Bronco Billy Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 Well, of course SOMEBODY who is currently ranked lower than Reggie Wayne is likely going to out-perform him in fantasy scoring this year. Why would anybody bet against that? That's what I was wondering, but I have no compunction against taking money from someone who makes a stupid bet. "If the good Lord did not want them to be sheared, he would not have made them sheep." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Swerski Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 That's what I was wondering, but I have no compunction against taking money from someone who makes a stupid bet. "If the good Lord did not want them to be sheared, he would not have made them sheep." I think that you two had a simple miscommunication. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 Bronco Billy's back in form. What's wrong Pony Boy, Warroom Boards been down lately? This is just too much fun. You think MR9 has the balls to ask nicely to be allowed out of the bet? I don't think he does, but we'll see. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caveman_Nick Posted May 31, 2007 Author Share Posted May 31, 2007 Good point. While I don't particularly care for the wording of the rule, as written, if the commish felt that the value in the trade was not justified, then he properly invoked the rule as he should do. THe problem with the wording is that IMO no two people have the exact same opinion of value of the same players/picks, so, while something may appear perfectly balanced to one person, it may appear quite lopsided to the other. Now, my question is this - What if one, or both owners, refused to amend the deal that they had agreed to? Do they have recourse in response to the commish's decision, as, essentially the commish is vetoing the trade as agreed to unless they make a modification? The rule last season was that an owner that had a problem with a commish decision could ask for a league vote and get it overturned with a league majority. This applied to trades, and could be used to overturn approved trades. I had a hugh problem with this and railed against it. The new rule is that, if the commish makes a ruling against a trade and the parties have a problem with the decision, they may plead their case to the assistant commish and treaurer (the other 2 league officials). These two will have the power to overturn the commish's denial of the trade. If one of those two officials can not be convinced of your argument, then the trade remains void. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 I think that you two had a simple miscommunication. There's no miscommunication. He stated any RB or WR. So I'll wait for the stats to come in and see if any RB or WR drafted after 82 in any draft outscores Wayne using the scoring crietria. If any RB or WR does, he loses the bet. It's not that difficult a concept to grasp, is it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh 0ne Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 This is just too much fun. You think MR9 has the balls to ask nicely to be allowed out of the bet? I don't think he does, but we'll see. Good to see that your time away from the huddle hasn't made you less of a dick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Swerski Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 I said you had to take a player at 82 or lower. And you are right that I didn't say you had to do it before the season. I also didn't say that the stats had to come from real football, so you can pull out your stats from "Madden 2007" and use those stats or warp the bet any other way you like. He's got a point there, Billy. Now why don't you two put your penises back in your pants. I deem you both "equally manly." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 I said you had to take a player at 82 or lower. No, you didn't. I've quoted what your established bet conditions were. Show me anywhere where you said I had to pick a specific player before we agreed to the bet. That's simple enough. Like I said, just ask nicely & I'll let you out of the bet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 Good to see that your time away from the huddle hasn't made you less of a dick. I'm the dick? I let him set up the entire conditions of the bet, except for scoring, which he agreed to & chose the ppr option. Now he won't honor the bet that he threw out there for anyone to take - and I'm the dick? Okay, so I'm still a dick. That doesn't let him off the hook. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Country Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 Let me get this straight... for $500, all BB has to do is find a player at the end of the season, with an ADP of 82 or later, that outscores Wayne? Guess I'm glad I didn't take the bet as I had the same interpretation as Billy and then I too would be in this predicament. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 We have a name for you where I'm from. But it's not a politically correct term, and probably not appropriate for this forum. Allow me - you're the one not living up to the terms you established. Here at the Huddle that's called being a portable dishwasher. I knew you'd weasel out once you realized how badly you had sunk yourself into it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 Though I did post: Billy conviently ignored that post, which made my intentions obvious. Yeah, you managed to post that after the bet, pw. Talk about convenience... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 Why are people messaging me telling me you have a history of cheating? What are they talking about? They aren't people very specific. Yeah, I'm a cheater, pw. Why don't you ask yourself instead why they are PMing you instead of having the nuts to post here in this thread? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 You interpreted that to mean after the season. "after the season" clearly wasn't a condition I set or agreed to. No, I didn't. I agreed to let the stats speak for themselves, since you were 99% sure that any player available at 82 couldn't post better numbers than Wayne. All it would take would be 1 of any of the players available at 82 to make you wrong, wouldn't it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 Maybe cause they don't want to enter this drama. Some people thrive on drama, others avoid it. Just tell me about the times you've been accused of cheating. You can pm me, if you like. I don't remember being accused of cheating here. Why don't you share what your PMs are saying with all of us? LOL @ thinking I need to PM you about it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 Yeah, any player drafted at 82 has a 1% chance of being better than Wayne. In the history of fantasy football, there are plenty of examples of players drafted at 82 or lower who have outdone Wayne. You have about a 1% chance of landing one of them at 82. That doesn't prove Reggie Wayne is of equal value to the 82nd pick. BTW, not one of your examples did. LJ was 81 and the only player who outperformed Wayne. Your other 6 examples didn't outperform Wayne. But there are plenty of examples, maybe 1 or 2 a year, that did outperform Wayne. You just didn't list any of them. No, but they are examples of players drafted at or near the 82 hole who may or will be kept by FF owners in leiu of keeping Wayne in a 2 player keeper league the following year, which was what the entire crux of what that argument was about. DJAX doesn't qualify, IMO, but the RBs sure do. It'll happen again this year with some rookie RBs who will be picked with the 82 pick or later. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Swerski Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 Relax, Billy is just messing with you. Yes, plenty of studly players have had an ADP of 82 or worse at some point in their career. Does that mean that Reggie Wayne being traded for the 82nd pick is fair? No. Reggie Wayne is worth way more than a pick at the end of the 7th round. I'll side with 99% of history, not 1% of history. I wouldn't trade Wayne for five 7th round picks. If one player is worth 5 times as much as another, it's not a fair trade. This is the bottom line, IMO. Anybody who makes this trade and then REFUSES to take another player because the commish thinks that it's too one-sided is either cheating or a massive moran. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big John Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 We have a name for you where I'm from. But it's not a politically correct term, and probably not appropriate for this forum. BB is originallyfrom the same area you are in now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grits and Shins Posted June 1, 2007 Share Posted June 1, 2007 This is my original post: I didn't say before the season or after the season. And you can probably think up a bunch of other ways to nit-pick at the wording of it. Why you would assume I meant after the season is beyone me. I also didn't say that the draft had to be the 2007 draft. So you could choose Larry Johnson from the 2005 draft, according to your expert legal analysis. LJ in 2005 clearly out did Reggie Wayne. Or maybe you should choose Jerry Rice from the 1986 draft. I did say any draft, not just the 2007 draft, after all. We have a name for you where I'm from. But it's not a politically correct term, and probably not appropriate for this forum. Sorry I'm with BB on this one ... your statement is clear in that you don't believe there will be any player available at 82+ that will out score Reggie Wayne. You are asserting that Reggie Wayne will outscore the entire field of players from the 82nd pick on. BB took you up on the bet and now you are trying to narrow the field to improve your odds. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted June 1, 2007 Share Posted June 1, 2007 (edited) That might be the case, but I have no tolerance for a-holes. When he disagrees with someone, he always makes it personal. He tells them they are an idiot, a moran, etc. Now you're out of line and have no clue what you are talking about. Aside from calling you a pw for weaseling out of a bet where you established the conditions and then tried to change those conditions when you realized how deep you had dug yourself, find me one instance where I denegrated someone with name calling in a football debate (not trading good natured barbs). If you're too sensitive to handle a little heat you shouldn't run your mouth and make outrageous statements, or at least if you do be right. To put forth some of the crap that you have in this thread & then plead that you got your poor little feelings hurt & make some b.s. up about name calling personal attacks - which you got called on again - is ludicrous. Tell you what, instead of a bet where you would have gotten your ass handed to you, PM me your address & I'll send you some kleenex & a box of tampons. Edited June 1, 2007 by Bronco Billy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh 0ne Posted June 1, 2007 Share Posted June 1, 2007 There are countless potential good huddlers who have been scared away due to the 10 or so rude people. Can we get a list of those 10? Now that would be entertainment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grits and Shins Posted June 1, 2007 Share Posted June 1, 2007 Can we get a list of those 10? Now that would be entertainment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh 0ne Posted June 1, 2007 Share Posted June 1, 2007 OK, OK, I'll start: 1. Blitz 2. Blitz 3. Blitz 4. Puddy 5. Blitz 6. Blitz 7. Blitz 8. Blitz 9. Blitz 10. Blitz Am I close? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cunning Runt Posted June 1, 2007 Share Posted June 1, 2007 OK, OK, I'll start: 1. Blitz 2. Blitz 3. Blitz 4. Puddy 5. Blitz 6. Blitz 7. Blitz 8. Blitz 9. Blitz 10. Blitz Am I close? Except for the Puddy part, I'd say you're spot on. Who would I put in that spot? .....thinking...... still thinking...... I know.... Grits. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted June 1, 2007 Share Posted June 1, 2007 OK, OK, I'll start: 1. Blitz 2. Blitz 3. Blitz 4. Puddy 5. Blitz 6. Blitz 7. Blitz 8. Blitz 9. Blitz 10. Blitz Am I close? 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.