Rule Discussion
 

We're all but full (just 1 spot remains), so lets start discussing how we want to integrate IDP's into the Frenzy Rules.

For reference, here's a link to the Frenzy rules http://frenzy.predsff.com/2005FeedingFrenzyRules.html

As another point of reference, here's a link to the Frenzy archives for 2004 stats and whatnot to give you an idea on valuations and player performance http://frenzy.predsff.com/2004/2004index.html.

We need to work on the following: (recently added items are listed in Red)

• a rules committee
• dole out league managment responsibilities
• decide on a commish
• define the IDP positions
• decide how many IDP players we want as starters
• decide how many IDP's on the bench
• decide overall roster size
• define divisions
• create a revised cap to include the extra players
• develop scoring for the IDP positions
• establish IDP RFA Tender levels
• establish IDP rookie draft salaries and bonus structures (for 2006)
• discuss possibly increasing the rookie draft by a round or 2
• discuss possible increasing the Taxi or Practice Squads by a member or 2
• consider some of the CDL's features, particularly contract extensions (Skip can expand on how this works in the CDL)
• consider adding a Franchise tag element
• decide on a league name
• have a logo created
• decide on a travelling trophy (not in the Frenzy everyone chipped in $10-15 the 1st year to get a trophy that travels from champ to tchamp)... we then chip in $1 a piece each year to cover engraving costs.
• discuss limiting contracts in the inaugural season to 1 year so that everyone can adjust to the new format (although still allow the use of the RFA tags and whatnot during the next off-season).
• increasing the number of RFAs per year, since the roster will be increasing greatly. I’d go with one more RFA if we get the Franchise tag, or two more RFAs without the Franchise tag.

Did I miss anything?

Re: Rule Discussion
 

IDP roster positions

We just using DL or DT and DG?

Re: Rule Discussion
 

we using safeties or FS and SS?
LBs - ILB or OLB or just LB?

Re: Rule Discussion
 

DG? you mean DE I take it?

Basically DL is defined as DE, DT, or NT

Re: Rule Discussion
 

Safeties will be grouped with the DB's...

DB's are CB's, FS, SS, Nicklebacks, etc.

Re: Rule Discussion
 

So we would have DBs, DLs, and LBs? is that right?

Re: Rule Discussion
 

yeah i meant DE, brain fart

Re: Rule Discussion
 

yes

Re: Rule Discussion
 

Skippy,
Plain English: DL (Defensive Line), LB (Line Backer) & DB (Defensive Back)

Re: Rule Discussion
 

Mike, do you have a quick and easy link to the CDL rules so I can check out the franchising and renegotiating aspects?

Re: Rule Discussion
 

The CDL rules aren't vieable online, but here's a link to download them:
www.ffforecaster.com/leagues/dynasty/leaguerules2005.doc

The reneg rules work pretty well (though we'd have to modify them to fit the Frenzy salary structure.

The Franchise tag isn't quite as effective, but the concept is one Matt has inquired about for a while, and I think we can modify the CDL's into a working model here.

Re: Rule Discussion
 

Another point of discussion BTW (brought up by Skip), was to limit contracts to 1 year for the 1st season (allow the use of the RFA tags and whatnot in the next offseason and prior to the draft), but this way everyone can adjust to the concept without wrecking their teams for years down the road.

Re: Rule Discussion
 

Not a bad idea, especially for those of you that have never been in an IDP league before.

Re: Rule Discussion
 

Quick fix on the franchise tag without studying the problem, what about changing the date the tag is based on to March 31 instead of April 1? Or Week 14 of the previous season (to get around possible players cut in the off season)?

Re: Rule Discussion
 

Would we still allow for renotiations at the end of the first year, or not until the 2nd?

Re: Rule Discussion
 

We can look at that, though I think the CDL problems are more towards the tag being too cost prohibitive to use at most positions.

It's only been used on D's and K's!

If we adjust the salary structure (still keep it at a premium, but not quite as high) I think we can make it work.

Re: Rule Discussion
 

I think we'd have to discuss that as a group. I'm open to either, but I think I'd lean towards not allowing the renegotiations until we enter season 2. The RFA or Franchise tags will still be selling players at market value, whereas the reneg's won't necessarily accomplish the same thing.

All that being said, if everybody is on 1 year contracts the 1st year, the only way to renegotiate would be via trade, which could make things quite interesting for the players that sell at bargain prices in error during year 1!

Re: Rule Discussion
 

Skippy wants that because he doesn't know JACK about IDP. Hee hee.:retard

Re: Rule Discussion
 

LOL, it is a good point though. If we want to build a strong league from the ground up it may be the way to go the 1st year.

