Geoff Kilpatrick Posted February 27, 2012 Share Posted February 27, 2012 Larry, it's only a game! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Digby Chicken Caesar Posted February 27, 2012 Share Posted February 27, 2012 It's seriously not a big deal, but my point was that if you are all about people getting involved and giving their opinion, that was a pretty good example of people not getting a chance to give their input. My opinion is that it was better as it was, and would have preferred it to have remained as such. As I wasn't given a chance to have input, I didn't pay a share of the cost, which I think was fair enough. I'd actually pay a few quid to return it to as it was! Same here, It looks a bit 'trying too hard to be cool' Whereas the other one was basic yes, but easy and simple to use. People can be as involved as they like, Even in the first season we had a league poll, and after a short while the minority won that aswell... So it just shows that your vote means virtually nothing in this league anyway so what's the point? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted February 27, 2012 Share Posted February 27, 2012 Larry, it's only a game! You'll never win anything with that attitude Geoff Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted February 27, 2012 Share Posted February 27, 2012 I think the kicker position should definitely be kept. But that there should be a maximum of two PK and two D/ST on each roster. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peebo Posted February 27, 2012 Share Posted February 27, 2012 I think the kicker position should definitely be kept. But that there should be a maximum of two PK and two D/ST on each roster. Why would anyone want to get rid of the kicker position? I see the poll on it, and am intrigued why it has been suggested. I don't believe in limiting the number for certain positions in a squad- bulking up on defenses or kicker seems to me to be a perfectly legit squad building strategy. I had three Ds at the start of the league, as someone had chosen to not draft a back up. Their choice, and any subsequent trades have been based on that. If someone is currently sitting with one D, I don't think they should suddenly get the chance to pick up a back up for free. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted February 27, 2012 Share Posted February 27, 2012 (edited) Why would anyone want to get rid of the kicker position? I see the poll on it, and am intrigued why it has been suggested. I don't believe in limiting the number for certain positions in a squad- bulking up on defenses or kicker seems to me to be a perfectly legit squad building strategy. I had three Ds at the start of the league, as someone had chosen to not draft a back up. Their choice, and any subsequent trades have been based on that. If someone is currently sitting with one D, I don't think they should suddenly get the chance to pick up a back up for free. Ron suggested it. Said this: I'd seen it in another league and felt it was worth asking. We haven't played with one for the last two years in the redraft. Unlike other positions there's very little value difference between kickers. With the exception of Akers who had an unreal season and even threw a TD there was a 1.5 PPG difference between PK2 and PK16. In other words they're pretty pointless. Actually, never mind the suggestion on limiting those two roster spots. Just saw that we had voted on this in the first season. Edited February 27, 2012 by Long Ball Larry Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peebo Posted February 27, 2012 Share Posted February 27, 2012 Ron suggested it. Said this: I'd seen it in another league and felt it was worth asking. We haven't played with one for the last two years in the redraft. Unlike other positions there's very little value difference between kickers. With the exception of Akers who had an unreal season and even threw a TD there was a 1.5 PPG difference between PK2 and PK16. In other words they're pretty pointless. Actually, never mind the suggestion on limiting those two roster spots. Just saw that we had voted on this in the first season. Fair dues. Personally don't agree that they are pointless as they can make a big difference on any given week. Will be voting against, and don't believe this sort of rule change is fair given squads have been built over years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nucky Thompson Posted February 27, 2012 Share Posted February 27, 2012 I think it's a bad idea to reduce the rosters to 25. I've been building my squad for the future based on a 30 man roster. I originally left myself weak at WR and I've got 7 receivers with 2 years or less experience and will find it hard even to reduce my squad to the 30 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff Kilpatrick Posted February 27, 2012 Share Posted February 27, 2012 I think some people are trying to tinker with things because they are bored! