League rule change (1 Viewer)

[Jackstraw]

We had a problem with a trade last year. Priest holmes was out for the season and I dropped him. We apparently had a rule that you have to keep a keeper on your roster regardless of whether he is out for the season or not. Anyway it turned into a giant cluster and people were not happy. It was as much my fault as anybody's which I acknowledged and apologized for. I have also done well on a couple of trades while most of my league does not do a lot of trades At our rules meeting they elected to eliminate trading altogether. I have argued that trading is fundamnetal to fantasy football and I feel this is a horrible rule. Does anyone participate in a league that doesn't do trades? Is this as silly as I think it is or just sour grapes on my part? I plan on submitting any input as objective opinion.

 

[Sopranos]

I would find another league. Seems too drastic of a change for me. :X

 

[Pops]

I have to agree, this is pretty extreme. Personally, I would be gone and find another league.

 

[BlueOnion]

I actually prefer to only play in no-trade leagues because trading changes the dynamics of the game. When leaving the draft, the team that was able to evaluate and project stats will be the front runner; as soon as trades start coming up the front runner will be the guy who can best exploit the weaker players. Some people like this and some leagues may actually have owners of equal ability.But most leagues I have played in where trading is allowed, the winner has been the one to pull off the most lop-sided trade.

 

[streamkeeper]

I would not play in a league without trades either. It is simply too big a part of the game. It is also a part I enjoy and utilize. I think it is a viable tactic, but only with constraints.

 

[John 14:6]

Trading is as much part of the game as the draft and free agency. Owners should have to make good decisions all year long.

 

[BlueOnion]

Trading is as much part of the game as the draft and free agency. Owners should have to make good decisions all year long.

I think it depends on the league. Any time I play in a league which allows trades, I find the weakest owner and exploit him for as much talent as I possibly can, because I know the other good owners are doing the same thing.

 

[John 14:6]

Trading is as much part of the game as the draft and free agency.  Owners should have to make good decisions all year long.

I think it depends on the league. Any time I play in a league which allows trades, I find the weakest owner and exploit him for as much talent as I possibly can, because I know the other good owners are doing the same thing.

Trading shouldn't be removed just because someone's not as good at it as others in the league. The guy should learn from his mistakes and just stop trading.

 

[BlueOnion]

Trading shouldn't be removed just because someone's no good at it. The guy should learn from his mistakes and just stop trading.

Every league has a weakest link, but this doesn't imply the weakest link is no good at it, he is just not as good at it as others in the league.

 

[John 14:6]

Trading shouldn't be removed just because someone's not as good at it as others in the league.  The guy should learn from his mistakes and just stop trading.

Every league has a weakest link, but this doesn't imply the weakest link is no good at it, he is just not as good at it as others in the league.

Fixed.

 

[KKrew]

I actually prefer to only play in no-trade leagues because trading changes the dynamics of the game. When leaving the draft, the team that was able to evaluate and project stats will be the front runner; as soon as trades start coming up the front runner will be the guy who can best exploit the weaker players. Some people like this and some leagues may actually have owners of equal ability.

But most leagues I have played in where trading is allowed, the winner has been the one to pull off the most lop-sided trade.

This reasonably applies to redraft leagues only. Trading is required for any form of keeper league - IMHO.

 

[stevec]

I'd bail on that league ASAP - it doesn't fit what you want. If you screw up a rule, and you fix it, it's dealt with - dropping an IR player.Luck is big in this league:1. IR Players can't be released.2. Players now cannot be traded.The most important thing to forecasting the league is now injuries, since they decrease your roster spots. Even worse, it's a keeper league, so you now want to forecast whose going to be hurt in 2007 at the 2006 draft to draft better. Can you at least cut a guy who was on IR during the off season keeper period?

