What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Serious Biz Dynasty - Eephus is year 18 champion - League is full for 2026 (5 Viewers)

The average age of protected players increased this year from 26.3 to 26.6 years old with only three teams getting younger.

The board didn't like the copy and paste of the detailed breakdown but it's on the last tab of the draft sheet.
 
The average age of protected players increased this year from 26.3 to 26.6 years old with only three teams getting younger.

The board didn't like the copy and paste of the detailed breakdown but it's on the last tab of the draft sheet.
I went from second oldest in 2023, to third youngest in 2025. I should be able to figure out if that was the right move by the middle of next year at the latest.
 
While everybody is here and we're actually organized for once, please cast votes on proposed season 19 rule changes.

1. Add 3 IL slots in-season only

2. Vary the number of protected roster spots for the minidraft based on previous season's standings (Pos #1-3 protect 24, #4-6 protect 25, #7-9 protect 26, #10-12 protect 27)
 
I'm against the IL slots because it'll deplete the FA pool, promote stashing and screw up off-season rosters.

I'm OK with the varying protected spots but I doubt it will make any significant difference on competitive balance.
 
Or we may pick in the morning. Greedy wasn't expecting to start and he left his list at work. If we can pick sooner we will, but definitely by 9am et tomorrow at the latest.
 
While everybody is here and we're actually organized for once, please cast votes on proposed season 19 rule changes.

1. Add 3 IL slots in-season only

2. Vary the number of protected roster spots for the minidraft based on previous season's standings (Pos #1-3 protect 24, #4-6 protect 25, #7-9 protect 26, #10-12 protect 27)
Yes
Yes
 
I'm against the IL slots because it'll deplete the FA pool, promote stashing and screw up off-season rosters.
Are you trying to torpedo me mang? I would argue it's already depleted. This would allow a team to try and compete in a category they may not otherwise if they have a bunch of hurt guys.
 
I like the idea of varying the protected lists, but I'd rather see 1-3 not drop from 25 to 24. I get giving the backend teams a shot by allowing an extra spot or two, but the top teams deserve their 25, IMO. So, I'm a yes, but would prefer a slight change.

I'm a no on 3 IL spots. I'd be a yes on 1 or 2, FWIW.
 
I like the idea of varying the protected lists, but I'd rather see 1-3 not drop from 25 to 24. I get giving the backend teams a shot by allowing an extra spot or two, but the top teams deserve their 25, IMO. So, I'm a yes, but would prefer a slight change.

I'm a no on 3 IL spots. I'd be a yes on 1 or 2, FWIW.

Fair points. If anybody agrees we can kick the ideas around some more because we have all year to decide. I'm sure Pik would like more IL slots.
 
Agree with not dropping from 25 to 24 for top dogs.

We just expanded rosters to 40 recently and that is more than enough IMO. It puts pressure on good teams to drop hurt guys, and presents an opportunity for the bottom feeders who might have more patience to sit on an injured player (I did this with de Grom). I'm cool with 3IL spots if rooster sizes go back to 35. glllllllllllllllllllllll
 
We started off with 38 man rosters and 1 IL slot. CBS did an inconsistent job of tracking minor league injuries so we ditched the IL slot in favor of a regular one. I think we went from 39 to 40 when we dropped from 13 teams to 12.
 
No and yes.

Game limits should help with injuries. IMO 40 is plenty to still be fielding full lineups even in an injury crisis. It can get hard to keep up in the game spamming race, but that won’t be an issue anymore.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top