keggerz Posted September 20, 2008 Share Posted September 20, 2008 Portis' last 5 games:Week 15 2007: 126 total yds 1 TD Week 16 2007: 124 total yds 1 TD Week 17 2007: 97 total yards 1 TD Week 1 2008: 84 total yds Week 2 2008: 99 total yds 2 TDs If that's your idea of inconsistent, you might need to lower your expectations. he used stats Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keggerz Posted September 20, 2008 Share Posted September 20, 2008 Here's a better question--why would you ever let a newbie into a league that costs $1000? Clearly, if every seasoned owner knew that alexander was over and this newbie owner did not, who was the brain trust that said it was okay to let a complete novice into your league? they all saw a fish but got pissed when it was someone else that hooked him Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
untateve Posted September 20, 2008 Share Posted September 20, 2008 they all saw a fish but got pissed when it was someone else that hooked him Exactly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clubfoothead Posted September 20, 2008 Share Posted September 20, 2008 As soon as someone can explain to me how to prove collusion, I will be opposed to commish veto powers. I'm thinkg about trading the Ice Cold Bruschis A. Peterson, TO, Holmes and Driver for D. Ward, Vincent Jackson, Bryant Johnson and LJ Smith. You've got 24 hours to prove collusion. Go. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted September 20, 2008 Share Posted September 20, 2008 (edited) he used stats Note to self: keggerz is incapable of taking simple data and drawing conclusions so provided you ever again make the mistake of bothering to engage him in debate, be sure to spell things out so well that even a five year old could understand. Edited September 20, 2008 by detlef Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keggerz Posted September 20, 2008 Share Posted September 20, 2008 Note to self: keggerz is incapable of taking simple data and drawing conclusions so provided you ever again make the mistake of bothering to engage him in debate, be sure to spell things out so well that even a five year old could understand. see if i ever give you a compliment again Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seahawks21 Posted September 20, 2008 Share Posted September 20, 2008 Here's a better question--why would you ever let a newbie into a league that costs $1000? Clearly, if every seasoned owner knew that alexander was over and this newbie owner did not, who was the brain trust that said it was okay to let a complete novice into your league? Because after the previous five owners had already quit, we were running out of friends to be in the league. This guy has wanted to be in the league for seven years, and we wouldn't let him, because he was an idiot. He was allowed in by majority vote and then ruined the league BEFORE HIS FIRST DRAFT. In local leagues, with friends, it is awfully hard to pick and choose owners sometimes. You need veto rules, period. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keggerz Posted September 20, 2008 Share Posted September 20, 2008 Because after the previous five owners had already quit, we were running out of friends to be in the league. This guy has wanted to be in the league for seven years, and we wouldn't let him, because he was an idiot. He was allowed in by majority vote and then ruined the league BEFORE HIS FIRST DRAFT. In local leagues, with friends, it is awfully hard to pick and choose owners sometimes. You need veto rules, period. so what you are really saying is: We(the league) made our bed and now we don't want to lay in it" there is a comedian that sums it up oh so well..."You can't fix stupid" to make it clearer the league was stupid to let stupid owners in when there is so much coin on the line...or as I said earlier and unta agreed....the league saw fish but got pissed when they weren't the ones to hook 'em Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seahawks21 Posted September 20, 2008 Share Posted September 20, 2008 If there is collusion then you have the right to prevent collusion. If you don't like the trade you don't have the right to disallow the trade. Vetoes are NOT a necessity I will leave any league that feels it has the right to manage my roster. So if you and the rest of your league mates felt collusion was going on and you had no recourse ... why the hell would you remain in that league in the first place. I remain in the league because it is all my high school buddies. I think making veto rules is a better option that simply quitting the league. We can't prove collusion. How would we? Like I said, if the owner all have a great track record, and have shown to be competetive and fair, I wouldn't need veto rules. In all other leagues, which are 99% of them on the planet, I will not play unless there are veto rules. Too many things can happen that could ultimately ruin the fun and integrity of the league. You have to have a way to fix these huge mistakes, for the sake of everyone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seahawks21 Posted September 20, 2008 Share Posted September 20, 2008 (edited) so what you are really saying is: We(the league) made our bed and now we don't want to lay in it" there is a comedian that sums it up oh so well..."You can't fix stupid" to make it clearer the league was stupid to let stupid owners in when there is so much coin on the line...or as I said earlier and unta agreed....the league saw fish but got pissed when they weren't the ones to hook 'em so we should have gone ahead with 9 owners? Sure, I could have had the kid over and attacked him until I got AD, but what fun is that? What does that prove? It is just stupid. If you want to win your fantasy leagues like that, be my guest, but I prefer an honest competetion. It just shouldn't be played that way. It isn't cheating, but ruins the league for the next five years plus. Would you rather continue the league like that, or simply input a veto system to insure that the league remains competetive? It is a pretty easy decision. Edited September 20, 2008 by Seahawks21 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keggerz Posted September 20, 2008 Share Posted September 20, 2008 As soon as someone can