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!
The only one for me was Guerendo. I went RB heavy though because that is where value fell to me in the draft. I have Aaron Jones, Walker, Jacobs, and also took Mostert/Wright (who didn't help). I had Austime at times, Marshawn Lloyd for awhile (drafted).
Isaac Guerendo was picked up three months ago and sits on a dead team.
I considered it strongly. He was a free add at the time.
I think the "matches" are just a placeholder so your points can be tabulated by Sleeper. H2H is mute point now it's just what you score.
The matches are there as a result of the way the leagues were set up needing each week to play out up until 17.
oh crap of course. Yeah I picked him up everywhere - didn't win the bid in this one.
I was going to say Tracy but then looked and saw that I drafted him in the 16th round.
You can give my Shark Pool spot away and put me in the league with 3 auto drafters and half the owners not using the WW budget.
Oh @BassNBrew what would I do without you.
I was like nah I want a SP Home League but for the contest, the fewer SP posters the better. We are the cream of the crop! Haha
What percentage of SP regulars made the cut?
A shark pool league would be fun, as several people in my league this season (#29?) didn't really play after about mid-year (perhaps that's why I was undefeated in my last 7 games). The other owners in our league stayed engaged, and we're all working with our league winner to help in the playoffs (advice when asked).
Cheaters
His profile avatar checks out for that.
His profile avatar checks out for that.
It was cold in Columbus last night.His profile avatar checks out for that.
Not sure if I'm a normal poster, but a good couple of weeks has me in the top 5 for the moment.
I was up in 18th or so before the SNF game, and only had the Dallas D going and dropped a bit. Don't have anyone going tonight, so I expect to drop further in the final weekly standings. I'm currently over 60 pts out of the top spot so I know i have no chance, but hoping to at least make the final week. Been a fun contest.
Yep, regular season weekly average score plus Week 15, 16, and 17 scores...highest total of those who make the final cut this week takes the title.
Week 17 (Round 3, finals)
What @Joey Wright said.
I picked up Hunt and rode him for half the season.
I disagree with your decision here @Joey Wright . I'm not a fan of fantasy league hosting sites determining what a league allows or does not allow. Actual written rules trump whatever a host site has set by default.
I disagree with your decision here @Joey Wright . I'm not a fan of fantasy league hosting sites determining what a league allows or does not allow. Actual written rules trump whatever a host site has set by default.
Example: We were told (at the very beginning of the season) that trades were not allowed in this league. Even though Sleeper gave you, the commish, no option to turn "off" the ability to trade. It was a written rule we were to abide by, lest we get tossed from the Bowl. Loophole closed. I thought this issue was handled well.
The league rules state that we are permitted 9 starter slots and 9 bench slots on our teams. That is it. That should be enough to treat this issue exactly the same as the trading issue. Just because the default settings of Sleeper allows this hoarding of players on bench slots to occur does not mean it should be allowed to occur at all in the FBG Bowl.
Why is this Sleeper setting being permitted to be abused? Okay, it's a loophole. So what? I am pretty sure the rules did not state that we were permitted 9 starter slots and 9 bench slots (except when loopholes are found and exploited.)
Rules are rules. Default settings on a hosting site are not rules. Nor should they be permitted to be exploited as such. The rules currently in place for the 2024 FBG Bowl are clear. 9 starters, 9 bench. That is it.
So, anyone doing this has a "legal" roster on Sleeper but, it is not legal in the FBG Bowl and should be dealt with accordingly. Especially when it is playoff time, final week or not. Any roster currently holding players on more than 9 bench slots needs to be fixed immediately. All non-playoff teams are locked so the illegal roster is a playoff team that has not been eliminated yet.
I am not suggesting you punish the offender of roster limits. I am suggesting it can be handled differently. Get the roster(s) into compliance. Roster limits are roster limits for a reason. There's also the tricky thing about it being in the rules.
Thanks for hearing me out. You've done a fantastic job this year with this huge undertaking. I am sure next year will be even better and I so very much look forward to participating again.
Happy Holidays and Merry New Year!!!
