Individual Defensive Players

[Jay Metz]

So now that we have new owners and were beaten into switching websites by a new dictator, I figured I'd gauge the interest on adding individual defensive players to the LOD format. I know in years past there were a good amount interested but also a fair amount uninterested.

So let's get a count of how many of you would like to see IDPs incorporated into our league at some point in the not too distant future?

I'd be all for it.

[Merkin]

IDP is to FF as the DH is to the MLB.

I'd rather participate in an NCAA FF league. :no:

[Jay Metz]

You'd make a good point if your vote actually mattered to anybody.

Are you still upset by your playoff loss to me? :points:

[Steebo]

IDP is to FF as the DH is to the MLB.

I'd rather participate in an NCAA FF league. :no:


I agree, but I also participate in a NCAA FF league.:D

[dirty dug]

:no:

[EMoney]

:no:

[SigEp316]

I'd prefer to keep it as is. The rosters are huge as they are, no need to add IDP to add more to keep up with.

[Gutter]

:no:

[Tusekan Raiders]

The slap fighting over what board to host this league on was a leading indicator that a bunch of pussies are in this league, now the lack of interest in IDP confirms it.

You have it backwards, Merkin. Team defense is to FF what the DH is to the AL, i.e. requires less strategy and used to pacify simpletons.

BTW, my vote would be yes, if there was any confusion. :hyper:

[dirty dug]

The slap fighting over what board to host this league on was a leading indicator that a bunch of pussies are in this league, now the lack of interest in IDP confirms it.

You have it backwards, Merkin. Team defense is to FF what the DH is to the AL, i.e. requires less strategy and used to pacify simpletons.

BTW, my vote would be yes, if there was any confusion. :hyper:

I still don't understand why you fucking douches joined our league.


Explain to me exactly how the transition to IDP would go? How does one go about constructing an equitable draft?

[Jay Metz]

An equitable draft wouldn't be a problem...but there's not enough interest anyway.

So in conclusion, eat shit.

[whoisjgalt]

Just piling on, but this is another :no: vote. I'm not completely against the concept, but you need to present a lot more complete of a proposal that'll allow it to be done equitably.

[dirty dug]

An equitable draft wouldn't be a problem...but there's not enough interest anyway.

So in conclusion, eat shit.

If you're really interested in the idea put together more details. I'm certainly not against it 100% but I'm also in no way voting for something that is completely without structure. Put together a way that is equitable (which I doubt you'll be able to do) and revisit it.
:clap:

[Jay Metz]

If you're really interested in the idea put together more details. I'm certainly not against it 100% but I'm also in no way voting for something that is completely without structure. Put together a way that is equitable (which I doubt you'll be able to do) and revisit it.
:clap:

As far as the draft, you basically take the regular season records over the life of the league and make a draft order. So it's a guarantee that Steebo gets then number one pick because I think he's won about 4 games in 6 seasons. And Jay would probably be number two.

But like I said, there's not enough serious interest to put a bunch of energy into it. An equitable draft would be one of the easier goals to accomplish...how many players we choose and scoring would be the bigger discussion.

[EMoney]

This topic isn't dead yet? :headscratch:

[whoisjgalt]

You'd also have propose what would happen to the team defense roster positions? Do you keep the team defense too, or drop it? Some geeks have good ones and others bad ones so there's a potential equity issue there too.

[Jay Metz]

I'd say drop it entirely. These team defenses vary so much over a period of two years or so that I wouldn't consider it that big a deal. The only team D that's really stayed in the top over the last few years have been the Ravens. All the other team D's come and go w/ all the parity in the league.

If enough owners actually wanted to consider making a change, then we could always keep the rights to a team defense why we do a 2 or 3 season trial period w/ IDP. If people hated it - then scrap it and go back to the old way. It's not like we play for money where it would be a huge deal if we made the change and then changed back. Everyone would have a fair opportunity.

Not too mention - it'd make these rookie drafts a little better...especially what appears to be an overall weak offensive player draft in 2006.

[whoisjgalt]

Which brings up something else ...

If you add the IDP's to the rookie draft and then drop the idea then again it's hugely inequitable. Someone takes Hawk with a 1st rounder - maybe me at 1.12 but more likely someone earlier. I get a top-two WR or Davis or a top-three QB if Hawk doesn't drop. So I like that. However, the new Hawk owner gets screwed if we cut the IDP aspect.

We'd need to keep both player pools separate until we decide if it's permanent. But then does the worst team get the top pick in both drafts? That's a far better reward for being bad than usual.

It's very problematic, we can all agree on that.

[Jay Metz]

Which brings up something else ...

