Dynasty League Integrity

[Sgt. Ryan]

Kegs, while keeping those players on your taxi squad is technically legal, it's sort of legal in the Bill Clinton "what is the definition of sex" type of a way. I can understand wanting to protect contract years, but it just doesn't seem fully above board. IMO, you have an obligation not to become a weekly bye for the rest of the league. I have no idea how the league would legislate such a thing.

 

One more time, reminded why I avoid leagues in which Sarge plays: everything always ends up spilled all over the front lawn.

 

 

 

LMAO, I join a league and it fills up within a day. Sorry you havent had the priveledge yet. But I think your friend Bunz will back me on this, I aint the problem. And I didnt attempt to spill any dirty laundry here, just wanted opinions, and yours is basically what I was looking for, so thanks.

[Big Country]

LMAO, I join a league and it fills up within a day. Sorry you havent had the priveledge yet.

 

 

EGO, party of one.... EGO party of one... your table is ready.

[Sgt. Ryan]

EGO, party of one.... EGO party of one... your table is ready.

 

 

 

LMAO, true. But it aint braggin, if its true.

[Big Country]

LMAO, true. But it aint braggin, if its true.

 

 

Touche....

[Caveman_Nick]

my question for the peanut gallery, would you as an owner, make multiple trades that force you to put in a lineup of backups, even if you were "rebuilding"? would you not even consider that you are making your team a bye week for the rest of the league?

 

 

 

Being in a league with almost the same set of rules, I can say that under the right circumstances I would do that. I considered blowing up the team I inherited in that league this year. But I would need to be getting some serious futures in order to completely explore that direction. I;m talking about a level of compensation at which my league mates would have to agree that they would be taking the same type of deals I am taking as well.

 

The problem was that I didn't feel like I could get the necessary return value on the players I would be dealing away. I tried, but it wasn't available to me in trade. So instead I went into a different kind of rebuild mode...I tried to rebuild with taking some downgrades at some positions to change the level and contract situation at other positions. My goal was to rebuild 3 positions this year, and I feel like I have successfully done that.

 

But I also think I had the right building blocks to work with and an early clear assessment of where I needed to rebuild first. Change a couple of things about the team and I might be singing a different song right now.

[darin3]

Being in a league with almost the same set of rules, I can say that under the right circumstances I would do that. I considered blowing up the team I inherited in that league this year. But I would need to be getting some serious futures in order to completely explore that direction. I;m talking about a level of compensation at which my league mates would have to agree that they would be taking the same type of deals I am taking as well.

 

The problem was that I didn't feel like I could get the necessary return value on the players I would be dealing away. I tried, but it wasn't available to me in trade. So instead I went into a different kind of rebuild mode...I tried to rebuild with taking some downgrades at some positions to change the level and contract situation at other positions. My goal was to rebuild 3 positions this year, and I feel like I have successfully done that.

 

But I also think I had the right building blocks to work with and an early clear assessment of where I needed to rebuild first. Change a couple of things about the team and I might be singing a different song right now.

 

I wasn't going to respond to anything in this thread... but since I'm in the league you speak of, and faced a very similar task you are facing, I should add... this "method" is certainly doable, but I'm not sure I would have employed it. You're correct in your thinking that you're never going to get "true value" when trading away those short-contract and/or older players.

 

I, too, am trying to "rebuild" position by position. That is one method. Keg is simply choosing to employ a different method. Tanking? I wouldn't necessarily call it that. Massive rebuilds will affect other teams in the league. That's just a matter of fact. That's why dynasty leagues are the closest thing to running an actual team.

[T_bone65]

Personally, yes. However, I only play in redrafts and keepers so I don't pretend to fully and properly understand the dynamics of a dynasty league. It seems to me inevitable though that remaining competitive and building for the future are sometimes mutually exclusive in a dynasty. Let's face it, even in a keeper league there are times when you have to trade away good starters for next year draft picks. Only redrafts offer no reason at all to be uncompetitive.

