Is this the most meaningless Week 17 ever? (1 Viewer)

[JaxBill]

There are only two games that determine playoff spots (DAL-WAS, IND-TEN) and a third game that sets regular season history (NE-NYG). And even in these three games, teams on the other side are resting players.

Last year you had the Chiefs beating the Jaguars and the Eagles beating the Giants to earn their way in (and the game meant something to the other team).

 

[bjabrad]

It is meaningless in terms of your drafted team and the team that got you to the championship game but even more representative of your fantasy skills as a scrambler and ability to craft a team from the best of your roster combined with the best from the waiver wire.

Good luck to all. It should be a wild way to end the season.

 

[Jeff Pasquino]

It is meaningless in terms of your drafted team and the team that got you to the championship game but even more representative of your fantasy skills as a scrambler and ability to craft a team from the best of your roster combined with the best from the waiver wire. Good luck to all. It should be a wild way to end the season.

Friends don't let friends use Week 17 to determine fantasy football leagues.If yours does, start the discussion now to make changes for 2008.

 

[whole-show]

It is meaningless in terms of your drafted team and the team that got you to the championship game but even more representative of your fantasy skills as a scrambler and ability to craft a team from the best of your roster combined with the best from the waiver wire. Good luck to all. It should be a wild way to end the season.

Friends don't let friends use Week 17 to determine fantasy football leagues.If yours does, start the discussion now to make changes for 2008.

Never done it and never would. Agree it is the dumbest thing to do with so many players sitting.

 

[SSOG]

There are only two games that determine playoff spots (DAL-WAS, IND-TEN) and a third game that sets regular season history (NE-NYG). And even in these three games, teams on the other side are resting players.Last year you had the Chiefs beating the Jaguars and the Eagles beating the Giants to earn their way in (and the game meant something to the other team).

There are actually four games that have playoff implications, not two. If Washington and Tennessee win, they're in... but the Browns and Vikings are both playing meaningful games because in the event of a Tennessee/Washington loss, a win puts them into the playoffs.

 

[Master of Past and Present]

There are only two games that determine playoff spots (DAL-WAS, IND-TEN) and a third game that sets regular season history (NE-NYG). And even in these three games, teams on the other side are resting players.Last year you had the Chiefs beating the Jaguars and the Eagles beating the Giants to earn their way in (and the game meant something to the other team).

This isn't completely true. Unless you are assuming that Wash wins no matter what, the Minn and NO games are in play also. SD is in play since they would be fools not to want to get the 3 seed even though it seems Pitt might be foolish enough not to care. Not saying it is an action packed weekend but many of the gameds will be played at the same time (Minn and Wash for example) so a team will be playing hard even though a win might not get them in.

 

[SSOG]

It is meaningless in terms of your drafted team and the team that got you to the championship game but even more representative of your fantasy skills as a scrambler and ability to craft a team from the best of your roster combined with the best from the waiver wire. Good luck to all. It should be a wild way to end the season.

Friends don't let friends use Week 17 to determine fantasy football leagues.If yours does, start the discussion now to make changes for 2008.

Never done it and never would. Agree it is the dumbest thing to do with so many players sitting.

It's not that dumb. Both sides follow the same rules. Everyone knows months in advance what the situation is going to be, and the serious contenders who are smart start rostering talent early, just in case. I have a dominant team in a week 17 championship league, and I've been quietly adding players all season long in preparation for my march to the title. I've had Charlie Batch and Najeh Davenport rostered for about a month now (before FWP went down). The Manning owner has been hoarding backup QBs on the power teams for a while now, too (he's got Aaron Rogers, Jim Sorgi, and Matt Cassell locked up).As long as everyone plays by the same rules, then no rule is inherently unfair. Every rule is just an opportunity to showcase a different skill as you use it to your advantage. If anything, I think week 17 championships can show more skill (or a wider range of skill), since you need great roster-construction skills to make it there, and great waiver-wire, prediction, and WDIS skills to win it.Now, I wouldn't want to play EXCLUSIVELY (or even mostly) in week 17 championships, but one or two never hurt anyone. If you're like most people, at the very worst, it just gives you something to about when I roll over you.

