| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| NSFL Expansion Vote (See details in thread) |
| FOR League Expansion |
|
52% |
[ 9 ] |
| AGAINST League Expansion |
|
47% |
[ 8 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 17 |
|
| Author |
Message |
TheKillerNacho
Joined: 10 Feb 2008
Posts: 8329
Location: Pennsylvania
|
 Posted: Wed May 02, 2012 10:50 am Post subject: |
 |
|
|
Okay so my question becomes... How many of those who voted "Against" would be willing to change their vote if I increased the Protected players to 4?
Also to Tk3 who seems to be a strong supporter of Expansion how it is now... Does 4 Protected players sound fair to you?
_________________
With much cheese,
Nacho Simulation Football League |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Remixxxxxxx
Joined: 06 Mar 2009
Posts: 10894
Location: E808 on the avi; P90 on the sig
|
| Posted: Wed May 02, 2012 11:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| TheKillerNacho wrote: | Okay so my question becomes... How many of those who voted "Against" would be willing to change their vote if I increased the Protected players to 4?
Also to Tk3 who seems to be a strong supporter of Expansion how it is now... Does 4 Protected players sound fair to you? |
I'd change over it was bumped up to four - I actually think more people is for the better.
If we do expand, I think we should shuffle the divisions a bit.
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheKillerNacho
Joined: 10 Feb 2008
Posts: 8329
Location: Pennsylvania
|
| Posted: Wed May 02, 2012 11:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Remixxxxxxx wrote: | | TheKillerNacho wrote: | Okay so my question becomes... How many of those who voted "Against" would be willing to change their vote if I increased the Protected players to 4?
Also to Tk3 who seems to be a strong supporter of Expansion how it is now... Does 4 Protected players sound fair to you? |
I'd change over it was bumped up to four - I actually think more people is for the better.
If we do expand, I think we should shuffle the divisions a bit. |
Why? I don't really want to break up rivalries. I mean I thought about re-alignment based on team location a few seasons ago, but teams change names / hometowns every year and besides, as I said before, rivalries are a good thing in any league.
Is there a particular owner(s) you wanted to be in the same division with?
_________________
With much cheese,
Nacho Simulation Football League |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Remixxxxxxx
Joined: 06 Mar 2009
Posts: 10894
Location: E808 on the avi; P90 on the sig
|
| Posted: Wed May 02, 2012 11:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| TheKillerNacho wrote: | | Remixxxxxxx wrote: | | TheKillerNacho wrote: | Okay so my question becomes... How many of those who voted "Against" would be willing to change their vote if I increased the Protected players to 4?
Also to Tk3 who seems to be a strong supporter of Expansion how it is now... Does 4 Protected players sound fair to you? |
I'd change over it was bumped up to four - I actually think more people is for the better.
If we do expand, I think we should shuffle the divisions a bit. |
Why? I don't really want to break up rivalries. I mean I thought about re-alignment based on team location a few seasons ago, but teams change names / hometowns every year and besides, as I said before, rivalries are a good thing in any league.
Is there a particular owner(s) you wanted to be in the same division with? |
No - just thought if we're expanding, could just shake things up a bit more.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
x0x
Joined: 10 Jul 2008
Posts: 14716
Location: Ontario, Canada
|
| Posted: Wed May 02, 2012 1:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| mgoblue44 wrote: | In case it goes to hand count vote.
I voted against. Not because I don't like the idea of expanding to 20 teams, but I don't like the expansion draft idea. For the owners like myself who have been participating since the beginning, our teams are built on a solid foundation of 4-5 players that make up the hearts of our teams. Only getting 3 players to protect can lead to one of those guys being picked in the expansion draft. I don't think the expansion draft is necessary because the new teams can still build a competitive team through the regular draft. Lots of solid players don't get tagged by teams every year.
Just my two cents |
Yeah I'm with you on that.
I'd prefer the 4 expansion teams simply get two 1st and two 2nd round picks.
And have those picks be in order from the first.
So for example, the first round would look like so:
1.Team #1
2.Team #2
3.Team #3
4.Team #4
5.Team #4
Would probably make the first two rounds a bit slow for everyone else but I'd rather have this than an expansion draft as well.