 

[houndirish]

The first league I ever played in didn't allow trades. It was redraft style with IDP's. We're also limited to 8 roster moves per year. It really made you carefully consider the worth and upside of any player you spent a move on. I personally like trade leagues better but I will say that in that league it likely worked out for the best that trades weren't allowed. We had a lot of dumbasses and the Commish wasn't too strong either. I could see where trades would've negatively effected that league.That being said, I still prefer having trades versus not, and I consider myself a much stronger drafter than trader.

 

[trader jake]

Does anyone participate in a league that doesn't do trades? Is this as silly as I think it is or just sour grapes on my part? I plan on submitting any input as objective opinion.

do a search with topics started by JohnnyU. he has covered the pros and cons of this topic very well. a post a few months back (not the one from this past week) should be especially helpful. good luck...it sounds like you'll need it with that group

 

[Challenge Everything]

This is complete sour grapes if you quit. Trading during the year is for people who cannot evaluate talent. You draft your team and that is your team. If your team suffers from injuries then chalk it up to an unfortunate year. Anybody who wins leagues because of a trade, in my mind, has that championship tarnished. Real players dont trade during the year.

 

[John 14:6]

This is complete sour grapes if you quit. Trading during the year is for people who cannot evaluate talent. You draft your team and that is your team. If your team suffers from injuries then chalk it up to an unfortunate year. Anybody who wins leagues because of a trade, in my mind, has that championship tarnished.

Real players dont trade during the year.

Trading also requires evaluating talent.

 

[Challenge Everything]

This is complete sour grapes if you quit.  Trading during the year is for people who cannot evaluate talent.  You draft your team and that is your team.  If your team suffers from injuries then chalk it up to an unfortunate year.  Anybody who wins leagues because of a trade, in my mind, has that championship tarnished. 

Real players dont trade during the year.

Trading also requires evaluating talent.

Trading during the year = many other factors that result in flawed trades... i.e. records of both teams at the time, needs due to bad drafting, needs due to injury, possible depth, possible draft pick implications whatever and whatever.Trading before season have a 0-0 record and similar circumstances with each team involved... trading during the season flawed one way or the other.

 

[John 14:6]

Trading during the year = many other factors that result in flawed trades... i.e. records of both teams at the time, needs due to bad drafting, needs due to injury, possible depth, possible draft pick implications whatever and whatever.

Trading before season have a 0-0 record and similar circumstances with each team involved... trading during the season flawed one way or the other.

Those aren't flaws. It's playing the game and adjusting to situations as the season goes. You don't set your line-up for every week before the season starts.

 

[thatguy]

Most ######ed rule change I can imagine. Once the draft is over, wheeling and dealing is the only thing that really keeps me interested.

 

[BlueOnion]

Those aren't flaws. It's playing the game and adjusting to situations as the season goes. You don't set your line-up for every week before the season starts.

For instance, last season I can understand if a 2-5 team traded a starter (Marvin Harrison) to a 7-0 team for two backup players like (TJ Duckett & Nate Burleson). A case can be made for the trade helping both teams, but the 7-0 team who trades two backups for another blue chip player suddenly gets a significant leg up on the other 6-1 and 5-2 teams in the league.Sure it is fun to wheel and deal, but it does throw off the competitive balance at the top of the league. Some people like this and some people don't.

 

[John 14:6]

For instance, last season I can understand if a 2-5 team traded a starter (Marvin Harrison) to a 7-0 team for two backup players like (TJ Duckett & Nate Burleson). A case can be made for the trade helping both teams, but the 7-0 team who trades two backups for another blue chip player suddenly gets a significant leg up on the other 6-1 and 5-2 teams in the league.

Sure it is fun to wheel and deal, but it does throw off the competitive balance at the top of the league. Some people like this and some people don't.

It doesn't throw off the competitive balance, it helps it. The owners that are more active and more knowledgable make good trades to improve their teams. In your example, the other 6-1 and 5-2 teams have only themselves to blame for not trying to make trades to improve their teams.Of course I'm only talking about fair trades. Leagues should have rules in place to overturn collusion.