 

[whole-show]

It is meaningless in terms of your drafted team and the team that got you to the championship game but even more representative of your fantasy skills as a scrambler and ability to craft a team from the best of your roster combined with the best from the waiver wire. Good luck to all. It should be a wild way to end the season.

Friends don't let friends use Week 17 to determine fantasy football leagues.If yours does, start the discussion now to make changes for 2008.

Never done it and never would. Agree it is the dumbest thing to do with so many players sitting.

It's not that dumb. Both sides follow the same rules. Everyone knows months in advance what the situation is going to be, and the serious contenders who are smart start rostering talent early, just in case. I have a dominant team in a week 17 championship league, and I've been quietly adding players all season long in preparation for my march to the title. I've had Charlie Batch and Najeh Davenport rostered for about a month now (before FWP went down). The Manning owner has been hoarding backup QBs on the power teams for a while now, too (he's got Aaron Rogers, Jim Sorgi, and Matt Cassell locked up).As long as everyone plays by the same rules, then no rule is inherently unfair. Every rule is just an opportunity to showcase a different skill as you use it to your advantage. If anything, I think week 17 championships can show more skill (or a wider range of skill), since you need great roster-construction skills to make it there, and great waiver-wire, prediction, and WDIS skills to win it.Now, I wouldn't want to play EXCLUSIVELY (or even mostly) in week 17 championships, but one or two never hurt anyone. If you're like most people, at the very worst, it just gives you something to about when I roll over you.

I agree with you that everyone follows the same rules and I congratulate you for stocking up before hand and making it to the championship and good luck. However the only way I see this making any sense is if you are allowed to have a pretty big roster for bench players, to stock up on these guys. If so then I agree it is alright and again good luck.Edited to add- Love the last statement

 

[JaxBill]

There are only two games that determine playoff spots (DAL-WAS, IND-TEN) and a third game that sets regular season history (NE-NYG). And even in these three games, teams on the other side are resting players.Last year you had the Chiefs beating the Jaguars and the Eagles beating the Giants to earn their way in (and the game meant something to the other team).

There are actually four games that have playoff implications, not two. If Washington and Tennessee win, they're in... but the Browns and Vikings are both playing meaningful games because in the event of a Tennessee/Washington loss, a win puts them into the playoffs.

I thought the Browns game ws meaningles since a TEN loss and a CLE loss would still put the Browns in because of conference record.I guess I should have included the Vikings and Saints games. But in all three NFC games, the opponent is less than interested. Sure, there's the Skins-Cowboys divisional rivalry, but the Cowboys will be resting people left and right.There's still no game this week where both teams are playing for their lives.Oh, and when I sterted this thread, I was talking about meaningless from a fan's perspective, not necessarily fantasy football wise. But, yes, I'm glad that both of my leagues have wrapped up already.

 

[Phurfur]

There are only two games that determine playoff spots (DAL-WAS, IND-TEN) and a third game that sets regular season history (NE-NYG). And even in these three games, teams on the other side are resting players.Last year you had the Chiefs beating the Jaguars and the Eagles beating the Giants to earn their way in (and the game meant something to the other team).

There are actually four games that have playoff implications, not two. If Washington and Tennessee win, they're in... but the Browns and Vikings are both playing meaningful games because in the event of a Tennessee/Washington loss, a win puts them into the playoffs.

The Browns game has no playoff implications.

 

[BaBastage]

It's not that dumb. Both sides follow the same rules. Everyone knows months in advance what the situation is going to be, and the serious contenders who are smart start rostering talent early, just in case. I have a dominant team in a week 17 championship league, and I've been quietly adding players all season long in preparation for my march to the title. I've had Charlie Batch and Najeh Davenport rostered for about a month now (before FWP went down). The Manning owner has been hoarding backup QBs on the power teams for a while now, too (he's got Aaron Rogers, Jim Sorgi, and Matt Cassell locked up).As long as everyone plays by the same rules, then no rule is inherently unfair. Every rule is just an opportunity to showcase a different skill as you use it to your advantage. If anything, I think week 17 championships can show more skill (or a wider range of skill), since you need great roster-construction skills to make it there, and great waiver-wire, prediction, and WDIS skills to win it.Now, I wouldn't want to play EXCLUSIVELY (or even mostly) in week 17 championships, but one or two never hurt anyone. If you're like most people, at the very worst, it just gives you something to about when I roll over you.

