![]() |
might as well use yahoo again since everyone is familiar with it.
|
I guess we could check out ESPN
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
I'm gonna check out ESPN.com's version and see if it is better than the yahoo one and we'll go from there.
|
espn.com looks very nice, but its invite only.
send me a forum pm with your email address if you want to join so I can invite you. |
Quote:
|
I would hope the draft starts a few days before the actual season begins.
|
Quote:
|
i havent really set a draft date yet.
|
My suggestion is the first week of August, but then again I forget when the season starts exactly.
|
spots have been filling up fast, only 3 remaining out of 12.
should we go to 16 teams max? |
Quote:
|
No. 12 is fine.
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Here's a quick example. After four rounds with 12 teams, you'd have 48 players taken. After four rounds with 16 teams, you'd have 64 players taken. So if you did have the last pick of the fourth round, you'd be taking the 64th best player rather than the 48th. The eighth round would be far worse: 96 vs 128. The further you go into the draft, the more you have to reach for 2nd and 3rd stringers to try and fill in your squad. It's easy to say "people who do better research will do fine even with more teams," but let's be honest: absolutely no one predicted Miles Austin would have the season he did last year. Trying to pick from a bunch of backups/rookies and find value is fun when you've actually heard of the guy (12 teams,) but in the later rounds of a 16 team draft, you're literally picking from people you've hardly heard of, at least in my experience (and make no mistake, I follow the NFL thoroughly.) So those are my thoughts. I'm very against having too many teams, as I've found 10-12 means there's enough good players spread around to make things fairly competitive, rather than having a few dominant teams and a lot of pathetic teams that you'll often get with 16 team draft. By no means will only having 10-12 prevent really good/bad teams, but it pulls the teams closer to the middle, rather than pushing them to the extremes (as is found with 16 teams.) Man I tend to ramble in these sort of replies... |
Quote:
I SUPPORT 16 |
Gladius is right. I'd rather it be competitive than having the talent pool spread very thin where a couple teams might have a bunch of 2nd and 3rd stringers.
But then again, I doubt there will be 16 interested people continuously checking this. Last years league had like 2-3 people who stopped checking it out of the 14 after a week. |
only position i can see anyone using backups on is for the WR position
there are 32 starting QBs in the NFL there are 32 #1 RB's there are 32 #1 WRs, and 32 #2's so theoretically everyone could have two of the starting QBs in the NFL same for each psotion besides WR. talent is just spread more thin is all. however signup seems to have slowed down so it doesn't look like we will need 16 teams yet despite how we vote on it |
You forgot bye weeks.
|
Quote:
|
still 3 spots open, where is this massive amount of people that i am told wanted to participate last year?
|
DC must be retarded; NFL.com does allow you to create a free league. I just made a test league a few minutes ago.
|
we've still got 3 slots open still if anyone is interested send DC a message plzx
|
nope
|
when is draft
|
Quote:
|
great
|
I actually forgot which site we're using.. espn right?
|
ok well since this league is failing im doing a new one goodbye
|
invite me bigbear
|
i dont feel like looking for one. THANKS A LOT DC. NO FANTASY FOOTBALL FOR ME THIS YEAR
|
Boo.
|
Quote:
|
| All times are GMT +2. The time now is 07:36 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Copyright (C) 1998-2019 Toonslab All Rights Reserved.