🏈🏈 The American Football Discussion Thread 🏈🏈

[suchmoon]

without having to play week 17

There are 18 weeks in the NFL season (17 games + bye). So if we just want to avoid the last week, we can still make the season 17 weeks long. But 16 is fine with me too.

[1714472001]

1714472001

[1714472001]

1714472001

[1714472001]

1714472001

[1714472001]

1714472001

[1714472001]

1714472001

[wheelz1200]

without having to play week 17

There are 18 weeks in the NFL season (17 games + bye). So if we just want to avoid the last week, we can still make the season 17 weeks long. But 16 is fine with me too.

I'm fine either way.  Not really sure what other leagues are doing but it usually is tied to the championship being the game before the last game of the year.  I'm fine either way. What's the default on the leagues 17 weeks?

[DireWolfM14]

without having to play week 17

There are 18 weeks in the NFL season (17 games + bye). So if we just want to avoid the last week, we can still make the season 17 weeks long. But 16 is fine with me too.

I'm fine either way.  Not really sure what other leagues are doing but it usually is tied to the championship being the game before the last game of the year.  I'm fine either way. What's the default on the leagues 17 weeks?

Doh!  That was a brain fart, yes 17 weeks is good with me.  I like the idea of skipping the last week of the season, we don't need to make it any shorter than that.

The other thing I wanted to say is that I'm fine with sticking to the 10 players we currently have.  This is a good crew, and for the sake of keeping a fun league I'm going to vote for keeping it as-is.

[bbc.reporter]

Is there a difference between playing 10 teams and 12 teams?

I think 12 teams would make things easier since we could have the regular season be 11 weeks long, then still have up to 5 weeks for playoffs without having to play week 17.  Another option for 12 players is to have 4 divisions, and play each of your division rivals twice.  That would make the regular season 13 weeks long, and we'd still have 3 weeks for playoffs without week 17.  I would like to keep the playoffs to 3 weeks, that would make for Quarter Finals (8 teams,) Semi Finals (4,) and Finals for the championship.

We could still do the same thing without divisions, we'll just have two random teams that we each play twice, then select the top 8 teams for the playoffs.

In any case, I might regret this suggestion later. I suggest for everyone's continued motivation until the end of the season, bottom 2 teams pay between $20 and $25 each.

Even though I won the league last year, this scares me.  

Hehehe it also scares me. What about if we make it optional and we only have a buy yourself out agreement if someone wants to stop playing and leave the game? This will not force anyone to pay, however, it will force everyone to play despite if someone is winning or losing hehehe.

[Hueristic]

Is there a difference between playing 10 teams and 12 teams?

I think 12 teams would make things easier since we could have the regular season be 11 weeks long, then still have up to 5 weeks for playoffs without having to play week 17.  Another option for 12 players is to have 4 divisions, and play each of your division rivals twice.  That would make the regular season 13 weeks long, and we'd still have 3 weeks for playoffs without week 17.  I would like to keep the playoffs to 3 weeks, that would make for Quarter Finals (8 teams,) Semi Finals (4,) and Finals for the championship.

We could still do the same thing without divisions, we'll just have two random teams that we each play twice, then select the top 8 teams for the playoffs.

In any case, I might regret this suggestion later. I suggest for everyone's continued motivation until the end of the season, bottom 2 teams pay between $20 and $25 each.

Even though I won the league last year, this scares me.  

Hehehe it also scares me. What about if we make it optional and we only have a buy yourself out agreement if someone wants to stop playing and leave the game? This will not force anyone to pay, however, it will force everyone to play despite if someone is winning or losing hehehe.

Works for me if everyone else is in.

[ChiBitCTy]

I’m good with 10 teams. This will make the league a bit easier for everyone. I know this league is not meant to be super serious so 10 teams makes it easier to play being that teams will have better players. When you get to 12 and 14 team leagues (though I prefer them) it makes it much more difficult as it requires a good bit more time researching players.

Glad everyone is on board with 17 week season. One of the biggest mistakes I made when I first started playing was keeping in that last week. The only coach who’s team is headed to the playoffs and still plays his stars in the final week is Bill Belichick lol

[wheelz1200]

I’m good with 10 teams. This will make the league a bit easier for everyone. I know this league is not meant to be super serious so 10 teams makes it easier to play being that teams will have better players. When you get to 12 and 14 team leagues (though I prefer them) it makes it much more difficult as it requires a good bit more time researching players.

