bring some more breakfast stuff--eggs, pancake/french toast stuff, and cinnamon rolls. I'll bring some fruit as well--not alcohol-infused, which means it may just gather dust in the corner. Perhaps a frozen pizza or two, for tradition's sake. And a couple bottle of rum to assist with Kent's ceremonial first passout.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 7/19/2016 9:47:52 AM |
|
What? The Minnesotans are coming?
|
|
|
|
| Outstanding! Now it's a party! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 5/29/2016 8:21:40 AM |
|
Wait... you're seriously trying to drag me into a bet about the Penguins?
|
|
|
|
| No thanks. A Penguins-Sharks Stanley Cup final is about as relevant to me as... well... a Maulers-Blast Ragnarok game. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 5/28/2016 4:26:11 PM |
|
Penguins? Is that Arena league team?
|
|
|
|
| You guys need to make that bet official, but only if the loser has to man up on Draft Weekend. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 11/10/2015 3:06:17 PM |
|
The R in Ragnarok stands for Racist
|
|
|
|
How else to explain the the week 10 Game of the Week involves two .500ish teams with white owners rather than Rice Bowl I between two 6-3 teams with Asian owners.
I demand an investigation. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 11/1/2015 10:27:57 AM |
|
I just tried to set my lineup...
|
|
|
|
| But instead ended up on KFC's website. Which is a win anyway! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 10/25/2015 11:56:42 AM |
|
if Scribbles quits, we all quit.
|
|
|
|
This league cannot go one without our preeminent journalist.
Sorry about your frustrations, Kent. We've all been there to some extent, I'm sure. However, there are some pretty easy workarounds here.
The biggest thing: don't write your post within the body of the Ragnarok site. That way, if something happens when you post--or if something gets cut off b/c of length restrictions, etc (like the week before), you're not fucked.
Write the preview in Microsoft Word or something similar. Or, if you don't have access to something like that, at least highlight your entire writeup, right-click the mouse, and copy it. That way, if the text disappears, you can always bring the screen back up, right-click again, and paste the text back in.
OR, if your email is more reliable, just write the text within an email and send it to someone else to post on your behalf (I wouldn't nominate Keith, simply b/c I think he'd edit it before posting...).
But don't give up. Don't ever give up. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 10/18/2015 2:27:28 PM |
|
Mattie B's it is.
|
|
|
|
| 5 min from my house. Good choice! I'll be there btw 8-8:30. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 10/18/2015 10:17:53 AM |
|
If I'm picking the place..
|
|
|
|
| I'm going with something generic like Champps or Buffalo Wild Wings in the Southpoint area. But I could easily be talked into something else. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 10/16/2015 12:54:22 PM |
|
Open to suggestions on the venue.
|
|
|
|
| Do you/Jeremy have a favorite haunt? As a father of 3, I don't get out much--hell, I'm just happy to get out at all. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 10/15/2015 7:20:19 AM |
|
Anyone want to watch the SNF game?
|
|
|
|
I'd be down. There could be as many as 9 players from this one game with fantasy implications in the Rattus-Dynasty game, which is insane. NINE!
Plus, it's my birthday. I'm buyin'! (not because I'm generous, but because I don't want to get roofied).
Who's in? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 10/1/2015 10:30:26 AM |
|
The latest Rush rant..
|
|
|
|
| ...brought to you by Budweiser. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 9/26/2015 11:41:19 AM |
|
A question for you, Skullsplitters:
|
|
|
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IU_y9FB0QKk |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 9/15/2015 11:43:38 AM |
|
Who do Ragnarok and the Minnesota Vikings have in common?
|
|
|
|
Nothing. Ragnarok is fucking incredible, and the Vikings (still) fucking suck. Good to know the Niners can hemorrhage hall-of-famers in the offseason and still truck Minnesota with their B-Team. Some things never change!
That aside, thanks to all for another memorable weekend. Despite constantly setting the bar impossibly high, we always seem to manage to surpass it. Special thanks to Stu for all you did with the house--your hard work and sportsmanlike handling of the 11th hour house change resulted in us getting the lakeside palace.
