|
Post by fbguru on Jan 29, 2008 9:43:43 GMT -5
I have been giving this some thought and I am curious on why we want to wait to incorporate IDP's?
This is a league of top GM's, i am sure we all can handle a second auction style draft of just IDP's. I have no idea why we would wait, IDP's is the way to go.
Not to be a jerk but I have to question any owner/GM who does not want the challenge of IDPs' in a league they are in. While we are making changes and developing this league, lets immediately incorportate IDP.
Your thoughts?
|
|
|
Post by gametime on Jan 29, 2008 10:01:15 GMT -5
guru I am with you on this one.... why wait a year to implement it.... Do you guys need a whole year to study up on defensive players? There is plenty of time to implement it now agree on the lineups/scoring and hold a draft..... all probably before RFA .....
|
|
|
Post by gametime on Jan 29, 2008 10:02:25 GMT -5
and start it off simply oif need be..... 2 d lineman.... 2 lbs....1 safety, 2 corners... something simple... so it won't require too much work for anyone......
if not atleast we have coaches!!!!
|
|
|
Post by Football Buddah on Jan 29, 2008 10:17:03 GMT -5
I've always been a big proponent of IDP's and I have thought of a method that would allow us to implement it now (vs 2010). Since there are GMs' who spent their BLB's, and blew their '08 draft picks, here's something to consider which will still ease the IDP's in, but sooner than '10. - Starting lineup = 1 DL, 1 LB, 1 DB, and 1 Flex.
- We go thru RFA and URFA like normal. (No IDP's)
- We hold our 2008 URFA/Rookie draft, like normal. (No IDP's)
Then, after the regular draft - we hold a SUPPLEMENTAL AUCTION DRAFT FOR IDP's ONLY. Example: Each team will get $100 and will draft 10 IDP's ONLY. (no carryover of any unused amounts). The BLY's would have to be adjusted to accommodate for the new positions, (maybe add an addt'l 20 years) but it would be an equal distribution amongst all GM's. (((this is an example only, the $$ amount, and # of players drafted can be decided on later.))) Then, during the 2008 season, URFA IDP's CANNOT be acquired. However, the IDP's on your roster can be traded. Then, starting with the off-season, IDP's would become part of the mix with all other players. This would give ALL GM's plenty of time to plan for BLB's and Draft picks for 2009 and beyond, while still incorporating IDP's in 2008 in a manner which is fair and equitable for ALL GM's. This is an ELITE league, with ELITE GM's - I'm quite sure we can handle incorporating IDP's sooner than 2010 if we stop thinking of ways we "can't" do it - and start thinking of ways that we "CAN" do it. Thoughts?
|
|
|
Post by fbguru on Jan 29, 2008 10:46:59 GMT -5
Buddah,
you hit the nail on the head. Let's get this ELITE league with ELITE owners set up the way it should be rather than looking until 2010 to implement.
I think with all our input it can work for sure. I can't' see how anyone could find negative to what you just proposed.
GReat Post!
|
|
|
Post by Rebels GM on Jan 29, 2008 10:52:48 GMT -5
I am not opposed to doing this as early as next season if we vote on it, but we wold need to do something to compensate as far as giving extra blbs to teams and such to compensate for this as many gms planned for the current system we have in place.
Either way, it will take some planning and details to make sure we do the right thing
|
|
|
Post by Football Buddah on Jan 29, 2008 10:59:59 GMT -5
Rob - read my post above... using that set up, there'd be no reason to compensate GM's with extra BLB's.
I could be wrong, since I'm still sorta new to this set up, but if we were to follow those guidelines, wouldn't that work?
GM's with little or no BLB's right now won't need extra for 2008, since nobody would be able to pick up an IDP off waivers anyways. But, they will be able to use the ones they drafted for trade, etc... and as we have all seen (with your trades) - it's not uncommon to trade players with BLB's coming back to you.
|
|
|
Post by Rebels GM on Jan 29, 2008 11:05:11 GMT -5
IT would be minimal but there are GMs that have some defense locked in long term and I think we need to compensate them in some fashion. If we gave each GM 5 blbs for each year they have their defenses signed I think that would make this transition a little easier for many.
Like I said,I am not opposed to this change or any change I just do not want to rock this boat too much as we have already been through a great deal with the whole Shodan thing. I am really excited by the amount of activity and excitement for a league that does not even have a true home yet.
Something of this magnitude would need to be handled with extreme care so we make sure that everyone is cool with it.
|
|
|
Post by Football Buddah on Jan 29, 2008 11:18:06 GMT -5
Yes, very good point. See, those are the little things that I didn't factor into my thought process. I think we can make it work. There's a bunch of smart GM's in this league.