Perhaps we could also have a league vote on how the expansion draft works??
P.S. I want to be in the same division.
_________________
Legends Never Die. They Breathe Through The New Generation.
100 Greatest Quarterbacks of All Time |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ravens5520
Joined: 20 Dec 2007
Posts: 8204
Location: New York
|
| Posted: Wed May 02, 2012 2:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| mgoblue44 wrote: | In case it goes to hand count vote.
I voted against. Not because I don't like the idea of expanding to 20 teams, but I don't like the expansion draft idea. For the owners like myself who have been participating since the beginning, our teams are built on a solid foundation of 4-5 players that make up the hearts of our teams. Only getting 3 players to protect can lead to one of those guys being picked in the expansion draft. I don't think the expansion draft is necessary because the new teams can still build a competitive team through the regular draft. Lots of solid players don't get tagged by teams every year.
Just my two cents |
This is what I've been thinking too.. I voted against it because it affects the old owners who've been here assembling our teams over multiple seasons. I know I'm going to lose one of my key players that I intend on using tags on... Most of me is against it but part of me is all for it because we get more owners and a longer season. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tk3
Joined: 15 Feb 2007
Posts: 1798
|
| Posted: Wed May 02, 2012 6:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
So 4 teams each take 4 players.. Each team cannot lose more than 1 (which means every team loses EXACTLY one)
IF we are allowed to keep FOUR players, these are the 16 who I predict would be taken (based on which 4 I am guessing teams would protect)
RB-Jamaal Charles
DT-Kyle Williams
CB-Brandon Flowers
WR-Jordy Nelson
RB-Darren McFadden
OT-Michael Roos
CB-Corey Webster
TE-Jimmy Graham
WR-Julio Jones
OT-D'Brickashaw Ferguson
S-Earl Thomas
LB-NaVorro Bowman
QB-Michael Vick
WR-DeSean Jackson
RB-Matt Forté
DE-Jason Babin
Something along those lines..
Those teams are SO far and away worse than any of the other teams in the league..
On top of that (due to keepers) the old teams get to keep a total of about 7 players (vs these groups of 4)
I will be happy with ANY decision.. Whether we stick at 16, move to 20 and lock down 3, or move to 20 and lock down 4.. I will be committed regardless..
But to me, it does not seem like a fair shake to the new teams if we keep 4..
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
x0x
Joined: 10 Jul 2008
Posts: 14716
Location: Ontario, Canada
|
| Posted: Thu May 03, 2012 1:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Tk3 wrote: | So 4 teams each take 4 players.. Each team cannot lose more than 1 (which means every team loses EXACTLY one)
IF we are allowed to keep FOUR players, these are the 16 who I predict would be taken (based on which 4 I am guessing teams would protect)
RB-Jamaal Charles
DT-Kyle Williams
CB-Brandon Flowers
WR-Jordy Nelson
RB-Darren McFadden
OT-Michael Roos
CB-Corey Webster
TE-Jimmy Graham
WR-Julio Jones
OT-D'Brickashaw Ferguson
S-Earl Thomas
LB-NaVorro Bowman
QB-Michael Vick
WR-DeSean Jackson
RB-Matt Forté
DE-Jason Babin
Something along those lines..
Those teams are SO far and away worse than any of the other teams in the league..
On top of that (due to keepers) the old teams get to keep a total of about 7 players (vs these groups of 4)
I will be happy with ANY decision.. Whether we stick at 16, move to 20 and lock down 3, or move to 20 and lock down 4.. I will be committed regardless..
But to me, it does not seem like a fair shake to the new teams if we keep 4.. |
I don't think the point of the expansion is to have any of the 4 new teams with a legit chance of winning it all.
Which I think is fair at this point.
I mean, we're expanding the league by 25%.
Now, if by some amazing luck one of the 4 expansion teams were to win the league title, so be it. But they SHOULD be terrible their first season. If nothing else it will show commitment of the owners for next season which will be in 2013.
QUESTION*
Do we get to use our tags AFTER the expansion draft?
Or are we just left to keep 4 players?
Cause that's a big deal since most of the teams here usually keep 7-9 of their players. If we only keep 4, and say, lose our 5th and 6th in the draft, do we get to use the tags on the players that weren't taken?
