HomeLog inRegisterFAQSearch

Share | 
 

 My intent in 2017

View previous topic View next topic Go down 
Go to page : 1, 2  Next
AuthorMessage
Minnesota Eternals
 
 
avatar

Posts : 22577

PostSubject: My intent in 2017   Sun Apr 03, 2016 7:42 pm

I am gonna get into this now to be fair to all...

In 2017...2017...2017...2017.....have I made it clear I am talking NEXT YEAR?

It will be my intent in January to change the RFA process to the intended plan which I fucked up in the beginning, and despite several arguments never corrected in some fashion even to this day. The line "an owner may only "match" bids on their own player" will be added in January.

This whole thing where everyone just opens the bidding on their own tagged players is nothing short of a joke. If you can't see that, that is unfortunate but it's completely shitting on the point and because I didn't have that important line above included in the bylaws, we have watched now 4 RFA sessions crapped on by this unsophisticated donkey show.

As with anything, I am always listening to ideas and welcome proposals but I am just letting ya'll know now that this retardation will not see 5 years of life. Boiling everything down to the most basic....everyone is given 1 SFT to retain a player without dealing with others...then we have 4 other tags which have varied levels of "strength" but none of them were ever intended to be advantageous for the players present owner...the bylaws never intended for you to not only have these tools with their various "powers" AND to control when things played out.

I'll leave it at that for now but I'm sure further argument about the topic will come in this thread...I'll go further if necessary. I just wanted to let ya'll know where I was at because I thought about this long and hard at work today and I feel it wouldn't be right to not say anything until much later or whatever.


Back to top Go down
Tarpon Springs RedKnights
 
 
avatar

Posts : 7982

PostSubject: Re: My intent in 2017   Sun Apr 03, 2016 7:48 pm

Sounds good to me. Simple and it takes care of it.


Back to top Go down
Norfolk Bombers
 
 
avatar

Posts : 5690

PostSubject: Re: My intent in 2017   Sun Apr 03, 2016 7:48 pm

cheers

Glad to hear!



Back to top Go down
Bergen Brawlers
 
 
avatar

Posts : 5100

PostSubject: Re: My intent in 2017   Sun Apr 03, 2016 7:50 pm

My intent in 2017 is to take home the title.

Great idea for a thread.


























I'm cool with the proposed added language.


Back to top Go down
Titletown Tyrants
 
 
avatar

Posts : 10055

PostSubject: Re: My intent in 2017   Sun Apr 03, 2016 7:53 pm

I'm cool with it.


Back to top Go down
New England Nineties
 
 
avatar

Posts : 5585

PostSubject: Re: My intent in 2017   Sun Apr 03, 2016 8:13 pm

I like it, I think I've stated that before. You should, as an RFA owner, be at the mercy of the bidding pool.


Back to top Go down
Mohawk Ridge Marauders
 
 
avatar

Posts : 20131

PostSubject: Re: My intent in 2017   Sun Apr 03, 2016 8:16 pm

Most other RFA's I've been in have "phases" where all FT's are bid on, then TT, then everything else. I'm cool with changing it up though. Looking forward to hearing the proposal!


Back to top Go down
Titletown Tyrants
 
 
avatar

Posts : 10055

PostSubject: Re: My intent in 2017   Sun Apr 03, 2016 8:25 pm

Mohawk Ridge Marauders wrote:
Most other RFA's I've been in have "phases" where all FT's are bid on, then TT, then everything else.  I'm cool with changing it up though.  Looking forward to hearing the proposal!  

Yeah, my other league does all the FT's, then all the TT's, then all the RFA's in that order. It has it's positives and negatives.


Back to top Go down
Morrison Minions
 
 
avatar

Posts : 7113

PostSubject: Re: My intent in 2017   Sun Apr 03, 2016 8:26 pm

I'll use whatever rules are in place.


Back to top Go down
Minnesota Eternals
 
 
avatar

Posts : 22577

PostSubject: Re: My intent in 2017   Sun Apr 03, 2016 8:28 pm

As of right now, my proposal change is that the missing line will just be added in January to end this nonsense.

I understand that other leagues have different scenarios...Chris is the most vocal on the subject...and while I cannot speak to the intent of those other leagues...the process here was always supposed to be one where folks could come with many different strategies and many different outcomes could occur...yes, some will walk away feeling like they fucked up and some might walk away feeling like the knocked it out of the park....but the super-controlled nature of having tagged players auctioned first (by design or because my error allows people to start their own auctions) is weaksauce in comparison to what was supposed to be our RFA sessions.