And - we have to remember - we're in THE BIG LEAGUES now... and as your motto says: "Many play fantasy football, only a few play in THE BIG LEAGUE"
|
|
|
Post by fbguru on Jan 29, 2008 11:46:18 GMT -5
I think we can iron out a plan, get a majority vote, and implement this without hurting the league or discouraging any gm's. I want this league to be competitive and as a GM, we should be accountable for all positions that play which includes IDP's. Otherwise, are we real GM's? Or are we GM's who can only strive in one type scoring format?
be challenged guys!!!!
|
|
|
Post by Barrister on Jan 31, 2008 5:08:18 GMT -5
I agree we should go to IDPs now. I think a truly elite league has to have them. And it's really not that much more prep, especially since we aren't a redraft league having to draft a complete new offensive team every year, too.
I like Buddah's approach. I'll probably be in the minority here, but I'd throw out a couple things to consider:
1. I'd let any of the unused 100 blbs to carry-over and allow the GMs to decide how to manage them.
2. Maybe we should draft 12-15 IDPs, rather than 10. If we draft only 10 and have to start 4, then I think we ought to be able to pick up IDPs off the ww, since just being able to trade may not be enough what with bye weeks and injuries. Plus, if we draft only 10, a ton of quality IDP's are going to be available for only $1 every week, if you really need to pick one up -- and everybody gets another 100 blbs after Labor Day. If it's a real problem, perhaps you could limit the number of IDPs you can get by ww to 3 all-year or something. 3. I wouldn't eliminate DSTs if IDPs are added. I don't see them being mutually exclusive and many leagues have both.
If nobody likes any of my thoughts above, no problem. Just something to consider. But no matter how we do it, I really, really think adding IDPs this year is a must for a quality league like this.
|
|
|
Post by Rebels GM on Jan 31, 2008 6:14:04 GMT -5
I liked all of you points Barrister
|
|
|
Post by Johns Jackrabbits on Jan 31, 2008 14:45:13 GMT -5
Gotta add my 2-cents!
I would love to add IDPs this year! I played in a Dynasty League last year that uses IDPs and it was a lot of fun, you open the league to so much more. Also, when you look at the Rookie Draft coming up, how many of the top 20 prospects are Defense? Now, if you sit at pick #12, there is still a change for you to get a solid impact player who may just happen to be on Defense and it adds another level of competition to the league.
I am 100% for IDPs here and in the original TBL...
|
|
|
Post by gametime on Jan 31, 2008 15:51:38 GMT -5
DO IT NOW !
|
|
|
Post by Wonderlickers on Jan 31, 2008 17:04:40 GMT -5
Nothing much to add except my support...a lot of good points have been made. I think we can definitely make this work now and it would improve the league to an even higher level. I would say capping it at 12 IDP's drafted per team would be better than 15, if we're still talking 1 DL, 1 LB, 1 DB and 1 Flex starting.
|
|
|
Post by fbguru on Feb 1, 2008 13:57:42 GMT -5
I am really pleased with what I am hearing. I think we need to set a plan and make it work and get it started. I would say I like the set up of 2 DL, 2 LB, 2DB, 1 Flex. Don't care about the scoring system, lets just make it happen.
Buddah...get on this now!!! haha
|
|
|
Post by Football Buddah on Feb 1, 2008 14:15:33 GMT -5
everybody will have the opportunity to share their opinions about this topic at the Owners' meeting.
|
|
|
Post by gametime on Feb 1, 2008 15:16:11 GMT -5
i think we should come to some type of aggrement/proposal now so the owner's meeting just requires a vote and not a discussion as the meeting could take day sto complete than... if a proposal can be made now so everyone can ponder it... a vote could be taken quickly and rules adapted than.... If everythng is just discussed at the meeting, we'll be starting all ovwr again after as nothing will be accomplished.... get the proposals now... vote at the meeting...
|
|
|
Post by Football Buddah on Feb 1, 2008 17:01:21 GMT -5
Good point.
I'll draft up something that I think would work for the incorporation of IDP's in 2008, without impacting D/ST or HC positions.
Stay tuned.
|
|
|
Post by Barrister on Feb 2, 2008 4:07:56 GMT -5
... if a proposal can be made now so everyone can ponder it... a vote could be taken quickly and rules adopted then.... Good point....I'll draft up something that I think would work for the incorporation of IDP's in 2008, without impacting D/ST or HC positions. I'm voting "Aye" on whatever Buddah thinks is fair and comes up with.
|
|
|
Post by Rebels GM on Feb 2, 2008 6:22:53 GMT -5
me too
|
|
|
Post by Football Buddah on Feb 2, 2008 8:38:55 GMT -5
I appreciate that from you guys.
I've been playing in an IDP league since 2004 and I've only done some minor tweaking of the scoring since starting them.
The 'tricky' part will be trying not to create a double-dip situation with IDP's and D/ST.
My sole intention is and was to simply ADD the IDP position to our league. What we do with the D/ST position, or HC position for that matter, shouldn't have an effect.