Sorry Bass, I guess I didn't quite understand. I think my previous post still holds a bit of merit.I disagree with your decision here @Joey Wright . I'm not a fan of fantasy league hosting sites determining what a league allows or does not allow. Actual written rules trump whatever a host site has set by default.
Example: We were told (at the very beginning of the season) that trades were not allowed in this league. Even though Sleeper gave you, the commish, no option to turn "off" the ability to trade. It was a written rule we were to abide by, lest we get tossed from the Bowl. Loophole closed. I thought this issue was handled well.
The league rules state that we are permitted 9 starter slots and 9 bench slots on our teams. That is it. That should be enough to treat this issue exactly the same as the trading issue. Just because the default settings of Sleeper allows this hoarding of players on bench slots to occur does not mean it should be allowed to occur at all in the FBG Bowl.
Why is this Sleeper setting being permitted to be abused? Okay, it's a loophole. So what? I am pretty sure the rules did not state that we were permitted 9 starter slots and 9 bench slots (except when loopholes are found and exploited.)
Rules are rules. Default settings on a hosting site are not rules. Nor should they be permitted to be exploited as such. The rules currently in place for the 2024 FBG Bowl are clear. 9 starters, 9 bench. That is it.
So, anyone doing this has a "legal" roster on Sleeper but, it is not legal in the FBG Bowl and should be dealt with accordingly. Especially when it is playoff time, final week or not. Any roster currently holding players on more than 9 bench slots needs to be fixed immediately. All non-playoff teams are locked so the illegal roster is a playoff team that has not been eliminated yet.
I am not suggesting you punish the offender of roster limits. I am suggesting it can be handled differently. Get the roster(s) into compliance. Roster limits are roster limits for a reason. There's also the tricky thing about it being in the rules.
Thanks for hearing me out. You've done a fantastic job this year with this huge undertaking. I am sure next year will be even better and I so very much look forward to participating again.
Happy Holidays and Merry New Year!!!
Well technically they have the correct number of players (not 24), the software is still showing dropped players on their roster that are really free agents. I can put a bid on them for Wednesday. It's another "Sleeper" issue.
Patrick Taylor didn’t help.
I assume since there is only one prize that we should be trying to play guys not widely held?
@Ruffrodys05 We have a note to address this during the build up to 2025. It was something people brought up a lot at the beginning of the season. It is tricky for sure. I appreciate your thoughts on it and will be sharing it with the team for sure.Sorry Bass, I guess I didn't quite understand. I think my previous post still holds a bit of merit.I disagree with your decision here @Joey Wright . I'm not a fan of fantasy league hosting sites determining what a league allows or does not allow. Actual written rules trump whatever a host site has set by default.
Example: We were told (at the very beginning of the season) that trades were not allowed in this league. Even though Sleeper gave you, the commish, no option to turn "off" the ability to trade. It was a written rule we were to abide by, lest we get tossed from the Bowl. Loophole closed. I thought this issue was handled well.
The league rules state that we are permitted 9 starter slots and 9 bench slots on our teams. That is it. That should be enough to treat this issue exactly the same as the trading issue. Just because the default settings of Sleeper allows this hoarding of players on bench slots to occur does not mean it should be allowed to occur at all in the FBG Bowl.
Why is this Sleeper setting being permitted to be abused? Okay, it's a loophole. So what? I am pretty sure the rules did not state that we were permitted 9 starter slots and 9 bench slots (except when loopholes are found and exploited.)
Rules are rules. Default settings on a hosting site are not rules. Nor should they be permitted to be exploited as such. The rules currently in place for the 2024 FBG Bowl are clear. 9 starters, 9 bench. That is it.
So, anyone doing this has a "legal" roster on Sleeper but, it is not legal in the FBG Bowl and should be dealt with accordingly. Especially when it is playoff time, final week or not. Any roster currently holding players on more than 9 bench slots needs to be fixed immediately. All non-playoff teams are locked so the illegal roster is a playoff team that has not been eliminated yet.
I am not suggesting you punish the offender of roster limits. I am suggesting it can be handled differently. Get the roster(s) into compliance. Roster limits are roster limits for a reason. There's also the tricky thing about it being in the rules.
Thanks for hearing me out. You've done a fantastic job this year with this huge undertaking. I am sure next year will be even better and I so very much look forward to participating again.
