-
Maybe I misunderstood - so you are completely against changing the rule to the new system ever? If so, why?
-
Here was my posting on my vote when you announced that we were suspending the option to vote against the change at all: If it is so obvious change will pass voting seems harmless. I will vote no change
-
Second Rule proposal: any rule changes require 9 votes out of 12 (a super majority)
-
I would now like to propose a new Rule for this league for the future: Any league rules in existence on the auction date are unchangeable until the following year's auction date.
-
I specifically posted that I would vote against it. This is just a runaway train though we're just railroading to the result you want so let's just dispense the discussion and switch the league to the new one and let it screw whomever
-
Unless I'm mistaken, every person on the board today on this issue has said they're in favor of the change so it seems simply just to get to the heart of it: do it now or do it later
-
Nothing is retroactive - it applies to either 2013 or 2014. Those are the options
-
its my understanding that voting against is no longer an option, the only options are implementing it retroactively for the teams we drafted in 2012, or implementing it for the teams we will draft next spring
-
As I said earlier, if owners want to vote against it for the sole reason that we should have been given more notice, I completely buy that and can't fault anyone for doing so. I just happen to think it's worth doing something now we'd do later anyway
-
now you get to keep that guy anyway at wgat us likely still below market vakue and if it gets above market value then you can trade him before the drop date or toss him back in and risk it
-
I completely understand the hesitation to make a rule change mid season but a) this is the off season, and b) it's the same rule change for everyone, and c) there is no c
-
Agree with Wood. If somehow just a handful of owners knew about the rule before others it'd be a different story, but it impacts us all the same so the argument of "I may not have made X and Y trade" in 2012 would be the same for all
-
if you were trying to balance this year and future years that is a call you have to make that Strikes did as well and decided no one was untouchable
-
i love lamp.
The Syndicate 💣 on
September 18, 2012 10:11 PM
-
I dont think this rule will have any noticeable affect on the 2013 standings. Sure you will have to allocate money differently but so will everyone. If you did/did not make a trade this year because of the vote-off, it probably didnt effect your standin
-
i love lamp.
The Syndicate 💣 on
September 18, 2012 10:09 PM
-
Wow...that escalated quickly...I think Brick stabbed a guy with a trident!
-
If I like the old system, do I have to switch? No, absolutely not. The new system is an option and league commissioners will be able to change the settings for each league to reflect the system they want.
-
From the article:
-
If it is so obvious change will pass voting seems harmless. I will vote no change but I guess I will be outvoted even if it means changing the rules we agreed to this year
-
Yourselves either way is an option? Why even bother putting it to a vote? Just announce your preference and that can be that
-
So basically we are forced to change the rule even though the article that started this whole discussion specifically said discuss amongst yoursev
-
No reason to have "no change at all" a part of any poll. Only options should be now or later.
-
We had an owner (big Indians fan) leave the league last year specifically because he thought the vote-off rule was so terrible. He lost a $5 Kipnis. The new arbitration rule is inevitable for our league. Only decision (poll) is either 2013 or 2014.
-
I don't see how a positive rule change, implemented by the governing body and creators of the fantasy site, implemented in the OFF-Season, would NOT pass. Change and adaptation are beneficial to society, even the fantasy one.
-
+1 jed
-
We should do this over video-chat.
Eckfords ⚾ on
September 18, 2012 8:09 PM
-
Nate, once we know the date of the arbitration we'll find a time well beforehand to setup a poll using SurveyMonkey. Thanks
-
Anyone know a website we can use to create a poll once we get to that point?
-
anyway, other owners, if you want to chat more about this please email me off the board, I can't imagine it passing for immediate implementation but let me know if I'm wrong
-
i'm sure.
-
If I lose Headley over Cano I'd be thrilled
-
keeping Headley. So please, everyone that is reading Lucky's opinion as merely selflessness, think again
-
there are two reasons you're arguing for it, (a) b/c you like it (which is fine, so do I absent implementation this year) and (b) because you know you're losing Headley otherwise, and owning Robbie Cano at $41 or $43 or whatever doesn't matter as much as
-
That's great that you think that. There's no doubt in my mind that you have little chance to compete with my roster next year. And neither that nor your opinion is in any way relevant to this issue.
-
I already said four times I understand the procedural objection to this. Makes sense to me if anyone votes it down for that reason. I'm still going to lobby for it though. What's wrong with that?
-
There's not a doubt in my mind that the new rule would negatively impact my chances to repeat next year. I can absolutely bring back a contender, but with the new rule it will be much, much harder. But I still like it...
-
God Trey, you just will not address the real issues. Tinkering is fine. I'm all for implementation of this rule if the league wants it, starting next year. We're in the middle of this year, retroactive changes to the rules are horrible
-
Ottoneu is less than two years old with probably about 600 owners. Early tinkering is inevitable
-
with all due respect to your 2013 chances, they have very little to do with this rule and more to do with the $575 of 2013 salary you're carrying. Stop making this about individual teams
-
I could care less who is a front runner, etc. I'm going to dump dollars onto guys like Trout that are super bargains, the same way I would have voted in the vote off
-
i respectfully dissent
-
the supposed attraction of this league is that it's year over year, forcing careful future planning. here we're fundamentally pulling the rug out on one of the biggest rules that we plan for, and some owners think that's ok
-
if we want to change the 2012 rules, I'm dead set against and I can't understand how it can possibly be viewed as a good idea to vote in favor of unless we want a league where there is constant tinkering
-
This new rule has the potential to crush my chances for another run in 2013, but I still prefer it long term
-
anyway guys, this is just a ridiculously bad slippery slope. If everyone wants the new system, I will vote along for implementation immediately following this year's vote off
-
Ok great. So the fact that I've positioned myself as a front runner for 2013 means you agree that I will suffer the misfortune of having disproportionate inflation impact
-
I could lose Braun, Stanton, Cano, and Reyes instead of just one of them. Chiefs could lose both Votto and Miggy
-
Yes, I agree with Jed. That's exactly how I see it too
-
regardless of who is on each roster. Basically I would want to force the 2013 favorites into financial upheaval.
Eckfords ⚾ on
September 18, 2012 5:35 PM
Previous 50 messages |
Next 50 messages