And of course to Keith, the ultimate multitasker, who somehow managed to get the website running, deliver an epic powerpoint presentation, and drink, smoke, shoot, snort, and imbibe enough elicit substances to kill a horse, while maintaining the presence of mind to slap an I Heart Gay Porn magnet on my car and film as Jeremy and I drove away. No wonder those good old boys at the Bracey gas station chased us off with pitchforks (and why I had a parade in my honor once I got to Chapel Hill).
I cringe to think of how this footage will be used. Though to be fair, gay porn is terrific. It's like straight porn, only the dude gets a little more camera time.
Suck it, Keith. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 9/9/2015 10:16:02 PM |
|
TOMORROW!!
|
|
|
|
| That is all. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 9/3/2015 9:04:22 AM |
|
I'll bring...
|
|
|
|
Water, paper towels, toilet paper, bread, deli meat, some random snacks, etc.
And tampons for those who need it. Time to put the "men" back in menstruation. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 8/27/2015 6:52:59 AM |
|
Sure... the owner SOUNDS nice...
|
|
|
|
But does he beat his kids? Because I would be absolutely sickened by that. It would not just be a matter of a Dad going all old school with a "switch"--this man would likely have a history of extremely abusive behavior, and the testimony of his child would be heartbreaking. If so, this "man" should be tried, convicted and imprisoned. He shall no longer be our renter, and he should never be allowed to rent to the general public again. I would ask that he be removed from VRBO, Homeaway, Flipkey, etc. If he chooses not to, and someone rents from him freely, then I am fucking outta here. Things like domestic violence and child abuse only change when someone makes a stand. I am making mine right here.
Seriously, thanks for all your hard work, Stu. It sounds like we've upgraded, if anything. If there are mints on our pillows, we have you to thank. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 8/26/2015 11:34:46 AM |
|
Sorry to hear that, Scott.
|
|
|
|
| Hope everything turns out well for your Dad. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 8/25/2015 10:17:59 AM |
|
Thanks for the update, Stu.
|
|
|
|
| I think you said it--as long as internet is working, this could be an awesome upgrade for us! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 8/16/2015 12:18:31 AM |
|
There's been a mistake!
|
|
|
|
| I meant to keep Johnny Rehab, not Andrew Luck! He's no child-beater, but no one's perfect. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 8/12/2015 5:53:46 PM |
|
I don't know about that...
|
|
|
|
| But the Sparkle Bunnies division? Gaping Buttholes was so much better. Can we go back to that? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 7/7/2015 12:08:34 PM |
|
Chairman Mao
|
|
|
|
Now dat's a name I can get behind.
Asian Domination! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 7/1/2015 9:39:25 AM |
|
Amen, Blast--it's go time!
|
|
|
|
Here at the Koo Dynasty corporate offices, we decided a massive strategic overhaul was needed based on last season's unacceptable 3rd place finish. Hence, moving to the back of the bus.
Or, we're already a little wigged out by Dat Mao and wanted to get as far from him as possible. He's all that and dim sum. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/19/2015 11:29:59 AM |
|
Koo Dynasty sues Dat Mao Dynasty for copyright infringement
|
|
|
|
| Win some titles first! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/8/2015 11:20:16 AM |
|
Rookie Rule makeover?
|
|
|
|
I want to pose this to our rules committee (and not the shitty committee that has been reviewing the grossly exaggerated number of trophies next to Keith's name for YEARS now)...
First off, the rookie rule concept is one of the coolest things about our league format-wise. I just don't see why rookies can only be kept if they're drafted and kept on a roster the entire year.
Why not have a roster deadline (whether it's the trade deadline to keep things simpler or something different) by which point any rookie on a roster is eligible for the rookie rule?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/6/2015 10:50:01 PM |
|
Draft Order. I'm Confused.
|
|
|
|
Are we talking about changing the way we're determining the draft order in general, or talking specifically about the upcoming season, given that the #1 pick would belong to a noob? I'm assuming the latter; the former always seemed reasonable to me the way it is.