 

[BlueOnion]

It doesn't throw off the competitive balance, it helps it. The owners that are more active and more knowledgable make good trades to improve their teams. In your example, the other 6-1 and 5-2 teams have only themselves to blame for not trying to make trades to improve their teams.

Of course I'm only talking about fair trades. Leagues should have rules in place to overturn collusion.

Not sure if I would want the balance of power influenced by somebody sitting on their computer all day watching injury reports and sending out a plethora of fair (but one sided) trades all day.Everybody is different. For myself and my friends we like to use Fantasy Football as a measurement of how well we can project players prior to the season starting. Allowing trades circumvents this for us for the reasons mentioned above.

 

[thayman]

It depends on your preference......I love trading and talking about trading, keeps the league interesting all year. I can see how a no trade rule would be fun for a littl while, but way too much luck for my taste. It all comes down to what team has the fewest injuries.If I was you I'd find another league, maybe stick in this one in addition to another league. I don't think you have sour grapes, if you dont like the rules your league is passing, no problem in my opinion leaving. If I was in yoru league and we passed some rules you didn't like, and wanted to leave. I'd let you, better than having a disgruntled owner that might loose complete intrest in setting his lineup, or mainting his team during the year.

 

[John 14:6]

Not sure if I would want the balance of power influenced by somebody sitting on their computer all day watching injury reports and sending out a plethora of fair (but one sided) trades all day.

If you have people accepting one-sided trades the problem is with those players, not the rules. It's just the better fantasy players doing better at the game.These same people "sitting on their computer all day watching injury reports" do the same thing before the draft. The better players are going be more prepared, are going to draft better, and are going to trade better. Just because some people are better at one aspect of fantasy football than others doesn't mean it's an unfair competitive balance. It's like not allowing passing in real football because one team is better at it and does it more than the other.

Everybody is different.  For myself and my friends we like to use Fantasy Football as a measurement of how well we can project players prior to the season starting.  Allowing trades circumvents this for us for the reasons mentioned above.

I guess if that's what you like. I prefer fantasy football to be a dynamic game, one where you have to participate and adjust throughout the season.Do you and your friends set your starting line-ups for every week before the season even starts as well? I realize that sounds like a smart-alec question (I don't mean for it to), but it seems like the same mentality as you're describing and I think it's somewhat legitimate.

 

[BlueOnion]

If you have people accepting one-sided trades the problem is with those players, not the rules. It's just the better fantasy players doing better at the game.

That is the thing, one-sided is so subjective. On one hand, one of the better teams improves his team significantly while the same option (whether injuries and what not) is not available to other good teams.However, the one sided trade also helps out the bad team of the two because he picks up two immediate starters to help him make a playoff push.

Lets say for instance you and I are both 7-0 and have a marginal quarterback. Somebody at 2-5 wants to make a playoff push and trade Peyton Manning. We both make similar offers but the 2-5 takes my offer because he thinks the Jaguars have a soft schedule over the next 3 weeks and feels your offer of Tom Brady is inferior to my offer of Byron Leftwich. (We both have a marginal WR and RB involved).

So now we are both 7-0 and streaking to the playoffs and I just upgraded my quarterback from Byron Leftwich to Peyton Manning; in large part because the 2-5 team felt Byron held more value to him than Tom Brady.

These are the scenarios that I hate to see during my fantasy football season.

 

[John 14:6]

That is the thing, one-sided is so subjective. On one hand, one of the better teams improves his team significantly while the same option (whether injuries and what not) is not available to other good teams.

Usually you have to draft well to have the options to make trades. It still comes down to how well you draft and free agent moves. I don't see how trades, among good fantasy football players, is any different.

However, the one sided trade also helps out the bad team of the two because he picks up two immediate starters to help him make a playoff push.

If it helps out the bad team it's not really one-sided.