Happy Holidays and Merry New Year!!!
Well technically they have the correct number of players (not 24), the software is still showing dropped players on their roster that are really free agents. I can put a bid on them for Wednesday. It's another "Sleeper" issue.
Something doesn't feel right when bench players can be dropped after their game has already started. In my mind those players should unquestionably be locked onto the rosters they are on and not droppable after their game starts. It seems shady otherwise. Nah, it is shady. It feels like an early waiver run for just one fantasy team. Someone could conceivably add a player yet not actually start him. Thus, this one person just removed a player from the waiver pool three days before waivers run.
If there is no technical fix within the Sleeper settings then I suggest that the player(s) added MUST BE USED in the STARTING lineup that day (if dropping a bench player after his NFL game has started.)
We can't add a player after their game starts because they are locked. This should also apply to dropping bench players. Once an NFL game starts all players on those two teams should instantly be locked onto a roster or the waiver pool.
If, as a team owner, all your bench players games have started then unfortunately you have no players to drop and you can not add a player. Simple, really.
Ok, I'm done. Just rambling away late at night thinking out loud.
Bye
@Joey Wright How is it tricky?@Ruffrodys05 We have a note to address this during the build up to 2025. It was something people brought up a lot at the beginning of the season. It is tricky for sure. I appreciate your thoughts on it and will be sharing it with the team for sure.Sorry Bass, I guess I didn't quite understand. I think my previous post still holds a bit of merit.I disagree with your decision here @Joey Wright . I'm not a fan of fantasy league hosting sites determining what a league allows or does not allow. Actual written rules trump whatever a host site has set by default.
Example: We were told (at the very beginning of the season) that trades were not allowed in this league. Even though Sleeper gave you, the commish, no option to turn "off" the ability to trade. It was a written rule we were to abide by, lest we get tossed from the Bowl. Loophole closed. I thought this issue was handled well.
The league rules state that we are permitted 9 starter slots and 9 bench slots on our teams. That is it. That should be enough to treat this issue exactly the same as the trading issue. Just because the default settings of Sleeper allows this hoarding of players on bench slots to occur does not mean it should be allowed to occur at all in the FBG Bowl.
Why is this Sleeper setting being permitted to be abused? Okay, it's a loophole. So what? I am pretty sure the rules did not state that we were permitted 9 starter slots and 9 bench slots (except when loopholes are found and exploited.)
Rules are rules. Default settings on a hosting site are not rules. Nor should they be permitted to be exploited as such. The rules currently in place for the 2024 FBG Bowl are clear. 9 starters, 9 bench. That is it.
So, anyone doing this has a "legal" roster on Sleeper but, it is not legal in the FBG Bowl and should be dealt with accordingly. Especially when it is playoff time, final week or not. Any roster currently holding players on more than 9 bench slots needs to be fixed immediately. All non-playoff teams are locked so the illegal roster is a playoff team that has not been eliminated yet.
I am not suggesting you punish the offender of roster limits. I am suggesting it can be handled differently. Get the roster(s) into compliance. Roster limits are roster limits for a reason. There's also the tricky thing about it being in the rules.
Thanks for hearing me out. You've done a fantastic job this year with this huge undertaking. I am sure next year will be even better and I so very much look forward to participating again.
Happy Holidays and Merry New Year!!!
Well technically they have the correct number of players (not 24), the software is still showing dropped players on their roster that are really free agents. I can put a bid on them for Wednesday. It's another "Sleeper" issue.
Something doesn't feel right when bench players can be dropped after their game has already started. In my mind those players should unquestionably be locked onto the rosters they are on and not droppable after their game starts. It seems shady otherwise. Nah, it is shady. It feels like an early waiver run for just one fantasy team. Someone could conceivably add a player yet not actually start him. Thus, this one person just removed a player from the waiver pool three days before waivers run.
If there is no technical fix within the Sleeper settings then I suggest that the player(s) added MUST BE USED in the STARTING lineup that day (if dropping a bench player after his NFL game has started.)
We can't add a player after their game starts because they are locked. This should also apply to dropping bench players. Once an NFL game starts all players on those two teams should instantly be locked onto a roster or the waiver pool.