If you add the IDP's to the rookie draft and then drop the idea then again it's hugely inequitable. Someone takes Hawk with a 1st rounder - maybe me at 1.12 but more likely someone earlier. I get a top-two WR or Davis or a top-three QB if Hawk doesn't drop. So I like that. However, the new Hawk owner gets screwed if we cut the IDP aspect.

We'd need to keep both player pools separate until we decide if it's permanent. But then does the worst team get the top pick in both drafts? That's a far better reward for being bad than usual.

It's very problematic, we can all agree on that.

Well, for the first year, I would suggest having a completely separate IDP draft with rookies included. For example, after this draft we could figure out a IDP draft order for August and have the IDP draft. We could do IDP on a trial basis for 2 or 3 seasons or just make it permanent. If we did a trial basis, then we'd keep the annual rookie draft to just offensive players for the trial period. We'd have a separate rookie IDP draft later on in the off-season. After the trial period we'd vote to keep it or not. If it was scrapped, then get rid of all the IDP players and reinstate the team defense. If IDP was kept the we'd start incorporating IDP rookies and free agents into the annual rookie draft.

It's definitely something we can do and I'm positive we can work out something that would be as equitable as possible. I'm sure there would be bugs in incorporating the IDP players to the league, but I really think we could reduce that.

And if after 2 seasons the majority doesn't like IDP, then we scrap it. You basically get rid of the players on your roster. No harm, no foul. It wouldn't have affected your offensive rookie draft strategies during the trial period.

At the very least, we'd have given it a try. No money would be lost or won. I think worst case scenario is we do something we ultimately don't like and can get rid of. Best case scenario is it changes the way we play the league and makes it more fun. Everybody here is an NFL fan and everybody here knows defensive players...it could be something that's good for our league.

[Gutter]

Well, for the first year, I would suggest having a completely separate IDP draft with rookies included. For example, after this draft we could figure out a IDP draft order for August and have the IDP draft. We could do IDP on a trial basis for 2 or 3 seasons or just make it permanent. If we did a trial basis, then we'd keep the annual rookie draft to just offensive players for the trial period. We'd have a separate rookie IDP draft later on in the off-season. After the trial period we'd vote to keep it or not. If it was scrapped, then get rid of all the IDP players and reinstate the team defense. If IDP was kept the we'd start incorporating IDP rookies and free agents into the annual rookie draft.

It's definitely something we can do and I'm positive we can work out something that would be as equitable as possible. I'm sure there would be bugs in incorporating the IDP players to the league, but I really think we could reduce that.

And if after 2 seasons the majority doesn't like IDP, then we scrap it. You basically get rid of the players on your roster. No harm, no foul. It wouldn't have affected your offensive rookie draft strategies during the trial period.

At the very least, we'd have given it a try. No money would be lost or won. I think worst case scenario is we do something we ultimately don't like and can get rid of. Best case scenario is it changes the way we play the league and makes it more fun. Everybody here is an NFL fan and everybody here knows defensive players...it could be something that's good for our league.

shut up

[dirty dug]

As far as the draft, you basically take the regular season records over the life of the league and make a draft order. So it's a guarantee that Steebo gets then number one pick because I think he's won about 4 games in 6 seasons. And Jay would probably be number two.

But like I said, there's not enough serious interest to put a bunch of energy into it. An equitable draft would be one of the easier goals to accomplish...how many players we choose and scoring would be the bigger discussion.

I don't think we have league history all the way back.

And I'm pretty sure I'm near the top in total wins over the league's history, so I'd go late in the IDP draft. I don't see how that's equitable, that completely changes the league.

It's something I'd love to try eventually, but more than likely in a different league that is started as an IDP dynasty.

[Jay Metz]

I don't think we have league history all the way back.

And I'm pretty sure I'm near the top in total wins over the league's history, so I'd go late in the IDP draft. I don't see how that's equitable, that completely changes the league.

It's something I'd love to try eventually, but more than likely in a different league that is started as an IDP dynasty.

My team has missed the playoffs once. I'd be towards the back too. It's equitable because it helps teams that weren't as successful over the history of the league...in the same way that a rookie draft is designed to do.

[S.D. Jones]

I don't know why DD would want to add more players to his team considering he can't keep track of who's on his roster as is.

[dirty dug]

My team has missed the playoffs once. I'd be towards the back too. It's equitable because it helps teams that weren't as successful over the history of the league...in the same way that a rookie draft is designed to do.


I guess my point, which is analgous to beating the proverbial dead horse, is that the rookie draft is part of the league from inception, therefore I have no problem with the draft. Changing to IDP is a dramatic change to the league, and the past shouldn't be any indication of the future as there isn't a way to bridge them.

I don't know, I'm not being completely clear in my explanation, it just seems punative to successful teams.

[Gutter]

I don't know why DD would want to add more players to his team considering he can't keep track of who's on his roster as is.

Brian Bosworth is on my roster retard!!!