 

 

 

:Whomper: I know what a redraft league is :whomper:

[Sgt. Ryan]

I wasn't going to respond to anything in this thread... but since I'm in the league you speak of, and faced a very similar task you are facing, I should add... this "method" is certainly doable, but I'm not sure I would have employed it. You're correct in your thinking that you're never going to get "true value" when trading away those short-contract and/or older players.

 

I, too, am trying to "rebuild" position by position. That is one method. Keg is simply choosing to employ a different method. Tanking? I wouldn't necessarily call it that. Massive rebuilds will affect other teams in the league. That's just a matter of fact. That's why dynasty leagues are the closest thing to running an actual team.

 

 

many have nothing wrong with a rebuild. But when does an NFL team sit a Reggie Bush on its practice squad, and start the likes of Shaud Williams or Kevin Faulk. Also, when would a NFl team not start a QB, or a Wr and just go with 9 offensive players at any given time. They wouldnt, and its my opinion the rules are set up in a way we shouldnt either. I have rebuilt a team, and traded for the future in many leagues, and I see nothing wrong with that. But before the season begins, you are trading assets away with no regard to your team for a full season. That is shady, at best. Then to start a player who is inactive 4 out of 6 weeks, when rules specify you do this repeatedly, and you will be removed from the league, Id say that is serious.

 

I like Keg personally, and have told him as much privately. If pick 1.1 wasnt on the table for him, he wouldnt do this. But that pick is why he is doing what he is doing, so its not about getting futures or cash for assets, its about tanking to get a high draft pick, and taking whatever you can get to hide that fact. Being a bye for teams when other teams dont get that opportunity to pound you, is a clear disadvantage. If you have several teams employing this strategy, it can severly shift the balance in the league, where one owner just shifts a playoff spot or two for teams. Massive rebuilds shouldnt start before the season begins in my opinion either. That shoudl be done at the trade deadline, or in the offseason. But that is just one mans opinion, which is why I created this post. I wanted many opinions, as our league doesnt have a clue what we might do to stop this in the future. how can you tell a team, no you are tanking, and another team, you are doing your best to put the best lineup together every week, but you just suck right now. Its a very grey area, that many think Keg crossed weeks ago, but its coming to the forefront because those teams are about to see their rivals play Keg, where they do not have that opportunity, and he can help determine the winner, by having the worst lineup in the league, each and every week.

[Rovers]

When I took over a truely miserable orphan, I had a discussion with the league commish. I was worried that my rebuild plan might draw this sort of critisism. There was actually a rule in place to help teams that were in dire straights, but was overlooked when I joined. The rule stated the bad orphans would get league money equal to that of the average top 3 team balances in league money. That never happened.

 

There was another bad orphan. That team, in a move that was not in the rules, got 30 league dollars to help him rebuild. The league made no effort to help me that way, even though I did raise the question.... while this old rule remained overlooked.

 

So, in talking to the commish, he said I was expected to field a team .... even if it sucked, I had to at least have an outside shot at winning any given week this year. While I areed, I also warned the other owners that my team was going to be very bad, and I didn't want to hear it once I started to rebuild.

 

To date, I'm 2-5, but won't have a QB to start this week with Kitna on a bye. I'm ready to pounce on anyone that complains about it. My plan is a two year plan, building through the draft and RFA.... so I am throwing my dues $ away for this year and next. Since Houston got hurt, I've been starting Toefield who is yet to score a point this year, with Maroney on my taxi squad. Tough chit if anyone doesn't like it.... they were warned before I enacted my rebuild plan.

 

Personally, I couldn't go to the extreme that Keg did here, but I'm not going to critisize it either. What he is doing is better than raping a team for the future and quiting the league. It remains a very gray area. I traded Bledose, knowing that would leave me with only one QB when Kitna's bye came around. Well, Bledsoe wouldn't have helped me anyway, now that he's benched. Regardless, again, too bad. If I had held Bledsoe, I still would not have had a QB to start this week. At what point do I look after my $ investment vs. league inegrity?