Lets say for instance you and I are both 7-0 and have a marginal quarterback. Somebody at 2-5 wants to make a playoff push and trade Peyton Manning. We both make similar offers but the 2-5 takes my offer because he thinks the Jaguars have a soft schedule over the next 3 weeks and feels your offer of Tom Brady is inferior to my offer of Byron Leftwich. (We both have a marginal WR and RB involved).

So now we are both 7-0 and streaking to the playoffs and I just upgraded my quarterback from Byron Leftwich to Peyton Manning; in large part because the 2-5 team felt Byron held more value to him than Tom Brady.

These are the scenarios that I hate to see during my fantasy football season.

I don't see the problem. I should have tried to sweeten my deal but now I can go and see what else is out there.I actually did trade for Peyton last year before our deadline. Someone else then traded for McNabb. I made a move and he made a move to help counter it.

If the other person is trading away Manning, he will get something in return to improve his team. So that means you will have to give up something substantial. In order for you to do that and still have a good team would mean you drafted well. (Unless the 2-5 team isn't getting anything good in return, then it's once again the fault of the player, not the rule.) You have to do well at all aspects to succeed in fantasy football.

 

[thayman]

If you have people accepting one-sided trades the problem is with those players, not the rules.  It's just the better fantasy players doing better at the game.

That is the thing, one-sided is so subjective. On one hand, one of the better teams improves his team significantly while the same option (whether injuries and what not) is not available to other good teams.However, the one sided trade also helps out the bad team of the two because he picks up two immediate starters to help him make a playoff push.

Lets say for instance you and I are both 7-0 and have a marginal quarterback. Somebody at 2-5 wants to make a playoff push and trade Peyton Manning. We both make similar offers but the 2-5 takes my offer because he thinks the Jaguars have a soft schedule over the next 3 weeks and feels your offer of Tom Brady is inferior to my offer of Byron Leftwich. (We both have a marginal WR and RB involved).

So now we are both 7-0 and streaking to the playoffs and I just upgraded my quarterback from Byron Leftwich to Peyton Manning; in large part because the 2-5 team felt Byron held more value to him than Tom Brady.

These are the scenarios that I hate to see during my fantasy football season.

I undertand your argument, but that is also why you have trade deadlines and such. It sucks to get burned like this, but if your worried about having the other 7-0 team pick up Manning, then perhaps you need to offer a bit more, other than Brady. In keeper leagues trading can keep it interesting all year, if I know I'm out for the year, I can start trading some guys I know can't help me this year for some that can next year. It depends on your preference and what you enjoy the most about FF. That is why there are so many different leagues, if the rules in your league change, there is always a different leauge with rules more to your taste.

 

[BlueOnion]

I don't see the problem. I should have tried to sweeten my deal but now I can go and see what else is out there.

I actually did trade for Peyton last year before our deadline. Someone else then traded for McNabb. I made a move and he made a move to help counter it.

If the other person is trading away Manning, he will get something in return to improve his team. So that means you will have to give up something substantial. In order for you to do that and still have a good team would mean you drafted well. (Unless the 2-5 team isn't getting anything good in return, then it's once again the fault of the player, not the rule.) You have to do well at all aspects to succeed in fantasy football.

But again, the competitive balance of the league hinches on a subjective matter; what is substantial to one person may not be substantial to another person. So either you start asking your commish or a committee to define substantial on a per trade basis. But at which point, you are no longer letting owners run their team as they see fit.As mentioned, it depends on what you want. Avoiding these subjective calls in our big money league is a top priority, so we did away with trades. Although we lose the option of 'trading', this does not take take away value from the league, our owners stay tuned in to the end regardless.

 

[John 14:6]

But again, the competitive balance of the league hinches on a subjective matter; what is substantial to one person may not be substantial to another person.  So either you start asking your commish or a committee to define substantial on a per trade basis.  But at which point, you are no longer letting owners run their team as they see fit.

As mentioned, it depends on what you want.  Avoiding these subjective calls in our big money league is a top priority, so we did away with trades.  Although we lose the option of 'trading', this does not take take away value from the league, our owners stay tuned in to the end regardless.

