 |
 |
Very interesting discussion... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Flayers
Scout
76 posts
|
|
|
 |
Posted - 11/17/2004 8:25:26 PM |
 |
 |
Very interesting discussion...
|
|
|
|
Very good arguments on both sides, in my opinion. I do not believe that there is a concerted "movement" to change the rules, and I also do not think that our current system has any serious flaws. On the other hand, I think we need to consider that we might want to have some minor rules changes here and there to increase player movement and overall fun. I would especially like to see more active trading. Up until a few weeks ago the main source of movement on rosters has been via free agency, and usually just to fill a hole due to starters being on Bye. Can anyone name a player picked up on FA that is now a regular starter and top 10 performer? I think player movement is good for the league and it has been fun to see some big trades go down recently.
So perhaps the point here is not how to foster more parity, but how to make movement of players more fluid. Quid, in my opinion, is not working as is. Would you trade Payton or Priest or Dante for 50 quid? 100 quid? Don't know that I would. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Flayers
Scout
76 posts
|
|
|
|
Posted - 11/17/2004 8:34:21 PM |
|
|
One more thing and I'm out for now...
|
|
|
|
| Proposing, discussing/arguing, and rejecting/implementing rules changes is very much in line with how the NFL and its owners operate :) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
jd
Tape Junkie
55 posts
|
|
|
|
Posted - 11/17/2004 8:37:33 PM |
|
|
Trading -
|
|
|
|
While I respect everyone's desire to trade, it tends to be one teams plea to gain an edge over the other by getting more than what they are giving up. Just look at the NFL - how often do you see trades happen? Definetly less than what we have done in our league to this point in the season. As for free agents, I don't think the idea is to pick up a player through free agency and expect him to be an immediate starter or to be an automatic top 10 producer . . . the idea is to see the potential movement of a team to include/develop a player into a future star. I know from my offseason acquisitions (Suggs, Lloyd, T. Jones) my team has become deeper and more improved (except for the move I made to pick up AJ Feeley - ouch!). Just from my trade to get Mason for Jones, I have a weekly starter with a bunch of upside potential. If you will see by my tiny quid total, I seemed to be the only (overly) active aggressor for offseason pick-ups.
Again, I state my case for "No Changes"! Let's keep the vision and see how things go! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
jd
Tape Junkie
55 posts
|
|
|
|
Posted - 11/17/2004 8:42:19 PM |
|
|
One more thing for me . . . tambien . . .
|
|
|
|
As it states in our rules/by-laws:
"The Core Function: Longterm Gameplay
This league was formed in order to allow for strategies to play out over the course of many seasons, as teams can choose to keep as many players on their roster as they'd like. That nuance in the rules has far reaching implications in how we play the hands we're dealt, from evaluating younger talent to making trades involving future draft picks."
. . . this is how I've been basing my decisions from the get-go!
|
|
|
|
|
|