Re: Rule Discussion
 

I like the idea of trades being the only way to 'keep' people after first year. you can gain people from other teams, but not your own until season 2.

Re: Rule Discussion
 

And yes, it would allow Skippy to save face a little because he wouldn't have to keep any IDP from year one!

Re: Rule Discussion
 

Well I think we'd still allow the RFA and Franchise tags as well, but those players will sell at market pricing.

Re: Rule Discussion
 

My quick thoughts on the bullets:

• a rules committee-I’m doing it in the Frenzy, I’d be more than willing to let someone take my place
• dole out league managment responsibilities
• decide on a commish-one…two…three…”not it!”
• define the IDP positions – DL, LB, DB
• decide how many IDP players we want as starters – 6 (2, 2, 2) or 7 (2, 2, 2, flex)
• decide how many IDP's on the bench – 6, one backup for each player (I love those big rosters)
• decide overall roster size – 30, 18 mandatory offensive slots, 12 mandatory D
• define divisions – Division in sports is defined as “a category created for the purposes of competition”
• create a revised cap to include the extra players – 17,500, keeps the same exact ratio of 583 cb per player currently in the Frenzy
• develop scoring for the IDP positions - ???
• establish IDP RFA Tender levels – ooooh, that will be fun, let me work on that
• establish IDP rookie draft salaries and bonus structures (for 2006) - ditto
• discuss possibly increasing the rookie draft by a round or 2 - at least two rounds, I think defensive talent is usually deeper, at least as far as realistic projects than on offnse.
• discuss possible increasing the Taxi or Practice Squads by a member or 2 – Taxi squad up to 6 and 2 per year (from 5th, and 6th rounds)
• consider some of the CDL's features, particularly contract extensions (Skip can expand on how this works in the CDL) - I like the extensions. A minimum raise of 300, or 10% for current players, or 150 and 5% would keep it at a similar level to the CDL
• consider adding a Franchise tag element – I'd be open if the problems can be worked out
• decide on a league name – Frenzy IDP
• have a logo created -
• decide on a travelling trophy (not in the Frenzy everyone chipped in $10-15 the 1st year to get a trophy that travels from champ to tchamp)... we then chip in $1 a piece each year to cover engraving costs. - Fine, but I know I'll never see it
• discuss limiting contracts in the inaugural season to 1 year so that everyone can adjust to the new format (although still allow the use of the RFA tags and whatnot during the next off-season). – Yep
• My own suggestion, increasing the number of RFAs per year, since the roster will be increasing greatly. I’d go with one more RFA if we get the Franchise tag, or two more RFAs without the Franchise tag.

Re: Rule Discussion
 

umm, ditto! Well done Brian

Re: Rule Discussion
 

Actually, on these, I have no idea what these levels would be. In the Frenzy, the market values defined over the previous few seasons were a large part of the foundation for determining these. Never having played in an IDP league, I have no idea the values of IDPers.

Re: Rule Discussion
 

I think we might want to leave them open, and define them in the off-season (January/February) after we have a year of data to work with.

We could still hold a rookie draft and RFA period once we set the numbers.

What do you think?

Re: Rule Discussion
 

Guys, sorry if I don't chime in much in the next couple days.....taxes to be done :Alcoholic I'll post my thoughts (shouldn't take long) this weekend....

Re: Rule Discussion
 

Sounds good to me.

Re: Rule Discussion
 

Being CDL Commish requires a bunch of my time and don't think I could commit to Commishing another league.
6 or 7 sound good to me as well as 6 bench spots.

Do you think we need to make it madatory 18/12 split? Why not allow the owners to have some flexibility.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nittany Dodgers

:clap

Works for me.

Anyone have a good example to steal?


Waiting till the next off season sounds like a good plan for these two.

I think 2 rounds at the min for the draft. Do we need to think about flattening out the curve if we do this though. We will be effectivly doubling the talent level so we should probably alter the sloap or players will be going way to cheap.

Speaking of this we will probably need to alter the bonus structure somewhat because it is based on the round drafted.


Contract extentions work great in CDL.

Basically teams can sign a player to an extention if he has 2 or more years left on his contract. If he is in the final year of his contract he cannot be resigned. This forces team to trade players that have 1 year on their deal if they want to get any value for the player.


The CDL version is pretty useless at the moment. It could be fixed by making it the average of the top 10 (or somewhere around there) instead of top 4

How about something more creative than just tacking on IDP?:bag

Pure donation on my part as well i am sure.

Not sure how many guys have IDP experience but this would help level the playing field.


Sure why not.

Re: Rule Discussion
 

These ideas look good and cover most of things I was thinking of. Could I suggest a geographic alignment for teams? East, Central and West (though the names could be different). I am in suburban Philly as is Mike P. (randilover).

