Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Flaxwless
Fine with me, but tanking is not a big issue to risk a Toilet Bowl. It won't take effect for 08, but why should I lose my #1 pick b/c of Joel's tanking (not trying to point fingers). Why should future bad teams suffer?
IMO... it's toilet bowl AGAINST expanded playoffs. Those against a Toilet Bowl are against it b/c it sacrifices the bottom teams. They are not agaisnt it b/c it does not prevent tanking, which it does, but so will expanded playoffs + lottery.
Also if you issue is the bottom teams tanking (ie not setting their best line up) then count me in with Jake and league wide vote would be the best solution.
I could support..
No change.
Expanded playoffs + bottom 3 lottery.
Expanded playoffs + league wide vote on tanking.
Either way for me and I'm sure most of the others in support of playoff expansion it's ether playoff expansion or toilet bowl... not playoff expansion AND toilet bowl.
Any Toilet Bowl, Extra Balls,, or anything that grants draft seeding on WINS... I am against.
I think Jake and Popes would support... PLayoff Expansion + league wide vote on tanking any others?
IMO... seems like Toilet Bowl is losing out.
|
Frank, you keep trying to lump in those that are most adamant ... I hate the idea of a playoff expansion in any form. I think its terrible. I think its a huge blow to the quality of this league, and a huge step towards fantasy league mediocrity. I can't explain to you how much I despise the idea of playoff expansion. Is that clear enough? Honestly, I despise the idea of any of these changes. I think the league is great the way it is. Its an incredible league, actually, that we're all priviledged to be a part of. Those that can't get up for the competition shouldn't be around IMO.
Brian and I have been discussing this, but I have no problem with long term strategies. I would not have won my championship if I hadn't began preparing a championship team during the previous season. To be clear, though, I don't agree with an owner submitting a starting lineup that includes non-starters, if that team's roster has empty slots and cap space. Short of that, though, I don't think we should be trying to influence differing strategies among truly competitive owners.
Implementing a sever penalty, levied by the rules committee and ratified by a 75% vote takes care of the blatant tanking issue we've seen with Amish. I'm not sure we should be more aggressive than that.