I don't see how it's any more "subjective" than preseason rankings. For the draft, you have to evaluate talent, opportunity, etc. for weeks 1-16 or 17. After the first week, you have to make evaluations for weeks 2-16 or 17 for free agency and trades. Then you have to evaluate for weeks 3-16 or 17. And when you set your line-up you have to make evaluations every week.All other aspects of fantasy football have to do with the owners making evaluations and adjusting their rosters. I don't see why trading is any more "subjective".

 

[Bri]

Does anyone participate in a league that doesn't do trades? Is this as silly as I think it is or just sour grapes on my part? I plan on submitting any input as objective opinion.

I have played in leagues where guys don't trade yet the rules permit it. There's been other threads around here where we vent about these type leagues. What you maybe need to realize is suppose you get them to reinstate that trades are allowed, they still might not actually trade.

 

[BlueOnion]

All other aspects of fantasy football have to do with the owners making evaluations and adjusting their rosters. I don't see why trading is any more "subjective".

Everything has to do with assembling a team and acquiring players. Up to and through the draft, every owner starts with the same resources and has the same opportunity to acquire each guy.However, after the draft is completed each owner has a unique set of assets and unique assessment of their assets as well as other people's assets. Still, if you are a 'good' (however one would define that) fantasy football owner, you have nothing to worry about. However, the owners lower on the food chain (per say) are the pivotal owners here because it is 'where' there assets end up. This is where I have a problem with trades, the owner with the most influence on the outcome of the league is the owner 'lower on the food chain'.

 

[John 14:6]

Everything has to do with assembling a team and acquiring players.  Up to and through the draft, every owner starts with the same resources and has the same opportunity to acquire each guy.

However, after the draft is completed each owner has a unique set of assets and unique assessment of their assets as well as other people's assets.  Still, if you are a 'good' (however one would define that) fantasy football owner, you have nothing to worry about.  However, the owners lower on the food chain (per say) are the pivotal owners here because it is 'where' there assets end up.  This is where I have a problem with trades, the owner with the most influence on the outcome of the league is the owner 'lower on the food chain'.

Again it sounds like to me the problem is with the owners, not the rules. If you have a good league with good owners you don't have to worry about the have-nots helping out the better teams. And if you put a trade deadline in place, like thayman mentioned, you even further reduce that risk.Otherwise this sounds like punishing owners that are good at making trades. Sports and games all have several different aspects that need to be taken into account throughout the duration. Trading is just part of fantasy football and if you or other owners aren't as good at it as others that doesn't make it a bad rule. If some owners are worse at preseason evaluation, should you wait until the middle of the season to hold your draft?

 

[stevec]

The key is to find leagues that you enjoy playing in - with rules that you like.I wouldn't want to play in the no trade, must keep IR players legue, because I know that I'm going to get bitten by injuries. I've had the misfortune of going into a season with "empty" as my starting QB, because both guys I drafted got hurt pre-season post-draft. If one had to carry those guys all year, I'd have no idea how to come back from that.

 

[BlueOnion]

Again it sounds like to me the problem is with the owners, not the rules.

'Bad Owners' is a very subjective word as well, not all owners who are different from you are necessarily bad.

 

[John 14:6]

Again it sounds like to me the problem is with the owners, not the rules.

'Bad Owners' is a very subjective word as well, not all owners who are different from you are necessarily bad.

I never said they were.

 

[BlueOnion]

Again it sounds like to me the problem is with the owners, not the rules.

'Bad Owners' is a very subjective word as well, not all owners who are different from you are necessarily bad.

I never said they were.

Thats my point. I could do everything in my power to win a league, but than have the balance of power shifted because an owner I view as a 'bad owner' makes a decision he thinks is in the best interest of his team and pushes another team ahead of mine. I just don't like other owners dictated the fate of my team relative to the competition.

 

[diesel7982]

Trading represents everything that is wrong with FF. Id actually play draft leagues if i could find one with no trading.