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Grimes Posted February 27, 2012 Share Posted February 27, 2012 A few quick answers to the suggestions so far... 24hr time limit on the draft - OK, if folk insist, but maybe extend to 48 hours after the 2nd round. I don;t think we need to nail it down though, we've got months! Getting rid of kickers - No, its still a valid position and there's some element of skill in picking one who's kicking indoors or whose offense has been struggling to make TDs etc. Trade response time - you can already set a time limit on your offers, if you're not willing to wait any longer then don't Kicking less active folk out - Hell, no. We'll all have points where we're more or less active - this is meant to be fun, mind! Always submitting a line-up - definitely agree. Maybe have Commish override if someone has left an obviously unavailable player in the line-up Reduced squads - agree fully with Donnie's reasoning on keeping the larger squads. I'm actively stashing players for the future and have been since the 1st season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peebo Posted February 27, 2012 Share Posted February 27, 2012 A few quick answers to the suggestions so far... 24hr time limit on the draft - OK, if folk insist, but maybe extend to 48 hours after the 2nd round. I don;t think we need to nail it down though, we've got months! Getting rid of kickers - No, its still a valid position and there's some element of skill in picking one who's kicking indoors or whose offense has been struggling to make TDs etc. Trade response time - you can already set a time limit on your offers, if you're not willing to wait any longer then don't Kicking less active folk out - Hell, no. We'll all have points where we're more or less active - this is meant to be fun, mind! Always submitting a line-up - definitely agree. Maybe have Commish override if someone has left an obviously unavailable player in the line-up Reduced squads - agree fully with Donnie's reasoning on keeping the larger squads. I'm actively stashing players for the future and have been since the 1st season. Agree with all of this. Re submitting a team each week- last year, you could submit line ups for all future weeks which at least meant you didn't have bye week players playing. Maybe all that really needs to be done is remind folk they can do that, if possible? not sure what can be done beyond that, to be honest. Shit happens which mean they might overlook it from time to time- I know I have forgotten...cost me about $300 in a work league last year... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 Rams are going to trade the 2nd pick. http://espn.go.com/nfl/draft2012/story/_/id/7622088/2012-nfl-draft-st-louis-rams-decide-trade-no-2-overall-pick-sources-say No massive surprise. They must be tempted to pick Griffin and trade Bradford, but I suppose the value of trading that pick is too much to turn down. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peebo Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 Rams are going to trade the 2nd pick. http://espn.go.com/nfl/draft2012/story/_/id/7622088/2012-nfl-draft-st-louis-rams-decide-trade-no-2-overall-pick-sources-say No massive surprise. They must be tempted to pick Griffin and trade Bradford, but I suppose the value of trading that pick is too much to turn down. The article appears to imply Luck is not a definite at number one, after all... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 The article appears to imply Luck is not a definite at number one, after all... Would be good to see the Colts take Griffin after all the Luck chat this season, but Luck seems to safe a bet to pass up on unfortunately. I think RGIII is a lot higher rated heading into the draft, than Cam Newton was last year. Maybe some of Cams success plays a part in people being so high on Griffin though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 Would be good to see the Colts take Griffin after all the Luck chat this season, but Luck seems to safe a bet to pass up on unfortunately. I think RGIII is a lot higher rated heading into the draft, than Cam Newton was last year. Maybe some of Cams success plays a part in people being so high on Griffin though. Think it would be hilarious to see them take Griffin, although seems like it's an almost certainty. Not surprised to see the Rams probably trading down but they seem to be limiting their options as it appears to be either the Browns or Redskins that would trade up for him. Browns for the 4th and 22nd, I've seen that the Redskins might trade for their 6th overall pick, 2nd round, 3rd and 2013 1st. I'm still not sure about Bradford, especially with his injuries. Would be interesting to see what they could get for Bradford if they ignored other trades and went for Griffin. Wonder if the Dolphins (8th) or Seahawks (12th) would want him with their first rounder if he was available. