darin3

Ongoing Rules Talk

Recommended Posts

Feel free to throw out rules ideas or point out where there are deficiencies in the current constitution. 

 

Thanks. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I honestly have no idea why the devy/rookie draft was set up to be non-serpentine.  This needs to be addressed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, darin3 said:

I honestly have no idea why the devy/rookie draft was set up to be non-serpentine.  This needs to be addressed.

 

Why would it be?  No other rookie draft I have ever seen in dynasty is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, flemingd said:

 

Why would it be?  No other rookie draft I have ever seen in dynasty is.

 

f*ck.... it was written into the rules as non-serpentine and is showing up as such in this rookie draft, but our initial rookie/devy draft was not


 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, darin3 said:

 

f*ck.... it was written into the rules as non-serpentine and is showing up as such in this rookie draft, but our initial rookie/devy draft was not


 

 

Yes, but that was a byproduct of separating the rookie/devy draft from the startup draft.  The initial was also 5 rounds longer then this one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, darin3 said:

 

f*ck.... it was written into the rules as non-serpentine and is showing up as such in this rookie draft, but our initial rookie/devy draft was not


 

 

Well initial makes more sense, everyone was starting on even ground, no prior league history or 1-12 teams etc.  That's how every startup I've seen would do it, then go to non-serpentine with worst-gets-first as draft order.

 

Hell if we're going to change anything change how the draft order is generated.  I despise giving the "worst" team the first pick.  Very rarely is the team with the worst record actually the "worst" team, and quite frequently they were simply the ones that did the best job tanking for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will need to talk to TFord about this.  F*ck, sorry guys.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not gonna lie, I'm confused here.  Everything with the draft order looks good to me.  :shrug: 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Def. said:

Not gonna lie, I'm confused here.  Everything with the draft order looks good to me.  :shrug: 

 

Maybe I'm looking at it wrong.  Maybe my brain is fried.  :bag:

 

If it looks OK maybe I just need to change the language in the rules to reflect the rookie draft going forward.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, darin3 said:

 

Maybe I'm looking at it wrong.  Maybe my brain is fried.  :bag:

 

If it looks OK maybe I just need to change the language in the rules to reflect the rookie draft going forward.

 

I think the language looks alright too...think you've done lost your mind.  :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Def. said:

 

I think the language looks alright too...think you've done lost your mind.  :lol:

 

It's very possible.  :bag:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I sent you an email on this but I think that it was handled correctly.

 

Rookie draft and vet draft were serpentine because no standings to base things on. Every subsequent draft should be non-serpentine because you have standings to base things on.

 

Might have been written differently in the rules but I think we executed it correctly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Tford said:

I sent you an email on this but I think that it was handled correctly.

 

Rookie draft and vet draft were serpentine because no standings to base things on. Every subsequent draft should be non-serpentine because you have standings to base things on.

 

Might have been written differently in the rules but I think we executed it correctly.

 

:bag:  Back to your regularly-scheduled programming.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Something fun perhaps?

 

How about if an owner's devy players wins the Heisman trophy, they receive an extra $5 in AFL-Devy bucks the following reload?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, darin3 said:

Something fun perhaps?

 

How about if an owner's devy players wins the Heisman trophy, they receive an extra $5 in AFL-Devy bucks the following reload?

 

I'd support this. Something fun with a minor reward that isn't league-changing.

 

I'd like to see a fourth devy spot added but with the stipulation but it has to be used on a defensive player. As it stands, I'm never going to use a devy spot on defense unless we increase the number of devy spots.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Tford said:

 

I'd support this. Something fun with a minor reward that isn't league-changing.

 

I'd like to see a fourth devy spot added but with the stipulation but it has to be used on a defensive player. As it stands, I'm never going to use a devy spot on defense unless we increase the number of devy spots.

 

Absolutely.  It wouldn't increase our tracking too much and would expand our universe so to speak. 

 

We'll expand the total number of DTS spots as a result, yes?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Love the extra devy spot for IDP.  That's very tricky stuff and I agree not worth burning devy spots in when they are so limited/valuable. 

 

Hate cash for Heisman.  I do not favor anything giving a competitive advantage not based on prior season results.  Some leagues have/had a terrible rule that all members of the winner's conference/division got extra cash - just awful.  We voted it out on almost all of my leagues (one I didn't know it was still there and will crusade to change next year).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, flemingd said:

Love the extra devy spot for IDP.  That's very tricky stuff and I agree not worth burning devy spots in when they are so limited/valuable. 

 

Hate cash for Heisman.  I do not favor anything giving a competitive advantage not based on prior season results.  Some leagues have/had a terrible rule that all members of the winner's conference/division got extra cash - just awful.  We voted it out on almost all of my leagues (one I didn't know it was still there and will crusade to change next year).

 

Agree on first point.

 

Don't agree on second.  The cash would be a result of prior season results, just in college  :)  Quit being such a buzzkill...... :woot:  

 

I hated the extra cash for all members of the "winning" conference thing as well, though.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't buzzkill, I supported the IDP idea.

 

Now get off my lawn!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, darin3 said:

 

Absolutely.  It wouldn't increase our tracking too much and would expand our universe so to speak. 

 

We'll expand the total number of DTS spots as a result, yes?

 

I'm in favor of this regardless...10 is kind of a small number. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, darin3 said:

 

Absolutely.  It wouldn't increase our tracking too much and would expand our universe so to speak. 

 

We'll expand the total number of DTS spots as a result, yes?

 

One or two can't hurt IMO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most leagues have 12 DTS spots not 10. 12 and 4 sound good to me 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, t-bone65 said:

Most leagues have 12 DTS spots not 10. 12 and 4 sound good to me 

 

We have 13 including the 3 devys.

 

I'd be in favor of increasing it to 11 rookies and 4 devys (one of which must be defense).

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm down for increasing DTS Spots to whatever the consensus vote is and the Heisman cash idea sounds fun to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess what I am saying is, if you don't have any devy players currently your dts would be limited to 10 instead of 13. Should be your choice to have devy or not and if you decide not you shouldn't be penalized by shortness of dts size. Plus I have about 20 or so now so increase it lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.