Dexter McClusker position change (1 Viewer)

Apparently McCluster has officially changed positions and is now a wide receiver. Rtsports had a big message basically saying even though he has changed positions, they were going to leave him as a running back because to change him would cause issues with leagues with tight roster restrictions and screw up waiver wires. How are OTHER league management software handling this change? How is your specific league handling it?

The reason I ask is that our league constitution says that if a player OFFICIALLY changes position that player must be changed to his new position and started as such. Luckily this year we voted in a flex starter so its not nearly the issue as it would have been.

The reason for the rule was several years ago "slash" stewart started playing wide receiver for pittsburgh even though he was a QB. In a 6 point for td's league had we switched him to wr and he started throwing touchdowns it could have severely affected the balance of the league so we voted in "the slash rule" It was honestly intended to make sure slash was indeed started at qb and only if he officially changed positions could he be stated at wr (team wanted to do just that)

I realize this situation isnt nearly as critical but to remain consistent with the league constitution I almost have to allow the change to be made mentally right? We start 2 rb's plus a flex. If Mcclusker is officially a wr now shouldnt the team that has him be allowed to start ... Him AND 3 other rb's now that he is a wr?

The easy thing to do is say that in this day and age where McClusker plays the Sproles role in KC and sproles is still a rb that he stays a rb. Henandez plays a wr role yet is still listed as a te.

Im the commish and am conflicted on this.

Additional info: McClusker was not drafted but was picked up on the waiver wire last night. I do not have a dog in the fight as I wasnt the one who picked him up. Nobody else (that I know of) has noticed the implications to the league in reguard to lineups. Still sticking my head in the sand and hoping for the best isnt my style.

So again. What did MFL, sportsline , yahoo and the like have to say about this situation????

What are your leagues doing about it if anything?

What do you think I should do?

I

Who is McClusker?

'ponchsox said:

Who is McClusker?

Click to expand...

If you're talking about McCluster, he's a WR in our league and always has been. ETactually answer the question: He is the position that he was when the owner picked him up off WW.

'DoubleG said:

'ponchsox said:

Who is McClusker?

Click to expand...

If you're talking about McCluster, he's a WR in our league and always has been. ETactually answer the question: He is the position that he was when the owner picked him up off WW.

Click to expand...

He is listed as a RB and has been at rtsports as a Rb and they have made the decission to leave him designated as a rb....hence the conflict.

He is a WR on CBS. The black and white designations of RB and WR in the NFL continue to be blurred with guys like McCluster, Cobb & Sproles in their current roles and eventually more fantasy leagues are going to have to institute a flex position to handle these players appropriately.

'wudaben said:

He is a WR on CBS. The black and white designations of RB and WR in the NFL continue to be blurred with guys like McCluster, Cobb & Sproles in their current roles and eventually more fantasy leagues are going to have to institute a flex position to handle these players appropriately.

Click to expand...

I wish that were the case with Rtsports. They had him at RB and even though he has officially become a WR, they are leaving him at RB. I dont see how, with our league constitution, I can stick with their designation...but I am conflicted here which is why I came here for discussion.

If he's eligible at RB in your league I would allow him to be used there. I don't see how this will create such an unfair advantage.

'ponchsox said:

If he's eligible at RB in your league I would allow him to be used there. I don't see how this will create such an unfair advantage.

Click to expand...

Its not so much a huge advantage its just that it flies in the face of our league constitution. The slight advantage would be that if he were designated a wr by our league then a team could start 3 other running backs in addition to McCluster as opposed to only 2 plus McClusker now.

He continues to have a dual designation on Yahoo.

In our Yahoo league we don't abide by Yahoo's decision to dually designate players so we have an "offline" rule for it. It's a pretty short list of guys typically, so a decision gets made on one position before the draft. McCluster is a WR, Woodhead is a RB etc. It helps to keep the jimmie rustling to a minimum.

It can be a difference maker, depending on your league rules a pretty sizable difference maker. RTSports is particularly looking at how their leagues began drafting him, and if you are bound by positional limits that can be a serious consideration. I can see where it's an advantage to have him designated either way, and I can well imagine too how changing that designation midstream could have major consequences.

What I found surprising is that he was listed as a WR in our league prior to their announcement, and for consistency sake was changed afterwards to match either by them or by our commish. In this case I was good with that--and actually raised the issue when their notice posted, because I needed a RB and was looking to pick him up at that slot. Next year--maybe not so much(?)

We generally just follow the Yahoo designations (which means a player can never lose eligibility, only gain a new position). Occasionally we make a house rule based on league votes (Joe Webb, for example), but it's in the constitution that we don't do that for WR/RBs. But then, we also don't have any roster limits for bench players, so it's not that big of a deal.

Players that qualify at RB and WR have always been allowed to be used at either one.

Any other positional flexibility is not allowed. For example, Joe Webb starting at QB for Minnesota, but qualifying at QB and WR two years ago was not allowed to be used anywhere but QB. Marques Colston qualifying at TE and WR was only allowed to be used at WR.

'glumpy said:

It can be a difference maker, depending on your league rules a pretty sizable difference maker. RTSports is particularly looking at how their leagues began drafting him, and if you are bound by positional limits that can be a serious consideration. I can see where it's an advantage to have him designated either way, and I can well imagine too how changing that designation midstream could have major consequences. What I found surprising is that he was listed as a WR in our league prior to their announcement, and for consistency sake was changed afterwards to match either by them or by our commish. In this case I was good with that--and actually raised the issue when their notice posted, because I needed a RB and was looking to pick him up at that slot. Next year--maybe not so much(?)

Click to expand...

So he was drafted at RB and you noticed him at WR...and now he is back to RB? If so that is really screwed up.

RT Sports really dropped the ball there, not only in trying to change a week into the season, but doing it in the middle of the week when everyone is in the middle of making pickups, blind bids, WW requests, etc. The fact that they changed their minds on it in the span of hours means they must have gotten flooded with angry emails calling them out for their stupidity.

FWIW, the FBG subscriber contest had McCluster as RB, though I do not know why.

'Ghost Rider said:

RT Sports really dropped the ball there, not only in trying to change a week into the season, but doing it in the middle of the week when everyone is in the middle of making pickups, blind bids, WW requests, etc. The fact that they changed their minds on it in the span of hours means they must have gotten flooded with angry emails calling them out for their stupidity.

Click to expand...

Sounds like a real McClusterf**k.

McCluster was listed as RB/WR on Yahoo the last two years.

I took him late in my auction for $1 and the fact that he gives you a body at two positions was one of the reasons. I didn't even realize until afterwards that he was designated as only a RB.

A week later, however, Yahoo changed him back to his RB/WR designation. Our league has a flex spot so in the grand scheme of things its not that big of a deal but our league follows whatever is the host site designation.

You don't change people after the draft. period

MFL has him as a WR - that's what I picked him up as.

I'm a commish at RTSports as well. For our league, fortunately wehave no roster restrictions, however I can't for the life of me figure out why he just isn't listed as a RB/WR given his position change, after the fact.

'flooredyas said:

I'm a commish at RTSports as well. For our league, fortunately wehave no roster restrictions, however I can't for the life of me figure out why he just isn't listed as a RB/WR given his position change, after the fact.

Click to expand...

We have roster restrictions at the draft but they are lifted after the draft is over. Roster requirements are only part of the issue though. In general rbs score more than wrs so being able to start him at wr, his official position now, is an advantage for those who have them. How much of an advantage is dependent on your roster.