Re: Rule Discussion
 

One other thought. In my local league we subtract defensive scores from the oppositions offensive score. With our scoring in that league we get more realistic socres (or at at least arena football like scores). Might be something to consider trying here .

Re: Rule Discussion
 

Should we start a topic for each item/group of items? Having it all in one thread is going to get crazy.

Re: Rule Discussion
 

Seperate breakouts make a lot of sense since their is quite a bit happening here. Thanks!

Re: Rule Discussion
 

Here's the IDP scoring stucture I've used in an IDP league for the past few years:

Punt/Kickoff Return TDs: 6pts
Fumble Recovery/Interception Return TDs: 6pts
Blocked FG/Punt Return TDs: 6pts
Fumble Recoveries: 4pts
Interceptions Caught: 4pts
Blocked FG/Punt: 4pts
Tackles: 1pt
Assists: 0.5pt
QB Sack: 4pts
Safeties: 6pts

Re: Rule Discussion
 

What about pass deflections? Is that counted as an official stat or is that only a video game thing?

Re: Rule Discussion
 

And i dont know if was in this thread or the other... but I owuld be in favor of having an auction for vertans and rookie draft based upon random order or something like that.

Re: Rule Discussion
 

As the newbie I am trying digest things as quickly as I can so for now will add my 2 cents on only a couple things:

- I like the idea of having only 1 yr contracts for the 1st year ... although still have trading and RFAs sounds good.

- I would vote for 6 IDP players in starting lineups ... 2 each of DLs, LBs, DBs ... a flex guy will invariably be a LB, also as there is always an element of luck in FF but this is often even more evident with defensive players than offensive players so prefer to have IDPs as an add on rather than equal footing with offensive players.

- Having a roster size limit is a must but prefer not to have restrictions on offense vs defense.

Re: Rule Discussion
 

first of all, Skippy is right. We need a separate thread for each of these points otherwise we'll never keep things straight.

I played in one with passes deflected. NFL does track that. I say 1/2 point.

Re: Rule Discussion
 

Seperate threads is a great idea. Anyone have time to set em up? I can try later, but not at the moment.

Re: Rule Discussion
 

I like the limiting of rosters, and if Skippy wants 20 RBs and one of each other position, be my guest (he'll try to trade them off anyway). So, limits of how many IOP & IDP is up in the air...we can vote on it.

I had no problem with the recommended scorings...except maybe add the passes deflected.

auction for vets and random rookie draft is fine (trades can be done for rookie draft). In CDL, we are allowed to throw in next years picks as well, but not two years out.

I agree, you don't want too many IDP, otherwise they take over the scoring.

Re: Rule Discussion
 

I'll set them up...but from where?

Re: Rule Discussion
 

Can you post the top 25 scoring and their points from each position so we get an idea of what these scoring rules are like?

Re: Rule Discussion
 

I'm going to advocate an auction for the rookies (or including them in the auction, at least for the IDP's).

We have a solid understanding of IOP values, and rookier salaries that reflect that, but we have no idea what the IDP market will bear.

Seeing as we're talking 1 year contracts year 1, I think it makes the most sense just to throw everyone in the same auction pool (rookies, vets, IOP's, IDP's)

Re: Rule Discussion
 

Just create new threads in the parent forum. Here's a link http://predsff.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=89

Re: Rule Discussion
 

The first post in this thread has a list of topics. Use common sence to combine some that go together.

Re: Rule Discussion
 

NICE... suttle jab there Skip!

Rami's been jabbing at you all day, it's about time you jabbed back!

Re: Rule Discussion
 

grouping rookies in the auction sounds like a solid plan since we are limited to 1 year contracts.

I would like to see passes deflected, since from my small understanding of IDP, CBs are the TE of the DEF.

Also... thinking about it I wouldn't advocate a strict 17500 slary cap using the roughly 600 per player idea. This is b/c I believe teams will value offense more and drive the offensive salaries a bit higher. But as I type this it seems like a moot point since we are starting from the ground up and no market values have been set. Seems like more of an issue if we were to add onto the original Frenzy league.

that's it for now.

Re: Rule Discussion
 

I assume you mean subtle.

I have been busy at work, and Rami is easy to ignore.

Re: Rule Discussion
 

I thought we all knew my grammar sucked! ;)

Re: Rule Discussion
 

I really shouldn't be the one pointing this out considering how many mistakes I make.

Re: Rule Discussion
 

I haven't seen Jake sign off for a bit. If anyone is missing the postings this afternoon, they are going to crap when they see the new messages. This seriously has been a Frenzy of an afternoon.

Re: Rule Discussion
 

No kidding, I think there are over 300 posts today!

Re: Rule Discussion
 

This is borderline orgasmic! (Sorry, was that PG-13?)