Finally, a great post in defense of week 17 championships. Every year, as soon as it looks like I have a playoff spot locked up, I start looking at the week 14-17 matchups and prepare accordingly. Sometimes this happens around week 8 or 9. (Or earlier, if you start out 6-0 or 6-1).I'm not saying one format is better than the other. Do what you want, and be happy with your league's choice, or change it. But don't sit on a high crown and poo-poo others who have a different viewpoint than you.Thank you SSOG!

 

[King of the Wolfies]

I love week 17 super bowls. Its when you prove your true managerial skills.

 

[Topes]

I love week 17 super bowls. Its when you prove your true managerial skills.

Roll the dice and drink some Pepto.Got some gut-wrenching decisions to make.

 

[Werker]

Have we ever had a poll in the Shark Pool to determine what percentage of leagues use Week 16 vs. Week 17? I seem to recall that there was one but I can't find it.

 

[supersecretid]

There are only two games that determine playoff spots (DAL-WAS, IND-TEN) and a third game that sets regular season history (NE-NYG). And even in these three games, teams on the other side are resting players.

Last year you had the Chiefs beating the Jaguars and the Eagles beating the Giants to earn their way in (and the game meant something to the other team).

There are actually four games that have playoff implications, not two. If Washington and Tennessee win, they're in... but the Browns and Vikings are both playing meaningful games because in the event of a Tennessee/Washington loss, a win puts them into the playoffs.

The Browns game very likely, but not certainly has no playoff implications.

FYP

 

[Intergalactic Kegger]

It is meaningless in terms of your drafted team and the team that got you to the championship game but even more representative of your fantasy skills as a scrambler and ability to craft a team from the best of your roster combined with the best from the waiver wire. Good luck to all. It should be a wild way to end the season.

Friends don't let friends use Week 17 to determine fantasy football leagues.If yours does, start the discussion now to make changes for 2008.

I love week 17 super bowls. Its when you prove your true managerial skills.

 

[jagbag]

There are only two games that determine playoff spots (DAL-WAS, IND-TEN) and a third game that sets regular season history (NE-NYG). And even in these three games, teams on the other side are resting players.

Last year you had the Chiefs beating the Jaguars and the Eagles beating the Giants to earn their way in (and the game meant something to the other team).

There are actually four games that have playoff implications, not two. If Washington and Tennessee win, they're in... but the Browns and Vikings are both playing meaningful games because in the event of a Tennessee/Washington loss, a win puts them into the playoffs.

The Browns game has no playoff implications.

From what I have read this is not entirely true.I believe if Tenn. TIES (highly unlikely) Cleveland must win to get in the playoffs.

Again, just what I've heard.

 

[Jeff Pasquino]

It is meaningless in terms of your drafted team and the team that got you to the championship game but even more representative of your fantasy skills as a scrambler and ability to craft a team from the best of your roster combined with the best from the waiver wire. Good luck to all. It should be a wild way to end the season.

Friends don't let friends use Week 17 to determine fantasy football leagues.If yours does, start the discussion now to make changes for 2008.

I love week 17 super bowls. Its when you prove your true managerial skills.

Sorry, but the ability to meander through the one-week wonders for Week 17 doesn't compare to navigating the prior 16 weeks successfully.If you believe that knowing how well Jim Sorgi, Charlie Batch or Chris Weinke will do this week is more important, well, I'm going to disagree.I think it is much better for you to know which guys are off the radar in Weeks 1-6 and get those guys that will prove out for several weeks against good competition.I'm sure that some of you will disagree, but I for one want the horses that got me to the playoffs to still be viable options for my championship week.I agree with the earlier poster that the only way I could possibly see this as ok would be to have an ultra-deep bench, but even then I really don't want a championship decided by TJ Duckett or Labrandon Toefield.

