chiefswarpath Posted August 25, 2014 Share Posted August 25, 2014 I am a co-commish in one of my leagues and the two cooks in the kitchen are at odds about the waiver wire. I am on board with a standings based waiver order (I have never been in a league that did not do this) but my counterpart wants to switch it up to a waiver order ranked by number of claims made. You make a claim you move to the end of the order. Its a 12 team league and there is no fee for transactions. What do you all think? Any hate one or the other? We have a league poll up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
irish Posted August 25, 2014 Share Posted August 25, 2014 Blind bidding followed by FCFS is the best system and imo, the only system that should be used as it is the most equitable. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zooty Posted August 25, 2014 Share Posted August 25, 2014 I hate both options for various reasons. Blind bid is the way to go Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HighKite Posted August 25, 2014 Share Posted August 25, 2014 I am a co-commish in one of my leagues and the two cooks in the kitchen are at odds about the waiver wire. I am on board with a standings based waiver order (I have never been in a league that did not do this) but my counterpart wants to switch it up to a waiver order ranked by number of claims made. You make a claim you move to the end of the order. Its a 12 team league and there is no fee for transactions. What do you all think? Any hate one or the other? We have a league poll up. I would never have a good choice in any of my leagues if they went by numbers claimed . but have been in leagues like that before. IMO it just adds more luck to it ( much like head to head compared to roto's). for instance if your team makes it through semi injury free there is a good chance your team will have a good record. and then when that big move comes you can just jump in and grab it despite being a better team already because you made less moves. I never liked it and I also think it keeps moves down which in turn shrinks the pot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rileyrott Posted August 25, 2014 Share Posted August 25, 2014 Blind bidding/FCFS is the way to go....fair to all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrab Posted August 25, 2014 Share Posted August 25, 2014 Do you really mean the waiver order each week is set by number of claims made? Or just the part about "going to the back after you make a claim" because that is how waviers should be run anyway. Sounds like the distinguishing thing may be that with your counterparts plan the waiver order would never reset. So if I make a claim week 1 and nobody else does I'm last on the list and remain there until others make waiver moves. I personally don't care for that and we've always done it by current standings resetting every week. Blind bid is the most fair but is a totally different process and requires more work for all owners (and possibly the commish depending on league software). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BA Baracus Posted August 25, 2014 Share Posted August 25, 2014 Standings based is the worst option IMO. Blind bidding is best, but if that is too much of a leap then I recommend the 'move to last after claim' method. This at least adds an element of strategy to the waiver process. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rileyrott Posted August 25, 2014 Share Posted August 25, 2014 Standings based is the worst option IMO. Blind bidding is best, but if that is too much of a leap then I recommend the 'move to last after claim' method. This at least adds an element of strategy to the waiver process. Been trying to change my local for years, as we're stuck in the "worst to first" rut. I almost had them convinced to change to "move to last after claim" this year, but no go. I will try again next year, with the ultimate goal of BB/FCFS. I may be in for a long wait. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
irish Posted August 25, 2014 Share Posted August 25, 2014 Been trying to change my local for years, as we're stuck in the "worst to first" rut. I almost had them convinced to change to "move to last after claim" this year, but no go. I will try again next year, with the ultimate goal of BB/FCFS. I may be in for a long wait. Sometimes old-timers just don't like change and are stuck in the mud. For the life of me I just don't understand why anyone would continue using any other old, out-dated systems over BB/FCFS but they do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HighKite Posted August 25, 2014 Share Posted August 25, 2014 Been trying to change my local for years, as we're stuck in the "worst to first" rut. I almost had them convinced to change to "move to last after claim" this year, but no go. I will try again next year, with the ultimate goal of BB/FCFS. I may be in for a long wait. Yeah I am trying to get my main local to move away from old rules too but it is hard to convince. we have to take 2 TE's, 2 kickers and 2 defenses. and you only start 2 WR's ( and can only own 4 as with RB's) and we have no flex. it makes the waiver wire to filled all the time and hurts people who draft good benches or could draft better benches if they were not forced to hold guys they never plan on using except for the bye week. these guys been playing the same way for 21 years though and convincing the older cats has been impossible. I will once again bring it up at the draft though even though I know it will be shot down. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BA Baracus Posted August 25, 2014 Share Posted August 25, 2014 Sometimes old-timers just don't like change and are stuck in the mud. For the life of me I just don't understand why anyone would continue using any other old, out-dated systems over BB/FCFS but they do. A lot of sites don't support blind bidding or they do it poorly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
irish Posted August 25, 2014 Share Posted August 25, 2014 A lot of sites don't support blind bidding or they do it poorly. True, however, I'm in a league here at the huddle (using MFL) where most of the owners prefer using the worst to first method. They express doing so because it's different from all their other leagues. I always suggest change every year and always get shot down. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delicious_bass Posted August 25, 2014 Share Posted August 25, 2014 I hate both options for various reasons. Blind bid is the way to go +1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delicious_bass Posted August 25, 2014 Share Posted August 25, 2014 Yeah I am trying to get my main local to move away from old rules too but it is hard to convince. we have to take 2 TE's, 2 kickers and 2 defenses. and you only start 2 WR's ( and can only own 4 as with RB's) and we have no flex. it makes the waiver wire to filled all the time and hurts people who draft good benches or could draft better benches if they were not forced to hold guys they never plan on using except for the bye week. these guys been playing the same way for 21 years though and convincing the older cats has been impossible. I will once again bring it up at the draft though even though I know it will be shot down. a guy I used to work with was in a league just like that. Could have (at most) 4 RBs yet had to maintain 2 TE, 2DST, and 2 K at all times. I never understood nor agreed with that. When I asked, I was told they kept it that way 1) to prevent anyone from "hoarding" any one position (as though there isn't a natural deterrent to that strategy) and 2) to make sure there is always plenty of talent on the WW. I just shook my head in disbelief but to each their own I guess. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dolphindan1 Posted August 28, 2014 Share Posted August 28, 2014 (edited) keep trying it took me 5 years to get my league to add PPR to RBs...we had PPR for WR and TEs but not RBs....finally this year I got a majority vote but it wont take affect till next season Edited August 28, 2014 by dolphindan1 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.