 

That's the bottom line. I'm paying charity money for the chance to see how well I can pull this rebuild off. Two years of charity money. I'm not complaining, that was my choice and I was fully aware of what it meant. Funny.... when I warned people in that league about rebuilding, someone called me a whiny woman.... one guess who that was.

[darin3]

When I took over a truely miserable orphan, I had a discussion with the league commish. I was worried that my rebuild plan might draw this sort of critisism. There was actually a rule in place to help teams that were in dire straights, but was overlooked when I joined. The rule stated the bad orphans would get league money equal to that of the average top 3 team balances in league money. That never happened.

 

There was another bad orphan. That team, in a move that was not in the rules, got 30 league dollars to help him rebuild. The league made no effort to help me that way, even though I did raise the question.... while this old rule remained overlooked.

 

So, in talking to the commish, he said I was expected to field a team .... even if it sucked, I had to at least have an outside shot at winning any given week this year. While I areed, I also warned the other owners that my team was going to be very bad, and I didn't want to hear it once I started to rebuild.

 

To date, I'm 2-5, but won't have a QB to start this week with Kitna on a bye. I'm ready to pounce on anyone that complains about it. My plan is a two year plan, building through the draft and RFA.... so I am throwing my dues $ away for this year and next. Since Houston got hurt, I've been starting Toefield who is yet to score a point this year, with Maroney on my taxi squad. Tough chit if anyone doesn't like it.... they were warned before I enacted my rebuild plan.

 

Personally, I couldn't go to the extreme that Keg did here, but I'm not going to critisize it either. What he is doing is better than raping a team for the future and quiting the league. It remains a very gray area. I traded Bledose, knowing that would leave me with only one QB when Kitna's bye came around. Well, Bledsoe wouldn't have helped me anyway, now that he's benched. Regardless, again, too bad. If I had held Bledsoe, I still would not have had a QB to start this week. At what point do I look after my $ investment vs. league inegrity?

 

That's the bottom line. I'm paying charity money for the chance to see how well I can pull this rebuild off. Two years of charity money. I'm not complaining, that was my choice and I was fully aware of what it meant. Funny.... when I warned people in that league about rebuilding, someone called me a whiny woman.... one guess who that was.

 

Second well thought-out / quality post by Rovers in this thread.

[T_bone65]

This thread is like the train wreck you can't help but watch

[Sgt. Ryan]

When I took over a truely miserable orphan, I had a discussion with the league commish. I was worried that my rebuild plan might draw this sort of critisism. There was actually a rule in place to help teams that were in dire straights, but was overlooked when I joined. The rule stated the bad orphans would get league money equal to that of the average top 3 team balances in league money. That never happened.

 

There was another bad orphan. That team, in a move that was not in the rules, got 30 league dollars to help him rebuild. The league made no effort to help me that way, even though I did raise the question.... while this old rule remained overlooked.

 

So, in talking to the commish, he said I was expected to field a team .... even if it sucked, I had to at least have an outside shot at winning any given week this year. While I areed, I also warned the other owners that my team was going to be very bad, and I didn't want to hear it once I started to rebuild.

 

To date, I'm 2-5, but won't have a QB to start this week with Kitna on a bye. I'm ready to pounce on anyone that complains about it. My plan is a two year plan, building through the draft and RFA.... so I am throwing my dues $ away for this year and next. Since Houston got hurt, I've been starting Toefield who is yet to score a point this year, with Maroney on my taxi squad. Tough chit if anyone doesn't like it.... they were warned before I enacted my rebuild plan.

 

Personally, I couldn't go to the extreme that Keg did here, but I'm not going to critisize it either. What he is doing is better than raping a team for the future and quiting the league. It remains a very gray area. I traded Bledose, knowing that would leave me with only one QB when Kitna's bye came around. Well, Bledsoe wouldn't have helped me anyway, now that he's benched. Regardless, again, too bad. If I had held Bledsoe, I still would not have had a QB to start this week. At what point do I look after my $ investment vs. league inegrity?

