VOTE Rule Changes

[BBF]

I will add up the votes out of people who actually cast votes, I will try to get votes from those who don't post frequently. Results will come from votes cast only.

Please make a post with your votes on the following rule changes...

1. Do you want to add a starting lineup spot? Yes / No

1a. If Yes, indicate your preference for additional starting lineup spot: RB or Flex

2. Do you want to remove kickers? Yes/No

3. Do you want an additional IR spot? Yes/No

[BBF]

1. Do you want to add a starting lineup spot? Yes / No

Yes

1a. If Yes, indicate your preference for additional starting lineup spot: RB or Flex

Flex

2. Do you want to remove kickers? Yes/No

Yes

3. Do you want an additional IR spot? Yes/No

Yes


I removed superflex as an option as it would create such a premium on QBs that it may result in teams having no QBs to start in their regular QB slot too often.

[dplank]

1. Do you want to add a starting lineup spot? Yes / No

Yes

1a. If Yes, indicate your preference for additional starting lineup spot: RB or Flex

Flex

2. Do you want to remove kickers? Yes/No

Yes

3. Do you want an additional IR spot? Yes/No

Yes


I removed superflex as an option as it would create such a premium on QBs that it may result in teams having no QBs to start in their regular QB slot too often.

Same here on all these

[dabearsfan]

1. Do you want to add a starting lineup spot? Yes / No

Yes

1a. If Yes, indicate your preference for additional starting lineup spot: RB or Flex

RB

2. Do you want to remove kickers? Yes/No

No

3. Do you want an additional IR spot? Yes/No

Yes

[IE]

Yes - extra slot

RB as the extra slot

Yes get rid of kicker

Yes to extra IR slot

[BearsFanInMN]

1. Do you want to add a starting lineup spot? Yes / No

Yes

1a. If Yes, indicate your preference for additional starting lineup spot: RB or Flex

Flex

2. Do you want to remove kickers? Yes/No

Yes

3. Do you want an additional IR spot? Yes/No

Yes


I removed superflex as an option as it would create such a premium on QBs that it may result in teams having no QBs to start in their regular QB slot too often.

Same here on all these

Me too

[Arkansasbear]

I will add up the votes out of people who actually cast votes, I will try to get votes from those who don't post frequently. Results will come from votes cast only.

Please make a post with your votes on the following rule changes...

1. Do you want to add a starting lineup spot? Yes / No

1a. If Yes, indicate your preference for additional starting lineup spot: RB or Flex

2. Do you want to remove kickers? Yes/No

3. Do you want an additional IR spot? Yes/No

Yes - flex

No kicker

Yes extra IR


Do we have a decision on IDP?

[mouse]

Yes flex
No
No

[The Kaiser]

Yes, Flex
Yes, remove K
Yes, Add IR spot

Yes, Build a plan to transition to Superflex to more accurately reflect the value of QB in this league.
Yes, look at how we can build a better way of fostering trades, preferable through a mobile experience. If people don't want to leave ESPN then create a What's App group or use a mobile app like "Group Me" for sharing info. Relying on this message board is not as effective.

[BBF]

DD's votes...

1. No
2. Keep Kickers
3. Yes Additional IR

[Umbali]

1. Do you want to add a starting lineup spot? Yes / No
YES
1a. If Yes, indicate your preference for additional starting lineup spot: RB or Flex
YES FLEX
2. Do you want to remove kickers? Yes/No
NO , THEY ARE PEOPLE TOO
3. Do you want an additional IR spot? Yes/No
YES

[Atkins&Rebel]

Flex: in a given nfl week, finding 28-30 meaningful starting RBs is tough. So giving teams the option to have points from other spots adds to the value of an extra spot

Keep kickers: every fantasy platform has the ability to make every starting spot relevant. Address the scoring for kickers and you’ll find they add to overall fantasy football.

Add IR. Keeper dynasty needs 2-3 spots when. Injuries pile up. But I’d restrict it to only NFL pup or IR eligible players

[dplank]

Did we also change the keepers from 14 to 12? I'm cool with that, just noticed when I went to re-add those dudes that I couldn't mark them as keepers lol

[BBF]

We changed it to 12 last year, correct?

[dplank]

We changed it to 12 last year, correct?

No clue lol....

[BearsFanInMN]

We changed it to 12 last year, correct?

No clue lol....

I think we did for a year since we went down to 15 teams and then were going to determine if we wound up back to 16 keeping it or went down to 14 teams if we should raise it.

[dplank]

12 is cool with me, I was just curious....

[IE]

12 is fine - actually better for deterring hoarding at any one position. If it is a keeper league, I think the keeper part should be more selective - and there is a bit of a redraft flavor to every draft.

[Bad Flanders]

I will add up the votes out of people who actually cast votes, I will try to get votes from those who don't post frequently. Results will come from votes cast only.

Please make a post with your votes on the following rule changes...

1. Do you want to add a starting lineup spot? Yes / No

Yes, but only if flex, there already aren’t enough RBs available in this league, if there were less teams maybe but not at 14. Adding another starting spot will mean we are fighting over the next 14 down (but because of needing backups - really more like next 28 RB’s?!?)