 

[bjabrad]

It is meaningless in terms of your drafted team and the team that got you to the championship game but even more representative of your fantasy skills as a scrambler and ability to craft a team from the best of your roster combined with the best from the waiver wire. Good luck to all. It should be a wild way to end the season.

Friends don't let friends use Week 17 to determine fantasy football leagues.If yours does, start the discussion now to make changes for 2008.

That's snobbish and not based in any short history reality. Most of my leagues used to throw away week 17 on the advice of sharks like yourself but over the last two years, week 17 has been a viable option. This year, week 17 is back to the old way of thinking due to some teams that have run away with their division and have nothing to play for. Keep an open mind because the whole "throw week 17 away" type of thinking is way overblown and is at best only 50% accurate.So do you want to shorten the season and the fun if there is a 50-50 chance that it happens? I don't!!!I actually prefer using week 17 because I think my scrambling ability is better than that of any teams that got lucky in the draft and are one shot wonders to be in the championship game in the first place. Week 17 gives me an edge.

 

[bjabrad]

It is meaningless in terms of your drafted team and the team that got you to the championship game but even more representative of your fantasy skills as a scrambler and ability to craft a team from the best of your roster combined with the best from the waiver wire. Good luck to all. It should be a wild way to end the season.

Friends don't let friends use Week 17 to determine fantasy football leagues.If yours does, start the discussion now to make changes for 2008.

I love week 17 super bowls. Its when you prove your true managerial skills.

Sorry, but the ability to meander through the one-week wonders for Week 17 doesn't compare to navigating the prior 16 weeks successfully.If you believe that knowing how well Jim Sorgi, Charlie Batch or Chris Weinke will do this week is more important, well, I'm going to disagree.I think it is much better for you to know which guys are off the radar in Weeks 1-6 and get those guys that will prove out for several weeks against good competition.I'm sure that some of you will disagree, but I for one want the horses that got me to the playoffs to still be viable options for my championship week.I agree with the earlier poster that the only way I could possibly see this as ok would be to have an ultra-deep bench, but even then I really don't want a championship decided by TJ Duckett or Labrandon Toefield.

If you really want to use all your roster and drafted players then maybe you should quit at week 14 just to be extra careful.You want to live in a perfect world when the real world is the hyper injury prone reality of the NFL.

 

[FUBAR]

If you really want to use all your roster and drafted players then maybe you should quit at week 14 just to be extra careful.You want to live in a perfect world when the real world is the hyper injury prone reality of the NFL.

Don't forget to skip weeks 4-10, wouldn't want to lose because your stud QB has a bye week.

 

[FUBAR]

It is meaningless in terms of your drafted team and the team that got you to the championship game but even more representative of your fantasy skills as a scrambler and ability to craft a team from the best of your roster combined with the best from the waiver wire. Good luck to all. It should be a wild way to end the season.

Friends don't let friends use Week 17 to determine fantasy football leagues.If yours does, start the discussion now to make changes for 2008.

I love week 17 super bowls. Its when you prove your true managerial skills.

Sorry, but the ability to meander through the one-week wonders for Week 17 doesn't compare to navigating the prior 16 weeks successfully.If you believe that knowing how well Jim Sorgi, Charlie Batch or Chris Weinke will do this week is more important, well, I'm going to disagree.I think it is much better for you to know which guys are off the radar in Weeks 1-6 and get those guys that will prove out for several weeks against good competition.I'm sure that some of you will disagree, but I for one want the horses that got me to the playoffs to still be viable options for my championship week.I agree with the earlier poster that the only way I could possibly see this as ok would be to have an ultra-deep bench, but even then I really don't want a championship decided by TJ Duckett or Labrandon Toefield.

This would be a great posting IF your league only played week 17. You have to win enough to get into the playoffs, "meander" your way through the opening rounds and then figure out week 17. If that isn't for you, cool. Just don't insult those of us who insist on using the whole season.