That's the one confusing part to me.
_________________
Legends Never Die. They Breathe Through The New Generation.
100 Greatest Quarterbacks of All Time |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheKillerNacho
Joined: 10 Feb 2008
Posts: 8329
Location: Pennsylvania
|
| Posted: Thu May 03, 2012 8:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| x0x wrote: | | Tk3 wrote: | So 4 teams each take 4 players.. Each team cannot lose more than 1 (which means every team loses EXACTLY one)
IF we are allowed to keep FOUR players, these are the 16 who I predict would be taken (based on which 4 I am guessing teams would protect)
RB-Jamaal Charles
DT-Kyle Williams
CB-Brandon Flowers
WR-Jordy Nelson
RB-Darren McFadden
OT-Michael Roos
CB-Corey Webster
TE-Jimmy Graham
WR-Julio Jones
OT-D'Brickashaw Ferguson
S-Earl Thomas
LB-NaVorro Bowman
QB-Michael Vick
WR-DeSean Jackson
RB-Matt Forté
DE-Jason Babin
Something along those lines..
Those teams are SO far and away worse than any of the other teams in the league..
On top of that (due to keepers) the old teams get to keep a total of about 7 players (vs these groups of 4)
I will be happy with ANY decision.. Whether we stick at 16, move to 20 and lock down 3, or move to 20 and lock down 4.. I will be committed regardless..
But to me, it does not seem like a fair shake to the new teams if we keep 4.. |
I don't think the point of the expansion is to have any of the 4 new teams with a legit chance of winning it all.
Which I think is fair at this point.
I mean, we're expanding the league by 25%.
Now, if by some amazing luck one of the 4 expansion teams were to win the league title, so be it. But they SHOULD be terrible their first season. If nothing else it will show commitment of the owners for next season which will be in 2013.
QUESTION*
Do we get to use our tags AFTER the expansion draft?
Or are we just left to keep 4 players?
Cause that's a big deal since most of the teams here usually keep 7-9 of their players. If we only keep 4, and say, lose our 5th and 6th in the draft, do we get to use the tags on the players that weren't taken?
That's the one confusing part to me. |
To answer your question, Keepers will be selected after the Expansion draft. You can keep any player except the one that was picked in the Expansion draft and use your Keeper tags normally. Since they are used after the Expansion draft, you won't waste Keeper tags on a player that gets selected from your team.
_________________
With much cheese,
Nacho Simulation Football League |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tk3
Joined: 15 Feb 2007
Posts: 1798
|
| Posted: Thu May 03, 2012 8:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| x0x wrote: | | Tk3 wrote: | So 4 teams each take 4 players.. Each team cannot lose more than 1 (which means every team loses EXACTLY one)
IF we are allowed to keep FOUR players, these are the 16 who I predict would be taken (based on which 4 I am guessing teams would protect)
RB-Jamaal Charles
DT-Kyle Williams
CB-Brandon Flowers
WR-Jordy Nelson
RB-Darren McFadden
OT-Michael Roos
CB-Corey Webster
TE-Jimmy Graham
WR-Julio Jones
OT-D'Brickashaw Ferguson
S-Earl Thomas
LB-NaVorro Bowman
QB-Michael Vick
WR-DeSean Jackson
RB-Matt Forté
DE-Jason Babin
Something along those lines..
Those teams are SO far and away worse than any of the other teams in the league..
On top of that (due to keepers) the old teams get to keep a total of about 7 players (vs these groups of 4)
I will be happy with ANY decision.. Whether we stick at 16, move to 20 and lock down 3, or move to 20 and lock down 4.. I will be committed regardless..
But to me, it does not seem like a fair shake to the new teams if we keep 4.. |
I don't think the point of the expansion is to have any of the 4 new teams with a legit chance of winning it all.
Which I think is fair at this point.
I mean, we're expanding the league by 25%.
Now, if by some amazing luck one of the 4 expansion teams were to win the league title, so be it. But they SHOULD be terrible their first season. If nothing else it will show commitment of the owners for next season which will be in 2013.
QUESTION*
Do we get to use our tags AFTER the expansion draft?
Or are we just left to keep 4 players?