Glad everyone is on board with 17 week season. One of the biggest mistakes I made when I first started playing was keeping in that last week. The only coach who’s team is headed to the playoffs and still plays his stars in the final week is Bill Belichick lol

Agreed let's bump to 10 and if we need to get to 12.  12 requires a lot of knowledge on the 3rd and 4th recievers and hitting the waiver wire correctly.  Let's see how we do with 10 and add next year if there is room for growth here.  Excited for football.  LFG!!

[DireWolfM14]

Hehehe it also scares me. What about if we make it optional and we only have a buy yourself out agreement if someone wants to stop playing and leave the game? This will not force anyone to pay, however, it will force everyone to play despite if someone is winning or losing hehehe.

I'm not a fan of punishing people for doing poorly, that seems like pouring salt on the wound.  There's plenty of incentive to do well, and something like that might sour the experience for someone.  I'd rather keep it as friendly as possible.  But without holding back on the banter, of course.

I’m good with 10 teams.

Agreed let's bump to 10~

Two more hard votes for 10 players, that make 3 of us.

[suchmoon]

Two more hard votes for 10 players, that make 3 of us.

Count me in for 10. I think at this point instead of waiting/looking for two more teams we're better off discussing other stuff like divisions, playoffs etc, and I want to hit mock drafts as soon as possible LOL.

[Hueristic]

10

[morvillz7z]

Have we discussed trade vetoes yet, and do we really want them? We had to wait two days for trades to get approved on ESPN last year (review period). I'm aware we had a few of those completed within the league, but the fact that we had to wait discouraged me from proposing/pursuing trades on more than one occasion. How about we get rid of it completely? Once a trade offer is accepted, it's auto-confirmed...there is no need to wait, cast votes, etc. I understand the risk of collusion, and trades made in bad faith could really hurt the league, it's just the waiting period i find super annoying...Thoughts?

[bbc.reporter]

Hehehe it also scares me. What about if we make it optional and we only have a buy yourself out agreement if someone wants to stop playing and leave the game? This will not force anyone to pay, however, it will force everyone to play despite if someone is winning or losing hehehe.

I'm not a fan of punishing people for doing poorly, that seems like pouring salt on the wound.  There's plenty of incentive to do well, and something like that might sour the experience for someone.  I'd rather keep it as friendly as possible.  But without holding back on the banter, of course.

Punishment of poor performance was clearly not in my mind when I made the suggestion, only motivation to play until the final day.

@morvillz7z. I only want a clean and fair league. I also think that all the participants of our league are honest and will not collude only to win a prize collected from $50 fees hehehehe. It would he a different argument if it was $1000. I am okay in removing it.

Is 10 player league official? I will vote for what the majority wants. If it is 10, I am with 10. It might be easier for newbies like me.

[South Park]

I would also like to have at least 2 IR spots (i think that's the default setting in Yahoo), 1 was not ideal last year. By the way, the NFL has made some changes in that regard:

Agreed lets add this to the list.

That would be great, having only 1 IR spot was a nightmare last year, so having 2 IR spots will reduce the impact of having lots of players on IR, something which happened to both of us last year.

Two more hard votes for 10 players, that make 3 of us.

Count me in for 10. I think at this point instead of waiting/looking for two more teams we're better off discussing other stuff like divisions, playoffs etc, and I want to hit mock drafts as soon as possible LOL.

+1

Have we discussed trade vetoes yet, and do we really want them? We had to wait two days for trades to get approved on ESPN last year (review period). I'm aware we had a few of those completed within the league, but the fact that we had to wait discouraged me from proposing/pursuing trades on more than one occasion. How about we get rid of it completely? Once a trade offer is accepted, it's auto-confirmed...there is no need to wait, cast votes, etc. I understand the risk of collusion, and trades made in bad faith could really hurt the league, it's just the waiting period i find super annoying...Thoughts?

I think last year the rule made sense, not because of the risk of collusion but because we had 3 newbies playing in the league, myself included, so this was a way to protect us from doing terrible trades, but now everyone got some experience so I think we could do without that rule, but those are my thoughts lets see what the rest of the league members think about it.

[DireWolfM14]

Is 10 player league official? I will vote for what the majority wants. If it is 10, I am with 10. It might be easier for newbies like me.

I'm no expert at fantasy football (last year was the first time I had played since the early/mid aughts,) but it stands to reason that the more teams, the more difficult it is to pick up a gem.  Whether it's during the draft off the waivers, there are going to be fewer opportunities to find a stand out player.

+1

It looks like the majority is in favor of sticking with the 10 teams we currently have, the following voted for 10:

DireWolfM14
wheelz1200
ChiBitCTy
suchmoon
Hueristic
South Park
bbc.reporter

That's 7 votes for 10, which settles that question.