 

[Jeff Pasquino]

It is meaningless in terms of your drafted team and the team that got you to the championship game but even more representative of your fantasy skills as a scrambler and ability to craft a team from the best of your roster combined with the best from the waiver wire. Good luck to all. It should be a wild way to end the season.

Friends don't let friends use Week 17 to determine fantasy football leagues.If yours does, start the discussion now to make changes for 2008.

That's snobbish and not based in any short history reality. Most of my leagues used to throw away week 17 on the advice of sharks like yourself but over the last two years, week 17 has been a viable option. This year, week 17 is back to the old way of thinking due to some teams that have run away with their division and have nothing to play for. Keep an open mind because the whole "throw week 17 away" type of thinking is way overblown and is at best only 50% accurate.So do you want to shorten the season and the fun if there is a 50-50 chance that it happens? I don't!!!I actually prefer using week 17 because I think my scrambling ability is better than that of any teams that got lucky in the draft and are one shot wonders to be in the championship game in the first place. Week 17 gives me an edge.

I have an open mind, just fine, thanks.I can site several games from memory where players were pulled due to resting for the playoffs.Is that how you want to win or lose your championship?Last year, Philly pulled their starters in Week 17 after kickoff when Dallas lost their 1PM game.Another year the TB/PHI game was meaningless because the both teams actually had clinched - and would play each other in the first round of the playoffs, ironically.The Colts pulled starters in 2004 and 2005 due to clinching. Denver was 13-1 several years ago and rested in Week 17.There are tons of examples of players sitting out for coaching decisions. That's not my idea of fun - if it is for you, enjoy.

 

[TxBuckeye]

For all the posturing, what it really comes down to is, people want week 17 games so they can hope to get lucky and win with inferior talent and managerial skill. And that's fine if you are in a casual league with friends or whatever. If you are in a high value league, nope, no way.

 

[SSOG]

Sorry, but the ability to meander through the one-week wonders for Week 17 doesn't compare to navigating the prior 16 weeks successfully.If you believe that knowing how well Jim Sorgi, Charlie Batch or Chris Weinke will do this week is more important, well, I'm going to disagree.I think it is much better for you to know which guys are off the radar in Weeks 1-6 and get those guys that will prove out for several weeks against good competition.I'm sure that some of you will disagree, but I for one want the horses that got me to the playoffs to still be viable options for my championship week.I agree with the earlier poster that the only way I could possibly see this as ok would be to have an ultra-deep bench, but even then I really don't want a championship decided by TJ Duckett or Labrandon Toefield.

If you don't prefer week 17 games, then that's fine, but that's all it boils down to- preference. Everyone's welcome to their own preferences. As long as everyone in the league is beholden to the same rules, however, there is no rule that is inherently unfair. Whenever I see a rule that others are complaining about, I take a look at what exactly it is that is making those owners complain, and how exactly I can exploit that "flaw" to my advantage. I love playing in leagues with non-traditional or "unfair" rules because every rule is just one more chance for me to out-work, out-think, and out-manage my competition.

For all the posturing, what it really comes down to is, people want week 17 games so they can hope to get lucky and win with inferior talent and managerial skill. And that's fine if you are in a casual league with friends or whatever. If you are in a high value league, nope, no way.

Yes, I like my week 17 championship game because my team is so inferior that it's only posted the first or second highest score every single week for the past 8 weeks. I'm hoping to "luck" into a championship after destroying all of my league's total points records this season (all without the assistance of any New England Patriots, thankyouverymuch). Woe is me, how could I ever have won my league last week, despite the fact that my team posted the highest score of week 16 by a dozen points?Look, if you don't PREFER week 17 games, that's fine. That's your preference, and you're welcome to it. I don't PREFER them, either, but I certainly don't mind them and I like having one or two to keep me on my toes. Just can this whole snobbish arrogance. Maybe if you stopped looking at how a rule hurts you and start looking at how the rule hurts your competition, and how you can exploit that, then you'd realize that there are no bad rules (provided they apply to everyone equally), only bad players who don't know how to take advantage of rules.