 

That's the bottom line. I'm paying charity money for the chance to see how well I can pull this rebuild off. Two years of charity money. I'm not complaining, that was my choice and I was fully aware of what it meant. Funny.... when I warned people in that league about rebuilding, someone called me a whiny woman.... one guess who that was.

 

 

 

 

 

That rule was not over looked when you joined, the Commish didnt think your team warranted 13 extra bucks, when you had 73, and the league average of the top 3 teams was around 86. Your team wasnt as bad off as the one Frazia inherited. He had 7 bucks total, where you had 73 when you started. Frazia asked about that before he agreed to join, and you jumped at the chance to be in that league and didnt say anything until after Frazia received something, which he didnt get the average of the 3 highest teams either, he got less than half of the amount you had, $30 bucks from the league, plus the 7 his previous owner left him to equal half of your cash. And you were a whiny woman about that when we gave Frazia half of the cash you had, and he had half the team you had to start with as well. In fact some still talk about how pathetic you were, poor lil old me in those posts. I am not the commish of that league, but I think Slick was more than fair. Frazia could have said, I want what you had, since you two joined at roughly the same time. And you still complained. No one complained of you attempting to rebuild, is this another poor Rovers cry for attention. In fact I never even recall you going public you were trying to rebuild. So you must not have been talking about me.

Edited October 25, 2006 by Sgt. Ryan

[TecmoBeast]

Evidence for tanking shouldn't include whomever is on the Taxi squad unless it's defined in the rules

[Rovers]

Your team wasnt as bad off as the one Frazia inherited. He had 7 bucks total, where you had 73 when you started. Frazia asked about that before he agreed to join, and you jumped at the chance to be in that league and didnt say anything until after Frazia received something, which he didnt get the average of the 3 highest teams either, he got less than half of the amount you had, $30 bucks from the league, plus the 7 his previous owner left him to equal half of your cash. And you were a whiny woman about that when we gave Frazia half of the cash you had, and he had half the team you had to start with as well. In fact some still talk about how pathetic you were, poor lil old me in those posts. I am not the commish of that league, but I think Slick was more than fair. Frazia could have said, I want what you had, since you two joined at roughly the same time. And you still complained.

 

Again, you get things wrong and state them as fact. Same thing you did to Keg. Old act.

 

I agreed to take that orphan well after Fraz took his. The additional league $ Fraz got was after the fact. I was the one that found the old rule about helping orphans, and Fraz commented on that as well. It was ignored. That was fine, but yes, I did ask about why Fraz got help and I did not. I had Brady, F Taylor and C Johnson, all FA's. 73 was not enough to keep all three. I had no team.

 

When the league did not make a move to offer help, even though the league rules said otherwise, I wasn't complaining. I was doing CYA. I told the league I didn't want to hear about being noncompetitive while I spent the next two years rebuilding.... why? Because of what you are trying to do to Keg here. I was not complaining... at all... it was my choice. I CHOSE to take the team and rebuild. I WAS making sure that if YOU started whining about my rebuild I would have backup.

 

Bottom line, Fraz's team and mine were both pitiful. We are both at the bottom of the league. I fully expected that. This thread is exactly WHY I made my intentions known.... you were bound to go after someone. It was Keg. I'm next on your list, because I spoke up. You haven't started this sort of ruckus for a while.... but I knew the fuse was burning, and sooner or later, the explosion would come. Very predictable.

 

But, as you have told me in the past, you love conflict, you live for it. I'll give you this much... you do understand yourself. But the whiney woman description? Look in the mirror. Look at this thread. Nuff said.

 

PS: Keep editing that last post.... erasing your tracks and foolish comments....

Edited October 25, 2006 by Rovers

[Big Country]

So, in Rovers case Sarge is pleased the league did not follow the letter of their rules to help out the orphan teams, yet he is trying to PUSH the letter of the law in Keg's case to have him removed from the league.