So assuming we're talking about just this upcoming draft, I see the following options:
1) Change nothing--the noob inherits his team with whatever draft preference associated with it. This has worked well in the past, and the only reason for concern this season is because no one's ever won the league and then peaced out. In this scenario, Dat opens the mother of all fortune cookies and finds himself inheriting an elite team with the first draft spot preference--a far cry from my first season, where the dipshit owner left me with Laveraneus Coles and the 12th pick.
2) Slide everyone up one spot in the preference order and put the noob in the back. This could be a uniform policy in the (unlikely and tragic) event that others leave--like that arrogant motherfucker, Koo. He's a real dick. If you're a noob, the chance to join our elite league is reward enough. You pick last. Welcome to the league, D-Bag.
3) Some ridiculous idea involving ping-pong balls, advanced calculus related to team's success, who's never had the #1 pick, etc; a fucking lock box, and a top secret formula guaran-damn-teed to give Keith the #1 pick, which he'll refuse to justify to the rest of us. Seriously, if we go down this road, the possibilities are endless--and I'm not sure that we'd just be overcomplicating the issue. It seems to me #'s 1 or 2 would make the most sense as they'd be easy to enforce.. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 6/6/2015 4:26:52 PM |
|
Another Asian? Is our league racially tolerant enough for this?
|
|
|
|
| Or maybe I just don't like having company... Either way, welcome, Dat Mao! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 1/8/2015 10:41:16 PM |
|
Addition by subtraction
|
|
|
|
There are many things uniquely special about this league, three among them that we trust each other enough not to need a veto-system in place for trades, that we appreciate that our scoring system is different rather than bitching about it, and that while we all like to talk shit to each other, we understand what is considered in good humor and what is crossing the line.
In a single, self-congratulatory post, our noob "Champ" violated all three.
I wish I could say I'm surprised, but frankly there were signs all season this was coming. Who comes into a revered league and starts complaining and lobbying for changes in his first season anyway? And while it's too bad we're one short of a full complement of owners again (literally and figuratively), it's a welcome opportunity to take another shot at finding someone who will embody the Ragnarok values (including that you don't win the title in your first season!).
Onward and upward. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 9/27/2014 10:27:57 PM |
|
Greatest. Site. Design. Ever.
|
|
|
|
| Well done, Commish. I fully endorse this. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 9/16/2014 2:24:47 PM |
|
Haters Gotta Hate
|
|
|
|
First, I love the new stats. That could be because I'm half-Asian--throw any numbers in front of me and I'll start drooling.
Second, my team WAS pathetic in week 1, no doubt. 59 points is fucking dismal (though 4 teams were somehow even worse in week 1), and getting shit-canned by Joe was even worse.
Lastly--the numbers are a bit misleading for week 1, as there was no "choice" to be made in starting Packers or Seahawks (who weren't already franchised) as we couldn't start them anyway. That lowers my number to -13--which is still dead fucking last, and 100% due to starting the Bears D/ST over the 49ers. THAT was a dumb, fucking move--but it does make me feel slightly better because trying to pick the right D/ST is like flipping a coin.
You know what else makes me feel slightly better? Four Titles. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 8/28/2014 11:21:13 AM |
|
What a fucking good idea.
|
|
|
|
The fucking lock box sounds neat, though you've grossly underestimated how much I value Mason Crosby. He's an elite kicker.
My suggestion would be to limit this to one nomination per team. That way, if it all goes horribly fucking wrong, we're not as fucking screwed. And if we find out we all fucking love it, we can talk about expanding it to two the following season. In which case, we may need a bigger fucking lock box. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 8/27/2014 7:50:02 PM |
|
Dynasty
|
|
|
|
| I'll be there Thursday in the late afternoon, and leaving Sunday night. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 8/24/2014 8:00:49 AM |
|
Not 100% sure yet, but...
|
|
|
|
looks like I will be able to get out there on Thursday afternoon and leave Sunday night.