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 Talking of trades, once it's been processed, I await more abuse for the latest one that I've been involved in Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 Talking of trades, once it's been processed, I await more abuse for the latest one that I've been involved in You have made a profit on what you paid for him originally Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 Think it would be hilarious to see them take Griffin, although seems like it's an almost certainty. Not surprised to see the Rams probably trading down but they seem to be limiting their options as it appears to be either the Browns or Redskins that would trade up for him. Browns for the 4th and 22nd, I've seen that the Redskins might trade for their 6th overall pick, 2nd round, 3rd and 2013 1st. I'm still not sure about Bradford, especially with his injuries. Would be interesting to see what they could get for Bradford if they ignored other trades and went for Griffin. Wonder if the Dolphins (8th) or Seahawks (12th) would want him with their first rounder if he was available. One of the main problems in them picking Griffin, is that even though he is more mobile than Bradford and avoid being sacked as much, I would imagine he would also pick up injuries playing behind that O-line. So it makes sense for them to pick up all those additional picks for trading the 2nd, improve the line and also look to give Bradford some weapons. Desperate for a top CB too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 You have made a profit on what you paid for him originally If it turns out terribly for me, I can at least say that Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 One of the main problems in them picking Griffin, is that even though he is more mobile than Bradford and avoid being sacked as much, I would imagine he would also pick up injuries playing behind that O-line. So it makes sense for them to pick up all those additional picks for trading the 2nd, improve the line and also look to give Bradford some weapons. Desperate for a top CB too. You are right because the Rams are just in a shambolic state, that's why I find it strange that Fisher was so keen to go there. They've got needs all over the place and they'll probably get even worse as I can't see Lloyd staying so somewhere along the way before the start of the season they'll need 2 WR's. Plus although Jackson could probably stay to the same level for the next year or two, he's not got long to go either. No wonder they were so keen to bring their home games to Wembley. The good thing about the rookie salaries being much more reasonable now is that more trades might happen before, or during the draft. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isaac Clarke Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 Giving up Roethlisberger for a couple draft picks and bunch of junk? Surprised Larry finally managed to part with Forsett aswell. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 Giving up Roethlisberger for a couple draft picks and bunch of junk? Surprised Larry finally managed to part with Forsett aswell. I didn't actively try to sell him this time. That must have been where I had gone wrong before. He's guaranteed to do something this year now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 (edited) Don't remember the same comment when I got him for less a month or so back He wasn't going to start for me due to my 1.03 pick, two extra picks could have more value for me and gives me a few more choices. With the three players I picked up, Breaston is a better option at WR3 than I've got now, Cooley could be my TE and I'd thought I'd save Larry the pain of having Forsett anymore But with him being a free agent, he had two decent seasons before last, again with my roster it's worth taking a risk. I've read suggestions he might go to the Raiders which would be ideal for me as McFadden's backup. Edited February 28, 2012 by Martin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 I didn't actively try to sell him this time. That must have been where I had gone wrong before. He's guaranteed to do something this year now. With trying to sell him before, people just knew it would be too good to be true to have him on their team. If he does something this year, you can have first refusal to get him back Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 With trying to sell him before, people just knew it would be too good to be true to have him on their team. If he does something this year, you can have first refusal to get him back Nah no thanks. You're stuck with him now Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P-Dizzle Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 Martin, I've emailed you back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 Nah no thanks. You're stuck with him now I'll remember to quote this post when you make an offer for him again Martin, I've emailed you back. Just got it and replied back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff Kilpatrick Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 Told you. Some people are bored! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 Better to be bored and take a few risks than do nothing at all Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P-Dizzle Posted February 29, 2012 Share Posted February 29, 2012 I'm sure Martin won't mind me posting this, but I'd like to get some thoughts on a trade. It was a straight swap, Cruz for Chris Johnson. It was on the table but I think we were both reluctant to trade. It's the case of each of us valuing our own player it their highest point and their player at their lowest point. I thought about accepting but I'm hoping for bigger things from CJ this year. What would people's thoughts have been if this had gone through? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nucky Thompson Posted February 29, 2012 Share Posted February 29, 2012 I'm sure Martin won't mind me posting this, but I'd like to get some thoughts on a trade. It was a straight swap, Cruz for Chris Johnson. It was on the table but I think we were both reluctant to trade. It's the case of each of us valuing our own player it their highest point and their player at their lowest point. I thought about accepting but I'm hoping for bigger things from CJ this year. What would people's thoughts have been if this had gone through? I would've snatched his hand off Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isaac Clarke Posted February 29, 2012 Share Posted February 29, 2012 (edited) I'm sure Martin won't mind me posting this, but I'd like to get some thoughts on a trade. It was a straight swap, Cruz for Chris Johnson. It was on the table but I think we were both reluctant to trade. It's the case of each of us valuing our own player it their highest point and their player at their lowest point. I thought about accepting but I'm hoping for bigger things from CJ this year. What would people's thoughts have been if this had gone through? They're both valued about the same right now. Difference is Johnson's value can only really go up, while I can't see Cruz's value going up any more than it already has. I'd take the Chris Johnson side of the trade, especially considering it's quite hard to find a 3-down back nowadays with all the RBBC's about the place. Edited February 29, 2012 by JamboTaylor Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted February 29, 2012 Share Posted February 29, 2012 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff Kilpatrick Posted February 29, 2012 Share Posted February 29, 2012 Martin, I'm actually amenable to that proposal but it's more a case of watching the board unfold before going for it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isaac Clarke Posted February 29, 2012 Share Posted February 29, 2012 Martin, I'm actually amenable to that proposal but it's more a case of watching the board unfold before going for it. :interesting: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isaac Clarke Posted February 29, 2012 Share Posted February 29, 2012 For some reason my Trade Bait keeps getting cleared, even when I go and fix it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted February 29, 2012 Share Posted February 29, 2012 For some reason my Trade Bait keeps getting cleared, even when I go and fix it. I wondered why I had 6 emails telling me you'd updated your trade bait Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isaac Clarke Posted February 29, 2012 Share Posted February 29, 2012 I wondered why I had 6 emails telling me you'd updated your trade bait Yeah I thought I'd let you guys know, so you all don't think I've gone mental or anything. Somes to have stopped now...I think. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin Posted February 29, 2012 Share Posted February 29, 2012 Martin, I'm actually amenable to that proposal but it's more a case of watching the board unfold before going for it. No problem at all That offer will stay on the table. I wondered why I had 6 emails telling me you'd updated your trade bait I was hoping there might have been another one or two Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin Posted February 29, 2012 Share Posted February 29, 2012 The Raiders must clear in excess of $22 million in salary cap space before March 13. They're definitely not franchise tagging Michael Bush, and at this point we'd be surprised if they tagged any free agents at all. (See SS Tyvon Branch.) The Raiders' current cap allotment is a whopping $145.7 million, easily the most in the NFL and $16.6 million more than the Giants at No. 2. Expect a flurry of releases and restructures ahead of the free agency period. Poor Raiders Just shows as well how players that have been highly rated going into the NFL draft can completely fall SI's Don Banks suggests Arizona State ILB Vontaze Burfict will fall to day three of the draft after his Combine implosion.Burfict's workouts (5.09 forty, 8-foot-8 broad jump) were pathetic, and worst of all he blamed college coaches for his poor 2011 performance. Burfict doesn't play well on the field, appears to have a cancerous personality, and isn't nearly as athletic as some believed. We wouldn't be shocked if he went undrafted. One AFC executive told Yahoo Sports that he expects at least a handful of teams to remove North Alabama CB Janoris Jenkins from their draft boards due to off-field issues.Jenkins has been arrested three times, was suspended at North Alabama even after being kicked out of Florida, has four children under the age of four, and had an admitted ongoing drug problem as recently as a year ago. "We haven?t decided what to do with him," said the AFC exec. "We might take him off our board. I know there will be 3-4 teams that will take him off right away, at least for the first round." Said one NFC executive. Sure