 

[John 14:6]

Thats my point. I could do everything in my power to win a league, but than have the balance of power shifted because an owner I view as a 'bad owner' makes a decision he thinks is in the best interest of his team and pushes another team ahead of mine. I just don't like other owners dictated the fate of my team relative to the competition.

In that case you did not do everything in your power to win your league. The team that goes ahead of yours did. If the 'bad owner' is making moves that are in the best interest of his team and you're stagnant, perhaps he's not that 'bad' of an owner.If you're in a league with people you view as 'bad owners' and you don't like how they affect the league and your team, you should find a new league. There are other ways owners can affect other teams other than trades, like in the draft and in free agency.

I think free agency would really apply. If you have a waiver process that uses teams' records, usually the 'bad owners' will be picking first. Now since they're 'bad owners' they may make bad free agent picks. Then the best free agents will fall to the good owners, and that can throw off the 'competitive balance' among the good owners. Do you use free agency in your leagues?

 

[BlueOnion]

In that case you did not do everything in your power to win your league. The team that goes ahead of yours did. If the 'bad owner' is making moves that are in the best interest of his team and you're stagnant, perhaps he's not that 'bad' of an owner.

Not sure I follow here. I offer Player A (P. Manning) and Player B (Chad Johnson) for Player C (Shaun Alexander). The owner of Player C says 'that is not enough' and then turns around and trades Shaun Alexander for Kyle Boller and Nate Burleson.Why am I to be punished because one owner thinks Boller & Burleson > Manning & Johnson? And who am I to say Manning & Johnson > Boller & Burleson?

For me, allowing trades is only appealing to those who want to emulate real football. My sisters did something similar when they were younger, except they called it playing house.

It is just not my cup of tea.

 

[John 14:6]

Not sure I follow here.  I offer Player A (P. Manning) and Player B (Chad Johnson) for Player C (Shaun Alexander).  The owner of Player C says 'that is not enough' and then turns around and trades Shaun Alexander for Kyle Boller and Nate Burleson.

Why am I to be punished because one owner thinks Boller & Burleson > Manning & Johnson?  And who am I to say Manning & Johnson > Boller & Burleson?

It's not the rule of trading that's the problem here. It's the owner that is making a bad decision. I wouldn't play in a league with owners that make such bad trades.

For me, allowing trades is only appealing to those who want to emulate real football.

So you don't want to emulate real football?

 

[BlueOnion]

Not sure I follow here.  I offer Player A (P. Manning) and Player B (Chad Johnson) for Player C (Shaun Alexander).  The owner of Player C says 'that is not enough' and then turns around and trades Shaun Alexander for Kyle Boller and Nate Burleson.

Why am I to be punished because one owner thinks Boller & Burleson > Manning & Johnson?  And who am I to say Manning & Johnson > Boller & Burleson?

It's not the rule of trading that's the problem here. It's the owner that is making a bad decision. I wouldn't play in a league with owners that make such bad trades.

That is the point I have been trying to make. You only want to partake in trading leagues in which other owners share your own view on what players are worth. As soon as somebody breaks away from the mold, they are an idiot in your mind. Maybe the guy has a crystal ball and can predict injuries; you have to let owners run their team.

For me, allowing trades is only appealing to those who want to emulate real football.

So you don't want to emulate real football?

Absolutely not. Maybe I am cut from the fantasy baseball cloth in which my buddies and are more interested in seeing who can better project player's stats. Trying to emulate 'real' football by playing 'fantasy' football seems immature to me. I like stats, my friends like stats and we like to see who is better at projecting stats.Now I will be the first to say, if I am in a league that is established to 'be fun', then I don't mind trading.

 

[John 14:6]

That is the point I have been trying to make.  You only want to partake in trading leagues in which other owners share your own view on what players are worth.  As soon as somebody breaks away from the mold, they are an idiot in your mind.  Maybe the guy has a crystal ball and can predict injuries; you have to let owners run their team.