Definitely in for golf--I've been working hard on my "power fade" (slice). Two threesomes sound great-what about a Captain's Choice format this time? Just as long as Jeremy is on my team-I don't know how I'd cope otherwise. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 8/23/2014 6:13:07 PM |
|
I say again: the #1 pick in the 2014 Ragnarok draft is on the table.
|
|
|
|
| Anyone want to hammer out a deal? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 8/20/2014 2:22:33 PM |
|
A draft of division-mates? That is Ragnarok brilliance to me.
|
|
|
|
| Not to mention, a brand new opportunity for some good old-fashioned shit-talking. I'm intrigued. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 8/16/2014 10:04:07 PM |
|
Pick 1.1 is potentially on the table.
|
|
|
|
| Shoot me an email if you're interested. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 8/15/2014 3:06:02 PM |
|
Shady McCoy to return as Dynasty Franchise Player
|
|
|
|
(AP) LeSean "Shady" McCoy, stud running back, humanitarian, and (most importantly) cornerstone of the proud, 4-time champion Koo Dynasty, will return to the team for a 5th consecutive season.
"It was an easy choice," McCoy said via a statement prepared by his agent, Silky P. Jackson, "come back to a franchise I've helped win 2 Ragnarok Championships in 4 seasons or risk being drafted by 11 incompetent ingrates and having my career flushed down the shitter? I mean, what would YOU do?"
Terms of the new deal were not disclosed. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 8/12/2014 5:14:00 PM |
|
Really sorry to hear this awful news.
|
|
|
|
| Hang in there, Eric. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 8/10/2014 11:16:59 AM |
|
Weighing in from a top secret location
|
|
|
|
Haven't been around an active internet signal the past week or so.. so imagine my disgust--I mean delight--in finding 379 forum posts waiting for me!
I agree with the prevailing sentiment that unless a clearly understandable, extenuating circumstance pops up to prevent attendance at the draft (if not the entire draft weekend), it should not be too difficult to plan this far in advance. Maybe I was somewhat aware that similar shenanigans have happened previously with the same owner, but I didn't pay enough attention to it--and that's some bullshit that we don't need dampening enthusiasm as we head into the stretch run before the draft when we all start acting like kids in a candy store.
I'm in for golf. In for the draft. In for... TOTAL DOMINATION. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 3/22/2014 10:57:52 AM |
|
Awesome.
|
|
|
|
The lake house was terrific. Nearby golf, some kayaking, a ping pong table where I can beat Kent 21-3... What's not to like?
Thanks to everyone (especially Billy and Keith) for doing the legwork. I've always wanted to find a way to watch the Sunday games with everyone so I love the Sunday night idea. Like others, I'm not sure I could stay all four nights, but if given the choice I would probably lean toward Fri-Sun nights over Thu-Sat. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 3/15/2014 10:59:36 AM |
|
Wouldn't it be cool to have the draft in Thailand?
|
|
|
|
Dirt cheap hotels, booze, and hookers. Of course, the flight would cost $2,000... But if we're considering airfare...
Seriously I'm down for anything. My only concern with Minnesota: do they have the internet there? Running water? Electricity? An NFL franchise? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 12/24/2013 12:22:30 PM |
|
Your silence is deafening.
|
|
|
|
I assume those eleven congratulatory messages must've gotten held up as part of a site glitch. Don't worry, I won't hold it against you. Coincidentally, my house was egged, a flaming bag of dog shit left on my doorstep, someone keeps calling me at 3am and hanging up, and a bloody horse head was left in my bed. I'm sure none of that was done by you fine, upstanding gentlemen.
Suffice to say that I've enjoyed this season tremendously-a fact that would remain indisputable if I finished dead last each year. But seeing as I didn't, I do want to convey a few thank yous. You know, in the spirit of Christmas and all...
First, to Keith, for another terrific year making the Ragnarok world go round. Even if the alien theme was total horseshit, the overall site somehow gets better every time, even with the bar set so high. You also proved a worthy championship opponent (after seeping into the playoffs with all the force of an old man's urine stream). If that pussy Aaron Rodgers had sacked up and played in week 16, everyone may very well be reading your insufferable, self-congratulatory ramblings instead of mine. Mazel tov, Keith-I can't wait to see that runners-up trophy next to your name.