explain to me how to prove collusion, I will be opposed to commish veto powers. I'm thinkg about trading the Ice Cold Bruschis A. Peterson, TO, Holmes and Driver for D. Ward, Vincent Jackson, Bryant Johnson and LJ Smith. You've got 24 hours to prove collusion. Go. Dude, don't worry I won't let any of your leaguemates know about this PM you sent me: Hey Keg, I am planning on trading A. Peterson, TO, Holmes and Driver for D. Ward, Vincent Jackson, Bryant Johnson and LJ Smith because me and the other owner think that will stack his team enough to win it all this year. Since I have never won a fantasy title before at least I will get a share of the prize money. Oh, I forgot to mention he is going to give me 45% of his winnings too. Do you think that trade will stack his team enough to win it all? Thanks Clubfoothead PS Don't tell anyone about this so that they can't prove collusion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clubfoothead Posted September 20, 2008 Share Posted September 20, 2008 Dude, don't worry I won't let any of your leaguemates know about this PM you sent me: sending Blitz a carbon copy wasn't my smartest move, either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keggerz Posted September 20, 2008 Share Posted September 20, 2008 so we should have gone ahead with 9 owners? Sure, I could have had the kid over and attacked him until I got AD, but what fun is that? What does that prove? It is just stupid. If you want to win your fantasy leagues like that, be my guest, but I prefer an honest competetion. It just shouldn't be played that way. It isn't cheating, but ruins the league for the next five years plus. Would you rather continue the league like that, or simply input a veto system to insure that the league remains competetive? It is a pretty easy decision. i would do what I have to in order to get competent owners...hel1 I would do the same for a $25 league because I do want to play against good competition...putting a price tag of $1000 on a league doesnt guarantee that selecting good owners does. So like I said as a league you guys made your bed... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seahawks21 Posted September 20, 2008 Share Posted September 20, 2008 i would do what I have to in order to get competent owners...hel1 I would do the same for a $25 league because I do want to play against good competition...putting a price tag of $1000 on a league doesnt guarantee that selecting good owners does. So like I said as a league you guys made your bed... Hey, you're preaching to the choir. I voted seven years in a row to not let the guy in the league. Once he got into the league, I told him that this guy was going to offer him Shaun Alexander for his first pick. Unfortunately there are 11 other people that have votes in the league. So, we can have the mess that we have now, or we could have a veto system. Which is the worse evil? IMO, having a veto system in place fixes way more problems than it causes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grits and Shins Posted September 20, 2008 Share Posted September 20, 2008 IMO, having a veto system in place fixes way more problems than it causes. Until YOUR trade it vetoed because the other owners feel like they can manage YOUR team better than you ... then you'll be screaming bloody murder. If you are in a league where you think there is cheating then you should quit that league. If you choose to remain in a league where you think cheating is occuring then you have no right to whine when cheating occurs. It is not YOUR job or ANYBODY'S job to determine that somebody made a BAD trade. Until you can prove to me that you have an unfailing ability to predict the future performance of players you simply do not know how a trade will eventually play out. Too many people out there get caught up in a player's name and his past performance when they decide id a trade is "fair". Bottom line I think several have the right of it ... you guys let this 'fish' in the league and now you are pissed because you didn't hook him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seahawks21 Posted September 20, 2008 Share Posted September 20, 2008 Until YOUR trade it vetoed because the other owners feel like they can manage YOUR team better than you ... then you'll be screaming bloody murder. If you are in a league where you think there is cheating then you should quit that league. If you choose to remain in a league where you think cheating is occuring then you have no right to whine when cheating occurs. It is not YOUR job or ANYBODY'S job to determine that somebody made a BAD trade. Until you can prove to me that you have an unfailing ability to predict the future performance of players you simply do not know how a trade will eventually play out. Too many people out there get caught up in a player's name and his past performance when they decide id a trade is "fair". Bottom line I think several have the right of it ... you guys let this 'fish' in the league and now you are pissed because you didn't hook him. Ummmm, well, no, but, ok. Look, if 70% of the league felt it necessary to use one of their 3 vetoes on a trade that I did, it is probably a pretty good indicator that something isn't right. I'm guessing you aren't in any leagues with a dozen of your best friends. Are you "that guy" that pesters the "fish" nonstop until you get their best player? Like I said, if you are in a league with reponsible owners, this isn't an issue. If you're not, you end up with non-competetive leagues unless you have a veto system in place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grits and Shins Posted September 20, 2008 Share Posted September 20, 2008 Ummmm, well, no, but, ok. Look, if 70% of the league felt it necessary to use one of their 3 vetoes on a trade that I did, it is probably a pretty good indicator that something isn't right. I'm guessing you aren't in any leagues with a dozen of your best friends. Are you "that guy" that pesters the "fish" nonstop until you get their best player? Like I said, if you are in a league with reponsible owners, this isn't an issue. If you're not, you end up with non-competetive leagues unless you have a veto system in place. I got into my first league in 1992 with a group of friends. Not only am I STILL in this league but I am the commissioner. And I'm here to tell you we've had some trades go through that many would have vetoed. Have you been your league as long? I don't pester anybody ... I make an offer and if the other owner is so inclined he can take the offer or he can counter. But I make the offer ONCE and if the other owner response we either make the deal or begin negotiating. If you are in a league where you believe cheating is occurring then you are an idiot for staying in that league. If you don't believe they are cheating then you have no right to veto their trade. And my goal when I play in a league is to gain a competitive edge over the other owners and win. You can take that competitive balance crap and keep it in your league. Bottom line ... your pissed you didn't get AP first. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonorator Posted September 20, 2008 Share Posted September 20, 2008 And my goal when I play in a league is to gain a competitive edge over the other owners and win. You can take that competitive balance crap and keep it in your league. Bottom line ... your pissed you didn't get AP first. grits loves to be a badass in threads like this ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh 0ne Posted September 20, 2008 Share Posted September 20, 2008 grits loves to be a badass in threads like this ... Yeah, Grits is about as badass as Stuart Smalley. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted September 20, 2008 Share Posted September 20, 2008 Yeah, Grits is about as badass as Stuart Smalley. Just don't tell him he can't trade a ham sandwich and a "gee thanks" for AD, Westbrook, and TO or you'll have a serious fight on your hands. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
untateve Posted September 21, 2008 Share Posted September 21, 2008 So, if I understand, your league voted to let in an "idiot" into your league. You knew he was an idiot. You also know that there is another owner in the league who was going to badger the idiot into accepting Alexander for AD. You know that the league has no veto rule. Apparently, there was never a need for a veto rule. Keeping in mind that this league requires a $1000 buy in, I would have opted out of the league. I'm not the type who can take advantage of a fish, so that wouldn't be an option for me. I would never ask for a rule that allowed owner veto. And I'm certainly not going to piss away a grand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seahawks21 Posted September 21, 2008 Share Posted September 21, 2008 (edited) So, if I understand, your league voted to let in an "idiot" into your league. You knew he was an idiot. You also know that there is another owner in the league who was going to badger the idiot into accepting Alexander for AD. You know that the league has no veto rule. Apparently, there was never a need for a veto rule. Keeping in mind that this league requires a $1000 buy in, I would have opted out of the league. I'm not the type who can take advantage of a fish, so that wouldn't be an option for me. I would never ask for a rule that allowed owner veto. And I'm certainly not going to piss away a grand. I did, I quit the league. I'm simply saying, if there was a veto rule, I would still be in the league, having fun with my friends, watching football every sunday. No, for the last time, I'm not jealous that I didn't get AD. That was just an example. Thats not my point. Read again. THis will be my final post in this thread, so here goes...one more time. WHEN YOU ARE IN LEAGUES THAT HAVE IDIOT OWNERS (99% OF THEM), THE LEAGUE NEEDS TO PROTECT ITSELF FROM THE BAD OWNERS. WITHOUT SAID PROTECTION, YOUR LEAGUE WILL NOT REMAIN COMPETETIVE AND ONLY ONE OWNER WILL END UP HAVING ANY FUN. ALL BECAUSE OF ONE DUMBASS. Hey, if you want to run a stupid league, thats up to you, but guys that play the game the way it is supposed to be played aren't going to want to join your league. I know, more power to you. Whatever dude. Go play with yourself. Edited September 21, 2008 by Seahawks21 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cunning Runt Posted September 21, 2008 Share Posted September 21, 2008 I got your back Seahwaks21. I'm a commish and have been for years and years. If there's an asinine trade, it gets overturned and we move on. No - I'm not the sole decision maker, but I generally get irate emails right away from folks as soon as they get the notice a trade went down. We haven't had any problems with people leaving over it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
untateve Posted September 21, 2008 Share Posted September 21, 2008 I did, I quit the league. I'm simply saying, if there was a veto rule, I would still be in the league, having fun with my friends, watching football every sunday. No, for the last time, I'm not jealous that I didn't get AD. That was just an example. Thats not my point. Read again. THis will be my final post in this thread, so here goes...one more time. WHEN YOU ARE IN LEAGUES THAT HAVE IDIOT OWNERS (99% OF THEM), THE LEAGUE NEEDS TO PROTECT ITSELF FROM THE BAD OWNERS. WITHOUT SAID PROTECTION, YOUR LEAGUE WILL NOT REMAIN COMPETETIVE AND ONLY ONE OWNER WILL END UP HAVING ANY FUN. ALL BECAUSE OF ONE DUMBASS. Hey, if you want to run a stupid league, thats up to you, but guys that play the game the way it is supposed to be played aren't going to want to join your league. I know, more power to you. Whatever dude. Go play with yourself. You're going to have to back up the fact that 99% of all leagues have an idiot owner. Maybe it's a seattle thing. Is there a plethora of idiots in Seattle? And why do you keep joining leagues that have idiots in them? I'm in one re-draft, one pseudo dynasty, and one true dynasty league. So far as I can tell, not one idiot. Of course, that could mean I'm the idiot--but none of my trades have ever been overturned. And you should know that I'd play with myself whether fantasy football existed or not. That's who I am. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Piles Posted September 21, 2008 Share Posted September 21, 2008 We don't have trades. Makes EVERYTHING so much better. Peace policy +1, my main local does not allow trading and I wouldn't want it any other way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.