I look forward to people seeing this reality next year. It will be much more dramatic, you'll feel like there are many more variables to consider, you'll feel like there are 500 ways you "could" proceed and ultimately when RFA ends, you'll feel like you survived something.

This mistake I made has dulled RFA quite a bit from it's intent and I have nobody to blame for that other than me. Noted.


Back to top Go down
Philadelphia Pigskins
 
 
avatar

Posts : 6708

PostSubject: Re: My intent in 2017   Sun Apr 03, 2016 8:30 pm

I'm looking forward to the change. I've never liked owners nominating their own tagged players


Back to top Go down
Whiskey Creek Gadabouts
 
 
avatar

Posts : 5195

PostSubject: Re: My intent in 2017   Sun Apr 03, 2016 8:37 pm

I agree with Chris whenever he posts his stated objective. vote yes

It's the rules and I'll have to live with it, but as I've stated before, I think it will inhibit bidding. When you are franchising someone you're not saying you'd only go 50wbs + a first... You're willing to go higher and if you have to wait until the end of the RFA period and hold back WBs, then there are other guys that you're not going to bid on because you're waiting to see what happens to your player.

I think it's a mistake, but thems the breaks.


Back to top Go down
Morrison Minions
 
 
avatar

Posts : 7113

PostSubject: Re: My intent in 2017   Sun Apr 03, 2016 8:42 pm

Whiskey Creek Gadabouts wrote:
I agree with Chris whenever he posts his stated objective.  vote yes

It's the rules and I'll have to live with it, but as I've stated before, I think it will inhibit bidding.  When you are franchising someone you're not saying you'd only go 50wbs + a first... You're willing to go higher and if you have to wait until the end of the RFA period and hold back WBs, then there are other guys that you're not going to bid on because you're waiting to see what happens to your player.  

I think it's a mistake, but thems the breaks.

Fantasy football isn't about mitigating risk wink , it's about gambling, and holding your breath that the dice fall in your favor.


Back to top Go down
Norfolk Bombers
 
 
avatar

Posts : 5690

PostSubject: Re: My intent in 2017   Sun Apr 03, 2016 8:42 pm

Morrison Minions wrote:
Whiskey Creek Gadabouts wrote:
I agree with Chris whenever he posts his stated objective.  vote yes

It's the rules and I'll have to live with it, but as I've stated before, I think it will inhibit bidding.  When you are franchising someone you're not saying you'd only go 50wbs + a first... You're willing to go higher and if you have to wait until the end of the RFA period and hold back WBs, then there are other guys that you're not going to bid on because you're waiting to see what happens to your player.  

I think it's a mistake, but thems the breaks.

Fantasy football isn't about mitigating risk wink , it's about gambling, and holding your breath that the dice fall in your favor.

good post


Back to top Go down
Morrison Minions
 
 
avatar

Posts : 7113

PostSubject: Re: My intent in 2017   Sun Apr 03, 2016 8:44 pm

Norfolk Bombers wrote:
Morrison Minions wrote:
Whiskey Creek Gadabouts wrote:
I agree with Chris whenever he posts his stated objective.  vote yes

It's the rules and I'll have to live with it, but as I've stated before, I think it will inhibit bidding.  When you are franchising someone you're not saying you'd only go 50wbs + a first... You're willing to go higher and if you have to wait until the end of the RFA period and hold back WBs, then there are other guys that you're not going to bid on because you're waiting to see what happens to your player.  

I think it's a mistake, but thems the breaks.

Fantasy football isn't about mitigating risk wink , it's about gambling, and holding your breath that the dice fall in your favor.

good post



Back to top Go down
Norfolk Bombers
 
 
avatar

Posts : 5690

PostSubject: Re: My intent in 2017   Sun Apr 03, 2016 8:47 pm

Morrison Minions wrote:
Norfolk Bombers wrote:
Morrison Minions wrote:
Whiskey Creek Gadabouts wrote:
I agree with Chris whenever he posts his stated objective.  vote yes

It's the rules and I'll have to live with it, but as I've stated before, I think it will inhibit bidding.  When you are franchising someone you're not saying you'd only go 50wbs + a first... You're willing to go higher and if you have to wait until the end of the RFA period and hold back WBs, then there are other guys that you're not going to bid on because you're waiting to see what happens to your player.  