Secondly-to Zach, for the craziest, most bi-polar fantasy game I've ever been a part of. Our semifinal will live for a long time as the best in league history (or at least since I joined, because I refuse to acknowledge the league's existence prior to that). While most of us would've handled that loss with all the class and moral purity of a single, unmarried boy scout troop leader, Zach took the high road... consequently making it even harder to enjoy the victory. The Syndrome's time will come.
And lastly, to the likes of Incognito, Carruth, and Hitler for their valued guidance and direction.
#oneforthethumb
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 12/16/2013 11:47:55 PM |
|
Holy FUCK.
|
|
|
|
| I don't even know what to say. Probably best not to say anything at all tonight. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 12/16/2013 9:12:34 AM |
|
I can't believe I put up 124 pts and am probably going to LOSE.
|
|
|
|
| Best Ragnarok game ever? Incredible performance, Z. Hell, a part of ME wants you to win this.... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 10/27/2013 12:13:58 PM |
|
12pm free agency period
|
|
|
|
| It looks like the Blast and I both bid 2 on Roy Helu. Given the tiebreaker being W-L record, it looks like the Blast should get him. Unless I'm missing something? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 9/4/2013 9:27:23 AM |
|
Can someone post the physical address of the house for GPS purposes?
|
|
|
|
| ONE. MORE. DAY. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 9/2/2013 8:43:07 AM |
|
sounds fine to me.
|
|
|
|
| Though the draft is taking way too long. I propose a strictly enforced 90-minutes per pick clock. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 9/2/2013 7:51:03 AM |
|
do we need a podium?
|
|
|
|
| Gotta make this look official again... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 8/26/2013 12:34:44 PM |
|
Commish--don't forget...
|
|
|
|
The 5 extra megabucks to the members of the now defunct (but no less proud) Walsh division for their victory in the inaugural Ragnarok Pro Bowl!
I'm just sayin'... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 8/21/2013 11:53:25 AM |
|
I'll bring the pizza.
|
|
|
|
| You're welcome. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 7/23/2013 8:37:16 PM |
|
What do you want? Participation Trophies?
|
|
|
|
This isn't 8-year old soccer.
The Steelers and 49ers have 11 rings between them--I'd say they've earned the right to be rated highly. But hey, the Bills and Vikings have more fun, and that's what really counts, right?
Who's bringing the orange slices? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 5/21/2013 1:35:11 PM |
|
And fire, of course. Gotta have fire.
|
|
|
|
| Everyone can use it once. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 5/21/2013 1:34:25 PM |
|
Agreed--let's decide this as a group.
|
|
|
|
| Though I propose that if we're unable to reach a consensus, the default choices are Rock, Paper, and Scissors. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 4/24/2013 12:22:16 PM |
|
Which lake house is it?
|
|
|
|
That link seems to go to a bunch of listings. Not that I don't trust Billy's judgment...
OK, I don't trust Billy's judgment.
Seriously, just want to see which house. I'm sure it's fine--more than fine, actually. And since the mountain house appears to be off the table, I think we just lock down the lake house.
In the meantime: good luck to the Bills and Jets fighting over who can draft Ryan Nassib way too early! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 4/15/2013 11:49:29 AM |
|
Makes no difference to me.
|
|
|
|
I'm incredibly good at both.
GO DYNASTY! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 4/15/2013 10:20:22 AM |
|
I'd be interested.
|
|
|
|
And know some non-Ragnarokers who might be as well, if that isn't blasphemous (and as long as there aren't any Coldplay concerts that same day).
On Thursday I'd likely join the party in progress as I'd be coming from a tennis match. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 4/15/2013 10:18:37 AM |
|
Like David Bowie...
|
|
|
|
| I have no preference. So count that as a vote for both houses, or for neither. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 4/8/2013 3:19:45 PM |
|
And I may have missed it...
|
|
|
|
| But if not, allow me to be the first to comment on the new site aesthetics. While not nearly as cool as last year's Chinese Dragon theme, I will say that it's appropriate, not only because it speaks directly to Keith's extraterrestrial conspiracy theories, but also b/c the only rational explanation for his title run has something to do with motherfucking aliens. |
|
|
|
|
|