Cause that's a big deal since most of the teams here usually keep 7-9 of their players. If we only keep 4, and say, lose our 5th and 6th in the draft, do we get to use the tags on the players that weren't taken?
That's the one confusing part to me. |
The initial post led me to believe we use the tags AFTER expansion.. (Of course we still have to pay for the players we protect)
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ravens5520
Joined: 20 Dec 2007
Posts: 8204
Location: New York
|
| Posted: Thu May 03, 2012 8:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| I'd change my vote to yes if we protected 4 players. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Remixxxxxxx
Joined: 06 Mar 2009
Posts: 10894
Location: E808 on the avi; P90 on the sig
|
| Posted: Thu May 03, 2012 11:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
What's the verdict?
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tk3
Joined: 15 Feb 2007
Posts: 1798
|
| Posted: Thu May 03, 2012 12:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Remixxxxxxx wrote: | | What's the verdict? |
I think it is still all in discussion mode..
My proposal:
Each team gets to protect THREE players..
Snake draft amongst expansion teams (4 rounds) each team loses 1 and only 1 player:
1. Expansion A
2. Expansion B
3. Expansion C
4. Expansion D
5. Expansion D
6. Expansion C
7. Expansion B
8. Expansion A
9. Expansion A
10. Expansion B
11. Expansion C
12. Expansion D
13. Expansion D
14. Expansion C
15. Expansion B
16. Expansion A
Then each team uses their keeper tags (I would imagine 7-8 players total)
In the SEASON draft, Round 1 and 2 should be for expansion teams only..
Round 1:
1. Expansion D
2. Expansion C
3. Expansion B
4. Expansion A
Round 2:
5. Expansion A
6. Expansion B
7. Expansion C
8. Expansion D
Round 3:
9. Expansion D
10. Expansion C
11. Expansion B
12. Expansion A
13. Kansas City Knights
14. Winterfell Direwolves
15. Miami Dolphins
16. Tallin Hammers
17. Motor City Machine Gunners
18. Texas Armadillos
19 and beyond: etc etc etc etc etc
I think most here think I am being way too generous to the newbies.. but I think it is the fairest way..
Just my proposal.. I will be 100% fine with any decision that is made..
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RuskieTitan
Joined: 29 Apr 2007
Posts: 36007
Location: Front lines of Titania
|
| Posted: Thu May 03, 2012 1:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Tk3 wrote: | | Remixxxxxxx wrote: | | What's the verdict? |
Long Post |
I just checked the front page - you are a relatively new GM for this league.
That would explain why you wouldn't have a problem with expansion.
Others, such as myself who have built our teams up, have invested quite a bit more, and stand to lose more than you.
I'm 100% against 3 protected players. I won't be completely happy with 4, but I'd go with the flow.
Your proposal is heavily favored towards new GMs. Not only do they get to draft 4 elite / borderline elite players from each team, but they also get the first two rounds as well?
That'll shift the balance in their favor potentially.
Listen. Look at the history of new expansion franchises throughout the years. Sure, some have performed exceptionally well early on... but I don't think any have had success their first season.
4 protected players (minimum), 1 player taken from each team, then let them pick at the top of the draft or however else Nacho decides.
Again, if you look at the breakdown of who votes how, it seems to be that those GMs who have been around since the very beginning, and built their teams, want to keep their teams intact, while newer GMs such as yourself, who don't care for their teams as much, prefer to just dilate the talent pool. I understand your perspective, but I'm just saying that we've built our teams up.
Edit: Your team went 3-11 and the only two clear-cut 'protected' players would be Adrian Peterson and Mario Williams. Clearly, in your case, you wouldn't mind expansion teams having more for the choosing, since your own team isn't as talented as others.
_________________
^^ryknowssd^^
Supporter of the Death Penalty in CFB
FF Hunger Games I Winner
| titans0021 wrote: | Official Order
1.Michael Griffin |
#JDI |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Remixxxxxxx
Joined: 06 Mar 2009
Posts: 10894
Location: E808 on the avi; P90 on the sig
|
| Posted: Thu May 03, 2012 1:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
No offense Tk3 but that's an absolutely horrible proposal. If we're doing it like that, I'm against it - I'm okay with what TheKillerNacho stated from the start, with the exception of 4 protected players.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
