|
|
Post by Mark - Bruins on Jul 21, 2007 20:26:55 GMT -5
I also completely disagree with the multiple leagues thing. If you can manage more than one team, and you enjoy doing so then why the hell not. I guarantee a lot of people in here are in more than 1. I would get bored if I only did one, and need more to get my hockey fix. I'm probably in 4 keeper/dynasty leagues or so and none of them hamper my ability to keep up with my other teams. In fact, I feel being in more leagues helps me, as I do more research on players/prospects, and can apply what I learn to other leagues as well. As much as it pains me to say it, but Jesse is spot on. I actually think being in more than 1 league promotes being an active GM. If I decide to be an active GM and do player research, follow stats, etc. then I'd want to be in more than one league to make that research worth the time I invested in it. Last year I was active in two keeper leagues and I had fun in both. Am I suddenly going to say "suck it" to this league because I'm in more than 1 league? No. I'm open to ideas just fine, what we're discussing in this thread however is the idea to change this league into a money league. If this fails we could entertain the idea of a separate league at a later date. I've also worked at my team to get it this good. You had the good fortune to draft your own team, again I ask, did you purposely draft a loser? You said you're open to ideas, but what use is that if you just stated you're unwilling to modify your proposal until its been rejected outright? It shouldn't matter if I purposely drafted a loser (which I did and I'm sure Jesse will agree with me that both I and my team suck it long and suck it hard) or that you didn't draft your team. What matters is if any GM is unwilling to do a money league with current rosters. I could go into a more detailed explanation about my thoughts on using current rosters, but honestly I just don't feel like I need to justify myself. If you feel differently, let me know and I can get into a pointless and lengthy discussion with you. Playing fantasy hockey is fun enough for me that doing it for money isn't a real necessity for me and would probably only stress me out. I seriously doubt I'd join any kind of money league. |
|
|
|
Post by Derrick - Senators on Jul 21, 2007 23:03:54 GMT -5
I just love how the managers of all winning teams are so opposed to a "side league" (as you call it). It would take minimal organizing. All it'd take is people to send their entry pay in, someone to hold the money and distribute at the end, and the ability to create a league on yahoo and find a draft time everyone could make. I'd even be willing to take that responsibility and set it up. your post just radiates with biasness. what a surprise. by your thinking, every "winning" manager is opposed to a side league, so wouldnt that mean the opposite for the "losing" managers? how hard is this claim to refute. watch. umm i Just love how all the "losing" managers are all about a side league. wow. i know. (Insert how the two aforementioned equal and opposite sides to the argument are COMPLETELY different here) yes yes. thats great. If you can manage it, why not? ...but thats not what im talking about at all. the key components of my original post you overlooked. "confusing....and takes away from this league itself."I wish i could count how many times ive heard "who has him?" "i thought i traded him away" "is it my pick?" "which team are you?" " i cant remember if i have him in this league or not" etc etc etc. sorry, i consider that half-assing it. if youre not involved enough to know things of that nature you dont have a place here. THATS what im talking about, not information purposes and hockey fixes. as far as side leagues go, they are completely pointless for both "winning managers" and "losing managers." It's irrelevant. Those side leagues are not NAFHL. the side leagues dont have history or hours of time put into them to make them go. "side leagues" are one year yahoo leagues and nothing more. that would DEFINITELY complicate and confuse things in regards to what i previously mentioned. if you want to start a "side league" up get some of your buddies together for as custom yahoo league or join a public league, it has no place here. and listen pal, i would be against a side league if i won the championship last year, got 4th place, missed the playoffs or was in dead last. your way of thinking is cheap and to even insinuate i care about money over the leagues well being is insulting. i guess you should have seen it coming when i asked for money to save the league, or asked for pitch ins running the league last year, or asked for donations to help with the new website, or maybe just a little something special for all the time and effort i put into keeping this afloat. as i said before (selective reading) "to throw away an otherwise fun, healthy, growing league for a few bucks....im not in to." if you want to pay me, pay me with your time, dedication, effort and league activity, thats the only form of payment good here. so without further adieu, im squashing this idea now. |
|
|
|
Post by Derrick - Senators on Jul 22, 2007 0:05:40 GMT -5
...and just to leave you with something to chew on.
You claim having multiple teams doesnt hamper your performance but the Top 3 finishers in the NAFHL playoffs only have one team in one keeper league. coincidence? tricky tricky.
|
|
So exciting.
You better make that pick or trade it! I'm excited to see if we can use up all the draft picks this year.