 

[TxBuckeye]

For all the posturing, what it really comes down to is, people want week 17 games so they can hope to get lucky and win with inferior talent and managerial skill. And that's fine if you are in a casual league with friends or whatever. If you are in a high value league, nope, no way.

Yes, I like my week 17 championship game because my team is so inferior that it's only posted the first or second highest score every single week for the past 8 weeks. I'm hoping to "luck" into a championship after destroying all of my league's total points records this season (all without the assistance of any New England Patriots, thankyouverymuch). Woe is me, how could I ever have won my league last week, despite the fact that my team posted the highest score of week 16 by a dozen points?Look, if you don't PREFER week 17 games, that's fine. That's your preference, and you're welcome to it. I don't PREFER them, either, but I certainly don't mind them and I like having one or two to keep me on my toes. Just can this whole snobbish arrogance. Maybe if you stopped looking at how a rule hurts you and start looking at how the rule hurts your competition, and how you can exploit that, then you'd realize that there are no bad rules (provided they apply to everyone equally), only bad players who don't know how to take advantage of rules.

There is no "snobbish arrogance" in my post at all. I am simply stating facts. You had a great season, good for you. But I've been in both types of leagues too. Did I say I minded week 17 games? Nope. I'm just stating facts, people that like week 17 championships are people that normally are NOT the better managers in their leagues and hope they can get lucky and pull out a win against a superior manager based on all the folks sitting out that week. The fact you get so riled up about that point tells me you are the one bothered by that truth. I have my theory as to why that is, but that is irrelevant right now. But it doesn't change the simple truth. People who like week 17 championships are the ones that usually need the help.

 

[SSOG]

There is no "snobbish arrogance" in my post at all. I am simply stating facts. You had a great season, good for you. But I've been in both types of leagues too. Did I say I minded week 17 games? Nope. I'm just stating facts, people that like week 17 championships are people that normally are NOT the better managers in their leagues and hope they can get lucky and pull out a win against a superior manager based on all the folks sitting out that week. The fact you get so riled up about that point tells me you are the one bothered by that truth. I have my theory as to why that is, but that is irrelevant right now. But it doesn't change the simple truth. People who like week 17 championships are the ones that usually need the help.

Link? Can you provide any sort of support for your claim at all, or did you just pull it out of your hindquarters? You say it's a *FACT*, so it should be pretty easy to demonstrate the factual nature of your claims. Until you do so, however, it's nothing but an OPINION, (and, in my opinion, a very uneducated one).Now, I notice you tempered your claims. You said that people in 17-week leagues are NORMALLY hoping to get lucky. Previously, you implied that ANYONE who wants a week 17 league is hoping to get lucky. You're still an arrogant snob, but now you're very, very marginally less of one. If you dropped the pretend facts, acknowledged that you have no blessed clue what most people's inner motivations are for anything, and amended your claim to "some people" as opposed to "most people", then I will drop all charges of arrogant snobbery. Until such a time, I stand by my earlier claims.There are no bad rules, only bad owners who don't know how to take advantage of the rules.

 

[Reality Football]

This is why sharks shouldn't be commissioners.

I'd think the main concern of this discussion should be how you can make your league's rules best engender competitive balance...not over whether crappy owners or savvy owners are the ones who exploit the anomalies of Week 17.

 

[Keith R]

This is just one case study, but in my main league, we play the championship in the final week of the season and have done so since 1992. The higher seed has won 11 of 16 title games, or 68.8% of the time. In semifinal games, played the second-to-last week of the season, the higher seed has won 18 of 30 such games (we did not have semifinals in 1992, just a final), or 60.0% of the time.

Like I said, just one case study, but our history is that higher seeds (aka "better" teams) are more likely to prevail on Week 17 than Week 16. Hence, some evidence that the best teams tend to be the deepest teams and/or have the shrewdness to better compensate with the uniqueness of Week 17.

