Secondly, I realize that the grueling competition for good running backs in this league makes it more of a challenge, and I'd be on board with continuing that if one team didn't have all the best at that position. Or in the keeper format, in general.
I am not advocating the keeper reset that we playfully threw around last year, but as long as teams are allowed to horde good running backs from year to year, I think the stress of trying to fill a roster is a bit much. You never really have a chance to succeed at that position if you don't have a super high draft pick or already have one of the big guns kept.
A shortening of the roster would free up some creative wiggle room. This has been inarticulate.
Good for you Tomke. And Eli, if you are apathetic, I'll buy your vote.
The very fact that Arlen Harris plays an important role in game outcomes fundamentally flaws JR's argument that one team hoards all the worthwhile players. Scores of up and coming running backs play an important part of the season, and I should know as three guys barely on the radar in Maurice Jones-Drew (third string at best in Jacksonville this time last year), DeAngelo Williams (rookie), and Brandon Jacobs (behind superstar Tiki Baber) led me to the title. Complaining that Ed holds Larry Johnson and LT is lazy as there are ways to still win, and would punish him for doing the best job of constructing a long-term team.
The life span of an NFL running back is not all that long. This is our fourth go around with football and names like Priest Holmes, Jamal Lewis, and Curtis Martin that were superstars just a couple seasons ago are barely relevant now.
Perhaps I fear change, but I see absolutely no need to tinker with our most successful sport. Blow up the fantasy basketball set-up and throw in a few fraction points for assisted tackles, but keep this happy formula in tact.
Sorry, Drew. I voted "yes" quite a while ago because I can only disagree with Ed on so many things.
But it was an apathetic yes, and I think that if there are people who are vehemently against the change, that should count for something. Maybe we can create a Passion Index (PI) for voting. If you don't really care, your vote counts for 1 vote. If you lose sleep at night over the issue, your vote counts for two. If you tell your in-laws about the vote for 20 minutes during a family outing, your vote counts for three.
Arlen Harris does not hurt my argument that a handful of teams have all the power.
I agree that there are good running backs available each year, usually rookies, and I agree that the formula has proven entertaining in the past (so why fix it?). But just because you had a lucky run with some second tier guys (and that's what it was, a lucky run, even though it was destiny) doesn't mean it's always fun to have hardly any chance at pulling yourself up by your bootstraps (unless you're willing to suffer for two years or more and take the high picks). You have to admit, your case was downright cosmic.
Ultimately, I really don't care one way or the other, though I'm definitely leaning toward the other. I guess I'd like to hear what Champ, Dave, and others have to say.
Eli, if we don't keep Edwin in check he'll start kicking people out of the league and acquring John Smoltz for 11th round draft picks. What's that you say? Never mind.
As for the PI, I'm a 2. I spend significant amount of time stocking mandarin oranges with this (VUFSA in general) on my mind, but have not brought it up with my in-laws.
LT had the greatest season in the history of running backs.
Larry Johnson was selected in the 5th round.
If LT blows out his knee in week 1 and Larry Johnson is still holding out for more money, does this change your opinion?
If you had acquired these players in not-so-rip-off fashion (both via draft picks that Ed didn't even acquire from someone else but had in the normal course of events) would you be clamoring for this change?
Looking at the next five years, would you rather be sitting with a roster right now of LT and LJ or Frank Gore and Joseph Addai?
Agreed, I had a tremendous amount of good fortune, but I won seven of my last ten games with those "second tier" guys. At what point does some good managerial-ship begin to replace luck?
What I'm against is making the league easier, which is what this change does. It more levels the playing field and for those people who are for competitive balance, it makes sense. But we aren't talking about the Yankees who have more of a resource (money) that makes them more likely to win. Every one has the same number of picks each year and every one has the same chance. Those who do the most with those chances should be rewarded with a more successful season. Those who do poorly would be wise to position themselves for a better run next year. Ed is a perfect example of how to lose as last year in baseball he was horrible but made transactions to ensure that didn't happen again. He used his pieces wisely and is doing well this year. I'm anti-sharing and anti-helping. Yay Republicanism!
Eli, if we don't keep Edwin in check he'll start kicking people out of the league and acquring John Smoltz for 11th round draft picks. What's that you say? Never mind.
