G.K.Trey Posted November 10, 2008 Share Posted November 10, 2008 So I'm losing by 30 points ... even had I picked up the top performing free agent TE this week, Keller, I still lose the game. Now .. what are the odds that I actually would have picked Keller from the free agents ... would you have? I actually did, Witten on a bye, but I don't blame u at all for not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CBowden1220 Posted November 10, 2008 Share Posted November 10, 2008 Bottom line is if the league wants to prohibit incomplete lineups, then it should institute a fine for incomplete lineups. I don't really get this misplaced sense of honor that people seem to believe dictates that somebody is morally obligated to waste five bucks on something almost worthless that provides him with little to no benefits. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jrick35 Posted November 10, 2008 Share Posted November 10, 2008 The real bottom line is, would you be breaking any "existing" league rules? By "existing" I mean a rule that exists in a written or typed form? Not an "understood" rule or an "unwritten" rule. If, by submitting an incomplete lineup, you would be breaking a rule, then you should incur any penalty, as written in that rule. If no rule was broken then do whatever makes you happy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted November 10, 2008 Share Posted November 10, 2008 Wow. I find some of the positions here unfathomable. I am a firm believer that every owner should enter their most competive lineup every week in the spirit of competition and sportsmanship. That said, if a league chooses to charge owners for FA pickups, it has written a rule in direct conflict with that spirit and made finacial considerations paramount in an effort to sweep in more money. I find it unconscionable that anyone would think that any owner out of the playoff race should be either forced or feel obligated to contribute more money when they have no chance of winning it back. I'll give some of you sanctimonious others another scenario: I'm facing an owner this week who is starting Leinart at QB. He's sitting on the outside of the playoff race looking in while I'm in a 3-way tie for first place in my conference. He burned his FA purse (imaginary dollars) earlier on FAs who he thought would improve his team - which is his right and in the spirit of competition. Even if he hadn't spent all of his money, the only WW QB he could have acquired would have been Grossman, who went to another owner for 40% of every owner's starting FA purse - which only 2 of the 14 teams could have afforded at the time. Is he submarining the league with his behavior? Is he under some obligation to retain a certain percentage of his FA purse until the end of the year in case of emergencies with injuries and byes? Didn't he act in the spirit of trying to be competitive by spending $$$ early in an effort to make his team better? This action benefited me in this case, but it has affected me negatively in the past, and I never felt that any owner - regardless of whether it helped, hurt, or neither - was trying to act outside of the boundaries of ethical behavior. How is this different (other than you are asking Grits to continue to ante into a pot he can't win, whereas our situation is static financially once dues are paid before the draft)? 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.