 

[TxBuckeye]

Now, I notice you tempered your claims. You said that people in 17-week leagues are NORMALLY hoping to get lucky. Previously, you implied that ANYONE who wants a week 17 league is hoping to get lucky. You're still an arrogant snob, but now you're very, very marginally less of one. If you dropped the pretend facts, acknowledged that you have no blessed clue what most people's inner motivations are for anything, and amended your claim to "some people" as opposed to "most people", then I will drop all charges of arrogant snobbery. Until such a time, I stand by my earlier claims.

Given your post. your claims of snobbery are probably the most blatant case of I have ever come across. You are the one that reeks of arrogance and have absolutely no clue about that of which you speak. You are so emotionally charged in your argument that you have no interest in hearing ANYTHING other than "I am right." So play your little "lucky league" rules and go on telling yourself what a pro FF manager you are. Apparently your perception of yourself in the FF realm is all you have. And yes, I stand by MY claim about you also. So there, nanny nanny boo boh yea, edited to add

 

[Revo]

It is meaningless in terms of your drafted team and the team that got you to the championship game but even more representative of your fantasy skills as a scrambler and ability to craft a team from the best of your roster combined with the best from the waiver wire. Good luck to all. It should be a wild way to end the season.

Friends don't let friends use Week 17 to determine fantasy football leagues.If yours does, start the discussion now to make changes for 2008.

That's snobbish and not based in any short history reality. Most of my leagues used to throw away week 17 on the advice of sharks like yourself but over the last two years, week 17 has been a viable option. This year, week 17 is back to the old way of thinking due to some teams that have run away with their division and have nothing to play for. Keep an open mind because the whole "throw week 17 away" type of thinking is way overblown and is at best only 50% accurate.So do you want to shorten the season and the fun if there is a 50-50 chance that it happens? I don't!!!I actually prefer using week 17 because I think my scrambling ability is better than that of any teams that got lucky in the draft and are one shot wonders to be in the championship game in the first place. Week 17 gives me an edge.

I have an open mind, just fine, thanks.I can site several games from memory where players were pulled due to resting for the playoffs.Is that how you want to win or lose your championship?Last year, Philly pulled their starters in Week 17 after kickoff when Dallas lost their 1PM game.Another year the TB/PHI game was meaningless because the both teams actually had clinched - and would play each other in the first round of the playoffs, ironically.The Colts pulled starters in 2004 and 2005 due to clinching. Denver was 13-1 several years ago and rested in Week 17.There are tons of examples of players sitting out for coaching decisions. That's not my idea of fun - if it is for you, enjoy.

Yeah, but it seems that teams pulling starters in Week 17 does not hold for every season. I can't recall any games from memory, but I know this because every year my two leagues have an internal argument/discussion regarding adding/scrapping Week 17. One year no teams pull starters; the next year many do. It seems like it's been an every other year thing.This year, my two leagues voted to have the championships in Wk 17 because last year proved to be relatively calm, and it was a disaster. And I will now exclaim: never again will I allow my leagues to do this.

 

[NJ OAK]

Now, I notice you tempered your claims. You said that people in 17-week leagues are NORMALLY hoping to get lucky. Previously, you implied that ANYONE who wants a week 17 league is hoping to get lucky. You're still an arrogant snob, but now you're very, very marginally less of one. If you dropped the pretend facts, acknowledged that you have no blessed clue what most people's inner motivations are for anything, and amended your claim to "some people" as opposed to "most people", then I will drop all charges of arrogant snobbery. Until such a time, I stand by my earlier claims.

Given your post. your claims of snobbery are probably the most blatant case of I have ever come across. You are the one that reeks of arrogance and have absolutely no clue about that of which you speak. You are so emotionally charged in your argument that you have no interest in hearing ANYTHING other than "I am right." So play your little "lucky league" rules and go on telling yourself what a pro FF manager you are. Apparently your perception of yourself in the FF realm is all you have. And yes, I stand by MY claim about you also. So there, nanny nanny boo boh yea, edited to add

Not much interest here, but seeing how you fancy yourself as such a grammar specialist, the correct spelling is, "yeah", not yea. That would be appropriate when you are cheering yourself for a great post, get it?