 

Interesting.

[Brewer]

So, in Rovers case Sarge is pleased the league did not follow the letter of their rules to help out the orphan teams, yet he is trying to PUSH the letter of the law in Keg's case to have him removed from the league.

 

Interesting.

 

Hey, the more teams that you can "manage" in a league, the better your chances are of winning.

[Rovers]

So, in Rovers case Sarge is pleased the league did not follow the letter of their rules to help out the orphan teams, yet he is trying to PUSH the letter of the law in Keg's case to have him removed from the league.

 

Interesting.

 

Yeah, well this is why some peole won't be in a league with sarge. At first, his rantings bothered me. Now, I largely ignore him. But it is fun to have a sword fight with a tomatoe plant on occassion. I guess I'll have to block his 17 screen anmes on AIM again now. The guy lies.... he did an outstanding job or that and killing my rep in the Fusion forum with lies and skewed facts.... nuthin new for him. He likes it. He told me so.

[Big Country]

Yeah, well this is why some peole won't be in a league with sarge. At first, his rantings bothered me. Now, I largely ignore him. But it is fun to have a sword fight with a tomatoe plant on occassion. I guess I'll have to block his 17 screen anmes on AIM again now. The guy lies.... he did an outstanding job or that and killing my rep in the Fusion forum with lies and skewed facts.... nuthin new for him. He likes it. He told me so.

 

LOL... what is funny is you are not joking about him having 17 AIM screen names so that when one is blocked he can keep pestering you from another one

[Ziachild007]

I traded Bledose, knowing that would leave me with only one QB when Kitna's bye came around. Well, Bledsoe wouldn't have helped me anyway, now that he's benched.

 

I feel used.

[Rovers]

I feel used.

 

Sorry Z.... I didn't know he'd get benched! Tony freakin Romo? Geze....

[BillyBalata]

Let me see if I got this right....there are leagues out there where it's permissible to go week after week without a starting QB?

 

Boy, that sounds like fun.

[Czarina]

LMAO, I join a league and it fills up within a day. Sorry you havent had the priveledge yet. But I think your friend Bunz will back me on this, I aint the problem. And I didnt attempt to spill any dirty laundry here, just wanted opinions, and yours is basically what I was looking for, so thanks.

 

Well, as it happens I've turned down more than one offer to join a league that you're a member of, so you might want to wipe the smirk off your face. Despite the fact that you have a point about this situation, your way of turning a disagreement into a train wreck is...regrettable.

[Atlas]

Well, if taking zeros means you're rebuilding,

you all better watch out for my MVP team next year!!

[Rovers]

Let me see if I got this right....there are leagues out there where it's permissible to go week after week without a starting QB?

 

Boy, that sounds like fun.

 

 

Take a 16 team league.... add in bye weeks... even some contending teams will get the short end of that stick and be stuck without a starter. Let's say you had Bledsoe and Kitna. Unless you had Romo too... yer sunk. Kitna on a bye, Bledsoe benched. That's what we are talking about here.... 16 team leagues. Only 32 starting QB's. Contending teams do have to spend extra cash/picks to have the respective backups, but that isn't always possible. It happens. I'll be putting in a bid for Batch this week.... I'm just lucky he's still available.

[Ziachild007]

Take a 16 team league.... add in bye weeks... even some contending teams will get the short end of that stick and be stuck without a starter. Let's say you had Bledsoe and Kitna. Unless you had Romo too... yer sunk. Kitna on a bye, Bledsoe benched. That's what we are talking about here.... 16 team leagues. Only 32 starting QB's. Contending teams do have to spend extra cash/picks to have the respective backups, but that isn't always possible. It happens. I'll be putting in a bid for Batch this week.... I'm just lucky he's still available.

 

 

Great example.......If Peyton had been seriously hurt this past weekend, I would have been without a starting QB myself, as I had Bledsoe as my #2 no QBs on my DTS.