I saw a few months back that Burfict was predicted to go in the top 20 and Jenkins sounds as though he belongs in Leith or Paisley with his behaviour Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted March 1, 2012 Share Posted March 1, 2012 Sure I saw a few months back that Burfict was predicted to go in the top 20 and Jenkins sounds as though he belongs in Leith or Paisley with his behaviour Cheeky ******* Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isaac Clarke Posted March 1, 2012 Share Posted March 1, 2012 (edited) ESPN's Adam Schefter reports that free agent Peyton Hillis told the Browns "as recently as the end of the season" that he was considering retirement. Hillis, who is on his fourth agent since the 2010 season, appears to have a screw loose. Per Schefter, Hillis "even considered joining the CIA" at one point, and "wavered" about playing football throughout the past season. Schefter does report that it "now looks as if he will continue playing." The Browns will not be franchise tagging Hillis, and his lack of commitment to football will surely be detrimental to his free agent appeal. The Browns would like to re-sign Hillis, but we can't imagine them guaranteeing him much money. Edited March 1, 2012 by JamboTaylor Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin Posted March 1, 2012 Share Posted March 1, 2012 Cheeky ******* I'll take back Leith then and say Easter Road instead It deserves a from me as well. The Madden curse has really got to him! Don't know why anyone would even consider signing him with an attitude like that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted March 1, 2012 Share Posted March 1, 2012 DeSean Jackson franchise tagged. Bit surprised, I didn't think they where too keen to bring him back. Maybe they plan on trading him. http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d8275255c/article/eagles-franchise-wr-jackson-avoid-march-5-deadline?module=HP11_breaking_news Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin Posted March 2, 2012 Share Posted March 2, 2012 Surprised to hear that about Jackson, got to think that somehow they have sorted out his attitude or they'll trade him. According to Yahoo! Sports' Jason Cole, the Saints and free agent Drew Brees remain "roughly $5 million a year apart" on a new contract.That's a lot of ground to make up by Monday's franchise tag deadline. The Saints could free up $5 million by restructuring Will Smith's contract, and another $11 million by cutting MLB Jonathan Vilma and DT Sedrick Ellis. If the Saints are forced to use the exclusive franchise tag on Brees, they run the risk of losing both Marques Colston and Carl Nicks. This along with the troubles that the Steelers and the Raiders are having with the cap, is why I love the NFL. None of the nonsense you get in other sports where it's all about who has the most money, completely fair and it's all about how teams manage it and keep the league on a level playing field. Just wish football was like that as well Cardinals RB Ryan Williams said his kneecap was in his thigh when he tore his patella tendon last summer.Given a 9-12 month recovery timetable, Williams has just recently begun jogging again. As evidenced by the struggles of Cadillac Williams and Mark Clayton, the recovery rate for torn patella tendons isn't close to that of ACLs. It's fair to question whether Williams will ever regain his pre-injury explosiveness and quickness. Sounds a pretty horrific injury, difficult to come back from something like that Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peebo Posted March 2, 2012 Share Posted March 2, 2012 This along with the troubles that the Steelers and the Raiders are having with the cap, is why I love the NFL. None of the nonsense you get in other sports where it's all about who has the most money, completely fair and it's all about how teams manage it and keep the league on a level playing field. Just wish football was like that as well Ignoring for a moment the fact that Brees and his employer are arguing over a spare $5M/yr, it's probably about the only working example of communism in action that the world has known... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Grimes Posted March 2, 2012 Share Posted March 2, 2012 I'll take back Leith then and say Easter Road instead Cheeky ******* Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peebo Posted March 3, 2012 Share Posted March 3, 2012 I'll take back Leith then and say Easter Road instead It deserves a from me as well. The Madden curse has really got to him! Don't know why anyone would even consider signing him with an attitude like that. Hillis has come out and said it was a load of shite. Hillis Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Grimes Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 Big girl, you are beautiful Or maybe not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isaac Clarke Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 (edited) Nick's listed weight is 307 pounds, so Holley lifted more than her brother to get to the Olympics Must be like being attacked by a bear. Edited March 5, 2012 by JamboTaylor Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.