Speaking from a team that has sucked some balls over the last two years, I have to say that I am totally against this change.
It seems to me that the people that are for it are the people that end up right in the middle every year. The people at the top are content with what they have, and the people at the bottom (or just me) love building up with draft picks and such. I have just as much fun getting guys like Reggie Bush and Ronnie Brown and a top draft pick to get ready as I'm sure you guys do competing for the playoffs each year.
I didn't even check this before I sent out the email. I had no idea there has been this much discussion on the topic.
I suck at this even when I do things the democratic way. I guess it's all of your own faults for putting (literally) the stupidest member in charge of the league.
I feel it is my duty to point out that I didn't actually vote for Ed, and instead sent this email to Drew Wolf regarding a commissioner's election:
My votes for commissioner, in this order. If said person declines, please move further down the list.
1. Mike Tice 2. Bono 3. David Hasselhoff 4. Ken Tremendous 5. Rachel Nichols 6. Barry Bonds' former trainer 7. Drew Carey 8. A random lesbian 9. The entire cast of "The Sopranos" 10. Logan Tom 11. Kenny Chesney 12. Dennis DeYoung (formerly of Styx) 13. Becky Wolf 14. Barack Obama 15. Josh Groban 16. Jerry of Ben and Jerry's Ice Cream 17. The Last of the Mohicans 18. Jack Bauer 19. Lord Farquad 20. Edwin J. Schillinger IV
I'm not sure what "a random lesbian" had going on that was so important, but apparently you still wound up as the default winner.
As the person forced to seek out these people (and their subsequent declines), I was surprised that not only did Josh Groban turn down the offer, he was rude in doing so. Really there was no reason to drop the f bomb into my voice mail.
20 comments:
Firstly, I'm naked.
Secondly, I realize that the grueling competition for good running backs in this league makes it more of a challenge, and I'd be on board with continuing that if one team didn't have all the best at that position. Or in the keeper format, in general.
I am not advocating the keeper reset that we playfully threw around last year, but as long as teams are allowed to horde good running backs from year to year, I think the stress of trying to fill a roster is a bit much. You never really have a chance to succeed at that position if you don't have a super high draft pick or already have one of the big guns kept.
A shortening of the roster would free up some creative wiggle room. This has been inarticulate.
I am pretty apathetic about all of this.
Arlen Harris. Every year someone has to start Arlen Harris. This has to stop.
I voted no?
-Dave
Good for you Tomke. And Eli, if you are apathetic, I'll buy your vote.
The very fact that Arlen Harris plays an important role in game outcomes fundamentally flaws JR's argument that one team hoards all the worthwhile players. Scores of up and coming running backs play an important part of the season, and I should know as three guys barely on the radar in Maurice Jones-Drew (third string at best in Jacksonville this time last year), DeAngelo Williams (rookie), and Brandon Jacobs (behind superstar Tiki Baber) led me to the title. Complaining that Ed holds Larry Johnson and LT is lazy as there are ways to still win, and would punish him for doing the best job of constructing a long-term team.
The life span of an NFL running back is not all that long. This is our fourth go around with football and names like Priest Holmes, Jamal Lewis, and Curtis Martin that were superstars just a couple seasons ago are barely relevant now.
Perhaps I fear change, but I see absolutely no need to tinker with our most successful sport. Blow up the fantasy basketball set-up and throw in a few fraction points for assisted tackles, but keep this happy formula in tact.
Sorry, Drew. I voted "yes" quite a while ago because I can only disagree with Ed on so many things.
But it was an apathetic yes, and I think that if there are people who are vehemently against the change, that should count for something. Maybe we can create a Passion Index (PI) for voting. If you don't really care, your vote counts for 1 vote. If you lose sleep at night over the issue, your vote counts for two. If you tell your in-laws about the vote for 20 minutes during a family outing, your vote counts for three.
Arlen Harris does not hurt my argument that a handful of teams have all the power.
