This afternoon in response to the Chiefs postponement (and well after the Titans postponement where no change was proposed), the league commissioner, citing a Matthew Berry tweet, attempted to unilaterally change the league rules allowing for players to designate a back up player in the instance the starter's game is postponed. Commissioner owns Kelce, so he for example would be able to start Kelce and put his backup tight end as "backup" in the instance the Chiefs game is postponed. If Kelce plays his points count, if he doesn't the backup points count. Clearly this benefits him significantly this week, although he has made clear the rule change was no motivated by that. After my complaining he put this up for a league vote, but I still feel this is in bad form. Cancellations are not unanticipated, and me, like many other players, managed our rosters accordingly. Had this rule been in place I would have managed the waiver wire substantially different. A league vote will not change that.
Am I over reacting here, or do you all agree with me this is a problem? If this was an injury designated player on the weekend with a game Monday you would just have to make a call, make roster moves etc, or take the risk the player plays. How is this any different?
Am I over reacting here, or do you all agree with me this is a problem? If this was an injury designated player on the weekend with a game Monday you would just have to make a call, make roster moves etc, or take the risk the player plays. How is this any different?