Jump to content
[[Template core/front/custom/_customHeader is throwing an error. This theme may be out of date. Run the support tool in the AdminCP to restore the default theme.]]

RULE CHANGE VOTE: IR Rules

Tford

By Tford,
in AFL-Devy

 Share

RULE CHANGE VOTE: IR Rules  

11 members have voted

  1. 1. How should we change IR Rules going forward?

    • No change, rules remain the same. IR becomes closed to commission-only.
      0
    • Only players with (I) or (C) designation can be on the IR. If an NFL team activates a player from IR, so too must the fantasy team. One year credit lost once reactivated.
      7
    • Rules remain the same except that two players can be reactivated from IR. One year credit lost once reactivated.
      4

Recommended Posts

  • 2 weeks later...
Tford Huddler

Tford

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Bumping this again, looking for two more votes to try to settle this. Everyone has voted for a change so we might need to discuss this further to settle on a compromise that gets a majority vote.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
flemingd Huddler All-Pro

flemingd

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Tford said:

Bumping this again, looking for two more votes to try to settle this. Everyone has voted for a change so we might need to discuss this further to settle on a compromise that gets a majority vote.

 

Not at all a fan of leagues that require us to take actions like this, owners need to have full rights on roster management since we have no control over what NFL teams do.  If I go out and get a new TE to replace a guy I may not have cap room to re-add him later.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tford Huddler

Tford

Posted
  • Author
Posted
6 minutes ago, flemingd said:

 

Not at all a fan of leagues that require us to take actions like this, owners need to have full rights on roster management since we have no control over what NFL teams do.  If I go out and get a new TE to replace a guy I may not have cap room to re-add him later.

 

I'm actually surprised how the voting has been given the response in the discussion thread. All voices in favor of option 3, majority vote option 2.

 

FWIW, I agree with you. This will be more difficult to manage from both a player and commissioner point of view in my opinion but it's what the masses want.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
flemingd Huddler All-Pro

flemingd

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Tford said:

 

I'm actually surprised how the voting has been given the response in the discussion thread. All voices in favor of option 3, majority vote option 2.

 

FWIW, I agree with you. This will be more difficult to manage from both a player and commissioner point of view in my opinion but it's what the masses want.


 doubt they read if fully, it's very subtle after the main point of the (I) and (C) restrictions.  I likely won't be playing in this league for long if we're going to take things out of owners' hands.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tford Huddler

Tford

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Rereading the comments in the discussion thread, there were seven people interested in option three but we have much less than seven votes. Changed minds or mistaken votes?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tford Huddler

Tford

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, darin3 said:

maybe we need to re-do the thread/voting on this.  i don't think folks were understanding.  i may have been one of those that was misunderstanding.

 

Understood. I will remake a vote thread with just these two choices since nobody voted for the status quo.

 

I will try to do a better job explaining what exactly each option entails. Locking this thread.

Edited by Tford
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Tford locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

  I accept