If, as a team owner, all your bench players games have started then unfortunately you have no players to drop and you can not add a player. Simple, really.
Ok, I'm done. Just rambling away late at night thinking out loud.
Bye
Tricky in the aspect of "should we allow bench players who have already played to be dropped for free agent add/drops" It was something I would say was met with surprise at the beginning of the season with people being surprised by it. Most of the leagues I play in, this is a legal move. Whether I like it or not is a completely different story. Haha. This was a learning moment for myself that we need to be clearer on that for next year. For sure we will have it in the rules next season either way.@Joey Wright How is it tricky?@Ruffrodys05 We have a note to address this during the build up to 2025. It was something people brought up a lot at the beginning of the season. It is tricky for sure. I appreciate your thoughts on it and will be sharing it with the team for sure.Sorry Bass, I guess I didn't quite understand. I think my previous post still holds a bit of merit.I disagree with your decision here @Joey Wright . I'm not a fan of fantasy league hosting sites determining what a league allows or does not allow. Actual written rules trump whatever a host site has set by default.
Example: We were told (at the very beginning of the season) that trades were not allowed in this league. Even though Sleeper gave you, the commish, no option to turn "off" the ability to trade. It was a written rule we were to abide by, lest we get tossed from the Bowl. Loophole closed. I thought this issue was handled well.
The league rules state that we are permitted 9 starter slots and 9 bench slots on our teams. That is it. That should be enough to treat this issue exactly the same as the trading issue. Just because the default settings of Sleeper allows this hoarding of players on bench slots to occur does not mean it should be allowed to occur at all in the FBG Bowl.
Why is this Sleeper setting being permitted to be abused? Okay, it's a loophole. So what? I am pretty sure the rules did not state that we were permitted 9 starter slots and 9 bench slots (except when loopholes are found and exploited.)
Rules are rules. Default settings on a hosting site are not rules. Nor should they be permitted to be exploited as such. The rules currently in place for the 2024 FBG Bowl are clear. 9 starters, 9 bench. That is it.
So, anyone doing this has a "legal" roster on Sleeper but, it is not legal in the FBG Bowl and should be dealt with accordingly. Especially when it is playoff time, final week or not. Any roster currently holding players on more than 9 bench slots needs to be fixed immediately. All non-playoff teams are locked so the illegal roster is a playoff team that has not been eliminated yet.
I am not suggesting you punish the offender of roster limits. I am suggesting it can be handled differently. Get the roster(s) into compliance. Roster limits are roster limits for a reason. There's also the tricky thing about it being in the rules.
Thanks for hearing me out. You've done a fantastic job this year with this huge undertaking. I am sure next year will be even better and I so very much look forward to participating again.
Happy Holidays and Merry New Year!!!
Well technically they have the correct number of players (not 24), the software is still showing dropped players on their roster that are really free agents. I can put a bid on them for Wednesday. It's another "Sleeper" issue.
Something doesn't feel right when bench players can be dropped after their game has already started. In my mind those players should unquestionably be locked onto the rosters they are on and not droppable after their game starts. It seems shady otherwise. Nah, it is shady. It feels like an early waiver run for just one fantasy team. Someone could conceivably add a player yet not actually start him. Thus, this one person just removed a player from the waiver pool three days before waivers run.
If there is no technical fix within the Sleeper settings then I suggest that the player(s) added MUST BE USED in the STARTING lineup that day (if dropping a bench player after his NFL game has started.)
We can't add a player after their game starts because they are locked. This should also apply to dropping bench players. Once an NFL game starts all players on those two teams should instantly be locked onto a roster or the waiver pool.
If, as a team owner, all your bench players games have started then unfortunately you have no players to drop and you can not add a player. Simple, really.
Ok, I'm done. Just rambling away late at night thinking out loud.
Bye
Are you and your team "ok" with the hosting site dictating what a league allows/does not allow?
I guess I'm finding it difficult to understand how "it is tricky for sure." This did not seem to be the case when a decision was made between the hosting sites inability to turn off trading options vs league rules forbidding trades.
Back down to 42nd. My league mate sits in 25th. Three to go tonight so maybe an outside shot at top 20 finish.
out by 16 points.