View Single Post
Old December 10th, 2007, 05:15 PM   #187
Flaxwless
Feeding Frenzy
 
Flaxwless's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Bay Area, California
Posts: 6,050
Flaxwless is on a distinguished road
Default Re: 2007 Rules Discussion - Weighted Lottery for the #1 pick

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nittany Dodgers
I'll just share the thoughts I've exhanged with Jake on this one. I just think the rules committee idea is futile. The only scenario this would solve is the Joel scenario where a team blatantly does not start its best players. No one has come out and defended that strategy, and Joel admits it was a mistake. I sincerely doubt that will ever happen again, barring a new owner who's not aware of the history.

However, the rules committee idea would not solve the more subtle tanking by a team phoning in his season. Is the rules committee going to move to penalzie a player because they didn't sign a particular free agent, or sign a second defense when theirs was on the bye, or make any other move to make their team more competitive? I would certainly think not, but all of these things are the signs of either owners not caring about their teams, owners trying passively to get a higher pick next year, or owners who are just not interested in competing on a weekly basis. A toilet bowl not only solves the Joel issue (sorry to have to name if after you), but it goes further and solves the other issues as well. To some, those aren't issues that needs to be solved, and so be it, I can't make people agree with me on that. But, to those of you who agree those are issues that need to be addressed to some point, the rules committee idea just doesn't come close to solving.
.

I don't think most want the rules commitee to be deciding the issues you suggest. They just want people to simply start their best lineup.

If you want to improve league play... a 6 team playoff expansion will do so, without hurting the bad teams. Everyone will be much more competitive with a better shot at playoffs.

Jake and Mike seem to think it ruins the exclusivity of a 4 team playoff... but past history has shown that only once would a 7-7 seed have made playoffs. The rest of the 5th and 6th seeds needed 8-6 or better. Again... #1 or #2 seed just need to win 2 games to be crowned champions. Seeds 3-6 have to win 3 games in a row. This enhances competitivness between teams fighting for playoff spots, but also the Top 4 teams as the jockey for the bye week.

The bottom teams can be taken care of with a simple league voting to prevent tanking or a lottery (60/30/10)
__________________
Bay Area Bloodsucking Insects
- 1st EVER Feeding Frenzy Champion

Bay Area Bloodsuckers

2008 SAC'D Champions
- 2nd Worst to First in Year!
2011 SAC'D Champions
- #5 seed, # 2 power rankings, #1 in the end!

Last edited by Flaxwless; December 10th, 2007 at 05:23 PM.
Flaxwless is offline   Reply With Quote