How are you any less guilty by only participating in leagues that outlaw trading so teams can't make trades that, in your mind, make them idiots?If any collusive trade did happen in my leagues, they would veto it. But they would have to be REALLY bad. All the owners are allowed to run their teams.

Trying to emulate 'real' football by playing 'fantasy' football seems immature to me.

I think it's fun. If that makes me immature, so be it.

 

[BlueOnion]

That is the point I have been trying to make.  You only want to partake in trading leagues in which other owners share your own view on what players are worth.  As soon as somebody breaks away from the mold, they are an idiot in your mind.  Maybe the guy has a crystal ball and can predict injuries; you have to let owners run their team.

How are you any less guilty by only participating in leagues that outlaw trading so teams can't make trades that, in your mind, make them idiots?

Because I only view Fantasy Football as a vehicle to score stat projections.

 

[John 14:6]

That is the point I have been trying to make.  You only want to partake in trading leagues in which other owners share your own view on what players are worth.  As soon as somebody breaks away from the mold, they are an idiot in your mind.  Maybe the guy has a crystal ball and can predict injuries; you have to let owners run their team.

How are you any less guilty by only participating in leagues that outlaw trading so teams can't make trades that, in your mind, make them idiots?

Because I only view Fantasy Football as a vehicle to score stat projections.

That's fine if that's what's fun for you. So do you only participate in total points leagues?I think it's important to be able to predict stats throughout the season. With every trade, you're predicting that the players you get in return will benefit your team more than the players you're giving up.

 

[BlueOnion]

That is the point I have been trying to make.  You only want to partake in trading leagues in which other owners share your own view on what players are worth.  As soon as somebody breaks away from the mold, they are an idiot in your mind.  Maybe the guy has a crystal ball and can predict injuries; you have to let owners run their team.

How are you any less guilty by only participating in leagues that outlaw trading so teams can't make trades that, in your mind, make them idiots?

Because I only view Fantasy Football as a vehicle to score stat projections.

That's fine if that's what's fun for you. So do you only participate in total points leagues?

For the most part, yes. Again, unless it is a 'fun only' league with some co-workers or my wife's family.

 

[John 14:6]

That's fine if that's what's fun for you. So do you only participate in total points leagues?

For the most part, yes. Again, unless it is a 'fun only' league with some co-workers or my wife's family.

That's cool. [hijack]You live in Minnesota, right? We're talking about puting together a MN FBG league. None of the specific's are done yet, but I'm guessing it'll be head-to-head with trading, hopefully just for fun. Click the link in my sig if you're interested [/hijack]

 

[BlueOnion]

That's fine if that's what's fun for you.  So do you only participate in total points leagues?

For the most part, yes. Again, unless it is a 'fun only' league with some co-workers or my wife's family.

That's cool. [hijack]You live in Minnesota, right? We're talking about puting together a MN FBG league. None of the specific's are done yet, but I'm guessing it'll be head-to-head with trading, hopefully just for fun. Click the link in my sig if you're interested [/hijack]

I am very grateful for the invite, I have seen you post about it and would really like to partake as I am from Minnesota...but I live in New Jersey. :(

 

[John 14:6]

I am very grateful for the invite, I have seen you post about it and would really like to partake as I am from Minnesota...but I live in New Jersey. :(

:(

 

[Challenge Everything]

I need a smilie or emoticon that shows Calvin (from Calvin and Hobbes) peeing on a sign that says "Trades Welcome Here." I would be represented by Calvin and of course trading leagues would be represented by the sign. I would make this into a bumper sticker and put it on my car too if they had it.

 

[glock]

This is complete sour grapes if you quit. Trading during the year is for people who cannot evaluate talent. You draft your team and that is your team. If your team suffers from injuries then chalk it up to an unfortunate year. Anybody who wins leagues because of a trade, in my mind, has that championship tarnished.

Real players dont trade during the year.