I think it's a mistake, but thems the breaks.

Fantasy football isn't about mitigating risk wink , it's about gambling, and holding your breath that the dice fall in your favor.

good post


I know, but your statement is exactly what Andy is trying to create. You want a sure think use the SFT, otherwise you better hope things break your way...


Back to top Go down
Morrison Minions
 
 
avatar

Posts : 7113

PostSubject: Re: My intent in 2017   Sun Apr 03, 2016 8:48 pm

Norfolk Bombers wrote:
Morrison Minions wrote:
Norfolk Bombers wrote:
Morrison Minions wrote:
Whiskey Creek Gadabouts wrote:
I agree with Chris whenever he posts his stated objective.  vote yes

It's the rules and I'll have to live with it, but as I've stated before, I think it will inhibit bidding.  When you are franchising someone you're not saying you'd only go 50wbs + a first... You're willing to go higher and if you have to wait until the end of the RFA period and hold back WBs, then there are other guys that you're not going to bid on because you're waiting to see what happens to your player.  

I think it's a mistake, but thems the breaks.

Fantasy football isn't about mitigating risk wink , it's about gambling, and holding your breath that the dice fall in your favor.

good post


I know, but your statement is exactly what Andy is trying to create.  You want a sure think use the SFT, otherwise you better hope things break your way...

Which is silly to me. Let's just put it on auto draft and hope for the best.


Back to top Go down
Minnesota Eternals
 
 
avatar

Posts : 22577

PostSubject: Re: My intent in 2017   Sun Apr 03, 2016 8:59 pm

Whiskey Creek Gadabouts wrote:
I agree with Chris whenever he posts his stated objective.  vote yes

It's the rules and I'll have to live with it, but as I've stated before, I think it will inhibit bidding.  When you are franchising someone you're not saying you'd only go 50wbs + a first... You're willing to go higher and if you have to wait until the end of the RFA period and hold back WBs, then there are other guys that you're not going to bid on because you're waiting to see what happens to your player.  

I think it's a mistake, but thems the breaks.

You're not wrong BUT you seem to only be addressing one of many outcomes. Often times when you or Chris have presented this case, it's done so as if everyone is going to conspire to leave your tagged player until the end in an effort to handcuff you or fuck you....but think about it...

Most if not everyone has 1 or 2 tagged players...it's illogical as shit that everyone would independently sit on their hands on all of these players until the end of the session because in that event, we would all be going to war over them AFTER all of the other auctions which isn't advantageous to anyone..and clearly so.

Will you have a decision to make in regards to playing RFA defensively in order to defend your tagged player later (if you so choose)? Absolutely. But one does not have to tag a player with the intent to retain first of all. Second of all, one can gamble that they can be on the offensive and still be in a position to defend their tagged player if in fact someone puts that player up for auction.

Also, the uncertainty of when tagged players are put up (if at all) will make the entire RFA session much more exciting as opposed to this shit where all the best players go up at once, go nearly uncontested because quite honestly most people are able to see alternative options right now so why bother paying big? Whereas in 2017, two owners might be desperate late in the session and decide to go all-in for that last piece driving the auction result WAY UP...which is what auctions are supposed to be.

Lastly, I have said it before but I think everything one needs to know is right before our eyes...if it wasn't 200% advantageous to current owners to get their tagged players up first, you wouldn't see EVERYONE doing it like they have. The SFT is your benefit. The FT/TT/CT/EXT are tools for you to utilize but they're not meant to be advantageous to you.....you make what you can from them with numerous strategies.


Back to top Go down
Minnesota Eternals
 
 
avatar

Posts : 22577

PostSubject: Re: My intent in 2017   Sun Apr 03, 2016 9:04 pm

Morrison Minions wrote:
Norfolk Bombers wrote:
Morrison Minions wrote:
Norfolk Bombers wrote:
Morrison Minions wrote:
Whiskey Creek Gadabouts wrote:
I agree with Chris whenever he posts his stated objective.  vote yes

It's the rules and I'll have to live with it, but as I've stated before, I think it will inhibit bidding.  When you are franchising someone you're not saying you'd only go 50wbs + a first... You're willing to go higher and if you have to wait until the end of the RFA period and hold back WBs, then there are other guys that you're not going to bid on because you're waiting to see what happens to your player.  