I'll have something out before the meeting.
|
|
|
Post by gametime on Feb 2, 2008 8:49:34 GMT -5
I am really pleased with what I am hearing. I think we need to set a plan and make it work and get it started. I would say I like the set up of 2 DL, 2 LB, 2DB, 1 Flex. Don't care about the scoring system, lets just make it happen. Buddah...get on this now!!! haha I know Buddah will come up with something cool.... I think Guru has the best scenario as of right now (if you are worried about implementing it)..... If you guys wanted to slowly introduce it.... Possibly add a lineman, lb, and another db in a year..... I'm for whatever you come up with... never heard of IDP with team defenses, but i'm cool with it..... What are you bumpming the total years cap up to...100...? Figure with the above that is 7 more players... I think it should be a little more than 100.... that's only a little over 2 years per player and if you have a stud you may want to lock him up for more than 2 or 3 years... P.S. Please get rid of coaches... I'll give blb's to each owner to do so.... Nothing is worse than losing in fantasy because someone gets a 15 point swing because of a coach....
|
|
|
Post by Orca on Feb 2, 2008 12:58:55 GMT -5
OK, I need to read through all of this still but here's my concern. IDPs need to be incorporated but they have to be introduced on a set date in the future. I for one based my entire team around the current rules and roster set up. This changes the entire dynamic of the league as well as reconfiguring the values of all players.
I gave away everything to get the team I have now. I'm left with nothing to adjust for IDP in a draft. SUre I'll have my initial auction players but I'm screwed for thenext two drafts.
I think IDPs is a great idea but it's a major change to the rules and every owners needs to have time to prepare.
|
|
|
Post by Orca on Feb 2, 2008 13:05:46 GMT -5
Something of this magnitude would need to be handled with extreme care so we make sure that everyone is cool with it. I agree. We have a great thing going right now there's no need to rush into IDPs. No one is going anywhere and with a slow transition owners will not be able to claim they were blindsided by a sudden rule change.
|
|
|
Post by Orca on Feb 2, 2008 13:11:43 GMT -5
get a majority vote, and implement this ! Just because it's what the majority wants does not make it the right thing to do. I don't think anyone is opposed to IDP. A few of us just want to make sure it's implemented with caution
|
|
|
Post by Orca on Feb 2, 2008 13:16:54 GMT -5
i think we should come to some type of aggrement/proposal now so the owner's meeting just requires a vote and not a discussion as the meeting could take day sto complete than... if a proposal can be made now so everyone can ponder it... a vote could be taken quickly and rules adapted than.... If everythng is just discussed at the meeting, we'll be starting all ovwr again after as nothing will be accomplished.... get the proposals now... vote at the meeting... Not every owner is visiting this forum and reading every post. The called meeting was for discussion, let's keep it that
|
|
|
Post by Barrister on Feb 2, 2008 16:13:48 GMT -5
Just a quick response to Loqutis and Ron; whose opinions they know I regard highly, and do not disagree with lightly -- especially when they involve issues of fairness to all GMs, both collectively and individually. Then I’ll butt out.
I agree with Loq that he planned his team entirely around last year’s rules, and that adding IDPs is a major change to the league's dynamic. However, didn’t we all plan our teams around last year’s rules? And why wait for two years to make this admittedly major change, if it's agreed that IDPs are necessary to a top-flight league and they can be implemented fairly to all? Why put off the “pain”?
It would seem to me that if anyone should be opposed to the idea due to previous rules or plans, it’s Guru. Afterall, as last year’s total point champion, his team’s overall strength based solely on the positions established last year, stands to be the most diminished by the addition of IDPs unless he drafts IDPs extremely well.
I think where Loq has a point to be accounted for is in his lack of draft choices – although some might argue he shouldn’t have traded them all away then, since his basic problem is going to be the same for his team overall whether we add IDPs or not. I think that not drafting IDPs this year is one way of giving Loq the relief he seeks, and is a fair to him as long as he’s free to draft his initial IDPs at auction with the same amount of blbs as everyone else.
Bottomline, whether we go with IDPs or not is not a deal-breaker for me. And I realize that Loqutis feels strongly about this. Nevertheless, I think the league should take the obvious step-up by incorporating IDPs, this year, and believe that it can be done in a way that is no more unfair to Loq than to any of the rest of us. Frankly, I just haven't heard a reason that convinces me why we have to wait until 2010.
|
|
|
Post by Rebels GM on Feb 2, 2008 16:53:11 GMT -5
I think waiting until 2009 is the right thing to do
|
|
|
Post by gametime on Feb 2, 2008 16:57:43 GMT -5
Aren't we all on the same plane here.... I don't have any first round pick for this year or next.... My problem, not anyone elses.... I'll wait, but it makes no sense to me...
|
|