 |
 |
Free Agency, Illegal Rosters, Tiebreakers |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Conspiracy
Football Freak
3325 posts
|
|
|
 |
Posted - 9/22/2009 3:57:08 PM |
 |
 |
Free Agency, Illegal Rosters, Tiebreakers
|
|
|
|
Hi Everyone -
Thought I'd tie up a few loose ends into one thread...
The failed bids in FA (for when no competing bids were made) could be the result of not actually submitting that second page in the FA worksheet form. I think that usually is the case, but I have witnessed a rare occurance where this happened even with a confirmed form submission. In any case, the spoken intent was there and so prior to Week 2's kickoff I added these two players to the respective rosters and deducted the Quid.
Regarding illegal rosters, the website does not currently do any hard enforcing of the roster rules for either the Draft or on a week to week basis. This is due to...
a) giving teams the ability to make asymmetrical trades (2 for 1) and then utilize their assets to pull off a different trade (effectively, this is a 3-way trade). teams have until the day of the first game of the week before they would have to waive someone.
b) an honor system. not the best solution, i know, and kind of a remnant from the old pen and paper days. last season, the team roster page started analyzing and enforcing starting lineup requirements, and expanding this to include the overall roster is on the development short list.
Also, it's worth noting that the new roster requirements were not being properly defined on the league Scoring System page. The system that we have is simpler than what was being shown - all we do now is divide the team into two parts:
1) Offensive Players: can have a maximum of 18 total Offensive Players in any ratio. These are QB, RB, WR, TE, and K.
2) Defensive Players: can have a maximum of 26 total Defensive Players in any ratio. These are DL, LB, DB, and HC.
With this system, you can have any ratio of defensive players on your team (3 DL, 2 LB, 2 DB, 1 HC, for example). You can even have more than 8 total defensive players, no problem. You are just capped at 18 offensive players to prevent the extreme farming seen in years past.
Lastly, with the new supercharged IDP scoring (wow, what a nice boost eh?) we were to go back to having Head Coaches be the first level of tiebreaker. This was also displayed incorrectly and has been updated accordingly. Note that it does not affect the Week 1 tie between the Crunchies and Drinking Team - the second level tiebreaker is the total IDP score and the Crunchies still get the Win. But now, Head Coaches are once again relevant and if you want to only carry 1 HC and not have one for the bye, that's the tiebreaking risk you can choose to take.
Sooo, that still brings us to the issue of how to best resolve past indescretions as well as future offenses of illegal rosters (that is, until the software starts to automatically handle it for us dumb humans). For future offenses, we could automatically cut a non-Rookie player with the lowest YTD score, starting with any offending position (if a particular position is relevant). Does this seem like the appropriate solution? And to do so automatically at 12:01 am on the day of the first game of the week?
As for the illegal rosters at the beginning of the season, I'd like to come up with a non-draconian resolution and one that satisfies the opponents of the teams in question. One possible idea would be a payment of 1 Quid for each illegal roster slot. Or, if no meaningful competitive advantage was had then perhaps simple forgiveness is ok and then we are hardfast going forward: the next time a game day arrives (12:01 am) and a team is illegal, the offending non-Rookie player with the lowest YTD is automatically waived.
Any thoughts, lady and gents?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted - 9/23/2009 7:36:48 PM |
|
|
Thoughts
|
|
|
|
| So one HC is OK, that's good. I'd like for the site to not allow you to submit a starting lineup if you have an illegal roster. Sometimes you might not get the free agents you bid on in order to make your roster legal so if the site could enforce the 18 offensive player limit and require you to waive any offensive players that put you over that limit before you can set your roster. That way you might go into a game with less than the total number of players that you could have, say only 1 db but at least you wouldn't have extra offensive players. So it wouldn't be illegal to have only 1 defensive player at a certain position you just could not have more than 18 offensive players and would thus have either an open roster spot or 3 HC's or something. As far as the previous games involving illegal rosters I think we need to consider that the season had a late start with a last minute draft date involving quite a few auto drafts that did not fill out rosters as needed and I think just a slow start in general. I seriously doubt that anyone won any games because they had more than 18 offensive players on their roster. I'm for setting things straight from here on out and not trying to do some kind of retroactive punishment. And.... I really miss speaking like a pirate. |
|
|
|
|
|