I would also like to have at least 2 IR spots (i think that's the default setting in Yahoo), 1 was not ideal last year. By the way, the NFL has made some changes in that regard:

Agreed lets add this to the list.

That would be great, having only 1 IR spot was a nightmare last year, so having 2 IR spots will reduce the impact of having lots of players on IR, something which happened to both of us last year.

I'm good with that, I like the idea of having two IR spots.

Have we discussed trade vetoes yet, and do we really want them? We had to wait two days for trades to get approved on ESPN last year (review period). I'm aware we had a few of those completed within the league, but the fact that we had to wait discouraged me from proposing/pursuing trades on more than one occasion. How about we get rid of it completely? Once a trade offer is accepted, it's auto-confirmed...there is no need to wait, cast votes, etc. I understand the risk of collusion, and trades made in bad faith could really hurt the league, it's just the waiting period i find super annoying...Thoughts?

I think last year the rule made sense, not because of the risk of collusion but because we had 3 newbies playing in the league, myself included, so this was a way to protect us from doing terrible trades, but now everyone got some experience so I think we could do without that rule, but those are my thoughts lets see what the rest of the league members think about it.

I guess the whole trade veto thing makes sense if we were playing with a bunch of anonymous strangers on the internet, but I'd like to think we're past that, lol.  This is a friendly league, and I don't see collusion becoming an issue.  I'm good with instant trades.

[ChiBitCTy]

Have we discussed trade vetoes yet, and do we really want them? We had to wait two days for trades to get approved on ESPN last year (review period). I'm aware we had a few of those completed within the league, but the fact that we had to wait discouraged me from proposing/pursuing trades on more than one occasion. How about we get rid of it completely? Once a trade offer is accepted, it's auto-confirmed...there is no need to wait, cast votes, etc. I understand the risk of collusion, and trades made in bad faith could really hurt the league, it's just the waiting period i find super annoying...Thoughts?

I hate trade vetoes personally and I would be all for allowing them to be processed immediately. When it comes to trades (In my personal opinion) the only person who should be allowed to veto them is the commissioner and only if they deem the trade to be cheating (obviously this means the commissioner needs to know what they are doing). Otherwise, it really shouldn’t be anyone else’s business. I also hate the two day wait period. By allowing them to be processed immediately you’re not holding people up from setting lineups and what not. I really don’t think anyone here would cheat, so I thankfully don’t think we have to worry about that.

[bbc.reporter]

@ChiBitCTy. Agreed. Everyone in the league would not cheat only to win $50 from the other players hehehe. I think we have won or lost more than that in trading altcoins and tokens or betting on different types of casinos games and sportsbooks hehehe. There would be nothing to worry about if the transfers are transparent.

[morvillz7z]

Is anyone watching the Super Bowl today...umm pardon me, the USFL Championship game?

I only watched the opening game back in April and skipped the rest, haven't heard anyone criticize/diss the league though, on the contrary, only nice things.

Stallions vs. Stars 7:30 pm ET! I wish my bookie had some lines to bet on, but they don't cover the USFL, so i guess i won't be losing any money.

It's your last chance to watch some shaky bodycam footage...lol


If we are all set on a 10-man league, we should probably get the draft order raffle rolling soon, i need to start with those mock drafts.

[Hueristic]

Is anyone watching the Super Bowl today...umm pardon me, the USFL Championship game?

I've watched most of the games and will be catching the game in an hour.

I won't be surprised to see some of these guys in the nfl and I'll know where to target them.


Here's a link to the game guys.

http://ky.freestreams-live1.com/nfl-live-streams/

[nutildah]

Whats up dudes.

I vote Yes on everything.

NFL season can't come fast enough...

Let's do this!!

[ChiBitCTy]

@ChiBitCTy. Agreed. Everyone in the league would not cheat only to win $50 from the other players hehehe. I think we have won or lost more than that in trading altcoins and tokens or betting on different types of casinos games and sportsbooks hehehe. There would be nothing to worry about if the transfers are transparent.

Yeah I really don’t think any two people here would stoop as low as to collude to win a couple bucks.  Cheating takes all the fun out of winning as well.

Whats up dudes.

I vote Yes on everything.

NFL season can't come fast enough...

Let's do this!!

Lol I love it. It never can come fast enough. A couple quick facts.. July is the last month without NFL football until March of 2023.  We are only 10 weeks away from 7 hours of nonstop football (Redzone).