1a. If Yes, indicate your preference for additional starting lineup spot: RB or Flex

Flex, otherwise my vote goes to no.

2. Do you want to remove kickers? Yes/No

Meh. Don’t care.

I like the idea of IDP over team def that got put forward.

3. Do you want an additional IR spot? Yes/No

Yes.

Hope I’m not too late.

[Bad Flanders]

This might be out of the question for some of you. But I’m down for just adding cell numbers and all agreeing to texts, (No calls) as a group.

That might get the trade stuff jumping… and might make Sunday’s fun too.

[IE]

It would be nice to have everyone able to be notified they are on the clock without BBF having to do it.

Also - on the 12 keepers ... it might be a little light now that I'm thinking about it. For example, let's say someone has two QBs they like but one or both are getting older and they want to grab a Penix or JJ for the future. And then they have to "keep" 2 WR, RB, TE and 2 Flex ..... that only leaves 4 more slots for backups and developmental players. You couldn't even have more than 1 developmental player without not having a backup at WR, RB and TE for by weeks.

So after thinking some more I'm going to change my mind and say that we should go back to at least 14 keepers, Especially given that the original "complaint" about the previous larger number of keepers in a 16 team league was that players just sat hoarded, idle and there was no movement especially with some of the folks in the league not being very engaged. With 2 less teams there is a lot more "liquidity" in the league and I think we could go to 14 and not have hoarding. Especially without a Taxi squad for development players.

Maybe the answer is to establish an additional 2-3 man taxi squad so owners can stash first and second year players and not lose them. 12 keepers and at least 2 taxi.

[The Kaiser]

This might be out of the question for some of you. But I’m down for just adding cell numbers and all agreeing to texts, (No calls) as a group.

That might get the trade stuff jumping… and might make Sunday’s fun too.

I would prefer to use What's App. Much better for a group like this.

[IE]

This might be out of the question for some of you. But I’m down for just adding cell numbers and all agreeing to texts, (No calls) as a group.

That might get the trade stuff jumping… and might make Sunday’s fun too.

I would prefer to use What's App. Much better for a group like this.

I don't disagree. I'm wondering what the likelihood is of getting that 14 people to use that app though, versus text messaging. I do think if it is text OR Whatsapp it should only be for "on the clock" and person-to-person trade discussion. But not "chatting" and blowing up people's phones.

[dplank]

I would prefer to use What's App. Much better for a group like this.

I don't disagree. I'm wondering what the likelihood is of getting that 14 people to use that app though, versus text messaging. I do think if it is text OR Whatsapp it should only be for "on the clock" and person-to-person trade discussion. But not "chatting" and blowing up people's phones.

This. I get a billion texts a day, half of which are spam. There is a messaging feature on the app, why not have everyone just agree to actually use it?

[IE]

I don't disagree. I'm wondering what the likelihood is of getting that 14 people to use that app though, versus text messaging. I do think if it is text OR Whatsapp it should only be for "on the clock" and person-to-person trade discussion. But not "chatting" and blowing up people's phones.

This. I get a billion texts a day, half of which are spam. There is a messaging feature on the app, why not have everyone just agree to actually use it?

Do you mean the BFO site/app? That's the right answer but for some mysterious reason a small number of folks are resistant to even using it for draft purposes.

[dplank]

This. I get a billion texts a day, half of which are spam. There is a messaging feature on the app, why not have everyone just agree to actually use it?

Do you mean the BFO site/app? That's the right answer but for some mysterious reason a small number of folks are resistant to even using it for draft purposes.

I was talking about the ESPN app, does that have messaging in it? I just sent you a test trade and message on the app, let me know if you see it. And, if you want to do the trade lol....

[IE]

Do you mean the BFO site/app? That's the right answer but for some mysterious reason a small number of folks are resistant to even using it for draft purposes.

I was talking about the ESPN app, does that have messaging in it? I just sent you a test trade and message on the app, let me know if you see it. And, if you want to do the trade lol....

Oh yeah ESPN also has a chat feature. If we could all agree on one platform for communications it would be great.

[dplank]

I was talking about the ESPN app, does that have messaging in it? I just sent you a test trade and message on the app, let me know if you see it. And, if you want to do the trade lol....

Oh yeah ESPN also has a chat feature. If we could all agree on one platform for communications it would be great.

That's the easiest way I think, we already have to use this app to manage our teams so if we all just agree to use it to communicate with each other it should work fine. I think the tool is less important than folks just getting interested/engaged.

[IE]

Oh yeah ESPN also has a chat feature. If we could all agree on one platform for communications it would be great.

That's the easiest way I think, we already have to use this app to manage our teams so if we all just agree to use it to communicate with each other it should work fine. I think the tool is less important than folks just getting interested/engaged.

I responded in PM as well with this - but it is probably useful to let others see my comment about the ESPN app really being for re-draft mostly and how (from what I've seen) it doesn't let you trade picks as well. Which is a problem in dynasty.