Dynasty Leaguemates frustrated over lack of improvement, looking to shake things up. (1 Viewer)

[jm192]

I'm in a Dynasty or a Big Keeper, however one would look at it. 30 man rosters, keep 15 year to year.

We're going into our 7th year. 6 guys have been champion. A handful of guys typically finish near the bottom of the league. While they get some good pieces in the draft, they still don't have a ton of hope for competing any time soon.

They've recently expressed that they're somewhat disheartened that they don't have a chance to win despite years of rebuilding. The league doesn't see a ton of trades. And the guys near the bottom don't do a good job of trading veteran "win now pieces" IMO. And so I feel those sort of things play a large role in being "stuck" at the bottom.

That being said, if guys are feeling down on the league to a large enough extent, the league is going to fold.

Anyone been in a similar situation? Anyone have thoughts on how to reinvigorate the teams that seem to be stuck in the sand on their rebuilds?

 

[Amused to Death]

If you're not doing it already, switch to an auction format. Teams have an opportunity to get any player they want. Most fun you'll have all season is the auction.

 

[Gally]

Have a restart. I am partial to the idea of a random restart but you can also have it be after a repeat or three-peat. I don't like a known year because that last year is fairly stagnant.

 

[Gally]

Bottom line though is if these owners are the same owners at the bottom every year and they don't do anything different they are likely just bad FF players and no matter what you do they will end up back at the bottom at some point.

 

[sushinsky4tsar]

Empire Dynasty League would have solved most of the problems your league is experiencing in Year 7. Half the annual entry goes to current year payouts. The other half is a rolling pot that snowballs until somebody in the league wins back-to-back. At that point, you do a complete reset. At year 7, you would have a massive rolling jackpot to motivate every owner in the league to get after it, whether that means trying to win now or rebuild with a purpose to win an even larger jackpot in the future.

Is it really fair to just change a regular dynasty league into an Empire mid-stream? Not really. If one of the stronger teams just completed a successful rebuild and is now told that this year's pot will be 50% less valuable, they would be very justified in their opposition. If there are a number of teams up top that have all experienced success and everyone agrees that the league is stale and in danger of folding, then maybe you can pull it off. Or at least agree that it becomes an Empire the following season. Then again, if the current league is in enough trouble, I guess the natural progression is that it folds naturally and then you're free to start fresh with an Empire.

It really does solve all problems when it comes to dynasty team apathy. If an owner still wants to walk away, then they walk away from the progressive payout they've paid in. No matter how bad their team is, it will still be easy to find a replacement that would gain immediate eligibility to the progressive jackpot that somebody else has paid in.

 

[sushinsky4tsar]

I'm in a Dynasty or a Big Keeper, however one would look at it. 30 man rosters, keep 15 year to year.

Maybe there's a case for this, but I'm not really a fan of this format. Does this mean you're having a 15 round draft of the rookies and bottom half of the roster free agents (along with other free agents)?

Not a huge deal, but just seems kind of inefficient. Not much point in even bothering with free agents and trying to hustle to build roster depth if you're just going to have throw back half of your team. You might like having a longer 15 round draft every year, but this also might be contributing to the fatigue for some people. If this isn't IDP, I would personally prefer 25 man rosters, keep 20, and do a 5 round rookie/FA draft (which will mostly be rookies, with kickers, and DST late).

 

[Ironman2131]

In my league we have to start one rookie. This tends to make our draft look more like Superflex drafts and causes a fair amount of turnover in the standings year to year. Combined with the max contract being four years, there are good enough players every offseason for teams to turn things around pretty quickly. There are certainly some downsides to this approach, but if you're looking for a format where most rebuilds are 1-2 seasons, this works well.

 

[InDitkaWeTrust]

I'm in a Dynasty or a Big Keeper, however one would look at it. 30 man rosters, keep 15 year to year.

Maybe there's a case for this, but I'm not really a fan of this format. Does this mean you're having a 15 round draft of the rookies and bottom half of the roster free agents (along with other free agents)?

Not a huge deal, but just seems kind of inefficient. Not much point in even bothering with free agents and trying to hustle to build roster depth if you're just going to have throw back half of your team. You might like having a longer 15 round draft every year, but this also might be contributing to the fatigue for some people. If this isn't IDP, I would personally prefer 25 man rosters, keep 20, and do a 5 round rookie/FA draft (which will mostly be rookies, with kickers, and DST late).

My >25 season league is like this. We transitioned from redraft to keep 4 to keep 8 over the years. It does freshen up the rosters a good bit to just keep 8. If it's a tight group of team managers, it's often reasonable to make decisions as a league so that you all keep together and renew the interest of the players who tend to be bottom dwellers. Just an idea...