I agree that there are good running backs available each year, usually rookies, and I agree that the formula has proven entertaining in the past (so why fix it?). But just because you had a lucky run with some second tier guys (and that's what it was, a lucky run, even though it was destiny) doesn't mean it's always fun to have hardly any chance at pulling yourself up by your bootstraps (unless you're willing to suffer for two years or more and take the high picks). You have to admit, your case was downright cosmic.
Ultimately, I really don't care one way or the other, though I'm definitely leaning toward the other. I guess I'd like to hear what Champ, Dave, and others have to say.
Eli, if we don't keep Edwin in check he'll start kicking people out of the league and acquring John Smoltz for 11th round draft picks. What's that you say? Never mind.
As for the PI, I'm a 2. I spend significant amount of time stocking mandarin oranges with this (VUFSA in general) on my mind, but have not brought it up with my in-laws.
LT had the greatest season in the history of running backs.
Larry Johnson was selected in the 5th round.
If LT blows out his knee in week 1 and Larry Johnson is still holding out for more money, does this change your opinion?
If you had acquired these players in not-so-rip-off fashion (both via draft picks that Ed didn't even acquire from someone else but had in the normal course of events) would you be clamoring for this change?
Looking at the next five years, would you rather be sitting with a roster right now of LT and LJ or Frank Gore and Joseph Addai?
Agreed, I had a tremendous amount of good fortune, but I won seven of my last ten games with those "second tier" guys. At what point does some good managerial-ship begin to replace luck?
What I'm against is making the league easier, which is what this change does. It more levels the playing field and for those people who are for competitive balance, it makes sense. But we aren't talking about the Yankees who have more of a resource (money) that makes them more likely to win. Every one has the same number of picks each year and every one has the same chance. Those who do the most with those chances should be rewarded with a more successful season. Those who do poorly would be wise to position themselves for a better run next year. Ed is a perfect example of how to lose as last year in baseball he was horrible but made transactions to ensure that didn't happen again. He used his pieces wisely and is doing well this year. I'm anti-sharing and anti-helping. Yay Republicanism!
You've swayed me. I see it your way.
Eli, if we don't keep Edwin in check he'll start kicking people out of the league and acquring John Smoltz for 11th round draft picks. What's that you say? Never mind.
Damn, Drew.
I LOL'd, though.
Speaking from a team that has sucked some balls over the last two years, I have to say that I am totally against this change.
It seems to me that the people that are for it are the people that end up right in the middle every year. The people at the top are content with what they have, and the people at the bottom (or just me) love building up with draft picks and such. I have just as much fun getting guys like Reggie Bush and Ronnie Brown and a top draft pick to get ready as I'm sure you guys do competing for the playoffs each year.
-Tomke
So Republicans have won?
As a respected member of the VUFSA senior board, I thought I should contribute something to this important discussion.
I didn't even check this before I sent out the email. I had no idea there has been this much discussion on the topic.
I suck at this even when I do things the democratic way. I guess it's all of your own faults for putting (literally) the stupidest member in charge of the league.
I feel it is my duty to point out that I didn't actually vote for Ed, and instead sent this email to Drew Wolf regarding a commissioner's election:
My votes for commissioner, in this order. If said person declines, please move further down the list.
1. Mike Tice
2. Bono
3. David Hasselhoff
4. Ken Tremendous
5. Rachel Nichols
6. Barry Bonds' former trainer
7. Drew Carey
8. A random lesbian
9. The entire cast of "The Sopranos"
10. Logan Tom
11. Kenny Chesney
12. Dennis DeYoung (formerly of Styx)
13. Becky Wolf
14. Barack Obama
15. Josh Groban
16. Jerry of Ben and Jerry's Ice Cream
17. The Last of the Mohicans
18. Jack Bauer
19. Lord Farquad
20. Edwin J. Schillinger IV
I'm not sure what "a random lesbian" had going on that was so important, but apparently you still wound up as the default winner.
I can't believe Josh Groban wouldn't do it.
As the person forced to seek out these people (and their subsequent declines), I was surprised that not only did Josh Groban turn down the offer, he was rude in doing so. Really there was no reason to drop the f bomb into my voice mail.
Indeed, that was a bit rude. But I bet his baritone voice sounded beautiful in doing so.
It brought me to tears.
Can we get a thread going about keepers so that we can start planning for the draft?
-Tomke
Post a Comment