I think it's a mistake, but thems the breaks.

Fantasy football isn't about mitigating risk wink , it's about gambling, and holding your breath that the dice fall in your favor.

good post


I know, but your statement is exactly what Andy is trying to create.  You want a sure think use the SFT, otherwise you better hope things break your way...

Which is silly to me. Let's just put it on auto draft and hope for the best.

You act like it's a spin of the roulette wheel....how is there not a hundred avenues of strategy if you get a SFT, and an EXT and you have the ability to control your WB balance, your use of the TT and FT and CT and you can decide who to bid on, when to bid on them and manage your way through all of that just like 11 other motherfuckers?  It's strategy on steroids if anything.

I think some of you guys misinterpreted what the intent of RFA in RW was because of experiences elsewhere...
...or you prefer things much closer to the old dynasty format where you just get to keep your players forever which is the ultimate CONTROL.  

Here, you can have control but it's gonna take a shit ton of work because things are not handed out on a silver platter.

Like many things, I have faith that when people actually get to see what I am saying in action they will not only learn to enjoy it, they'll find it to be vastly superior to what they know already.




Last edited by Minnesota Eternals on Sun Apr 03, 2016 9:05 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top Go down
Whiskey Creek Gadabouts
 
 
avatar

Posts : 5195

PostSubject: Re: My intent in 2017   Sun Apr 03, 2016 9:05 pm

Minnesota Eternals wrote:
Whiskey Creek Gadabouts wrote:
I agree with Chris whenever he posts his stated objective.  vote yes

It's the rules and I'll have to live with it, but as I've stated before, I think it will inhibit bidding.  When you are franchising someone you're not saying you'd only go 50wbs + a first... You're willing to go higher and if you have to wait until the end of the RFA period and hold back WBs, then there are other guys that you're not going to bid on because you're waiting to see what happens to your player.  

I think it's a mistake, but thems the breaks.

You're not wrong BUT you seem to only be addressing one of many outcomes.  Often times when you or Chris have presented this case, it's done so as if everyone is going to conspire to leave your tagged player until the end in an effort to handcuff you or fuck you....but think about it...

Most if not everyone has 1 or 2 tagged players...it's illogical as shit that everyone would independently sit on their hands on all of these players until the end of the session because in that event, we would all be going to war over them AFTER all of the other auctions which isn't advantageous to anyone..and clearly so.

Will you have a decision to make in regards to playing RFA defensively in order to defend your tagged player later (if you so choose)? Absolutely.  But one does not have to tag a player with the intent to retain first of all.  Second of all, one can gamble that they can be on the offensive and still be in a position to defend their tagged player if in fact someone puts that player up for auction.

Also, the uncertainty of when tagged players are put up (if at all) will make the entire RFA session much more exciting as opposed to this shit where all the best players go up at once, go nearly uncontested because quite honestly most people are able to see alternative options right now so why bother paying big?  Whereas in 2017, two owners might be desperate late in the session and decide to go all-in for that last piece driving the auction result WAY UP...which is what auctions are supposed to be.

Lastly, I have said it before but I think everything one needs to know is right before our eyes...if it wasn't 200% advantageous to current owners to get their tagged players up first, you wouldn't see EVERYONE doing it like they have.  The SFT is your benefit.  The FT/TT/CT/EXT are tools for you to utilize but they're not meant to be advantageous to you.....you make what you can from them with numerous strategies.

I get that and appreciate the response. Apparently, we differ on whether the tagging process is for guys you want to retain vs. guys you'd like to get some compensation for. i look at those tags as guys I'd like to retain. As such, this would essentially mean most people are going to have to play defense. I don't necessarily think it's illogical as shit that everyone would sit back and wait to protect "their guy". But, we'll see next year I guess.

My personal prediction is that there will be a lot more defense and a lot less aggressive bidding on other players - you know, like the TT.


Back to top Go down
Minnesota Eternals
 
 
avatar

Posts : 22577

PostSubject: Re: My intent in 2017   Sun Apr 03, 2016 9:12 pm

Whiskey Creek Gadabouts wrote:
Minnesota Eternals wrote:
Whiskey Creek Gadabouts wrote:
I agree with Chris whenever he posts his stated objective.  vote yes

It's the rules and I'll have to live with it, but as I've stated before, I think it will inhibit bidding.  When you are franchising someone you're not saying you'd only go 50wbs + a first... You're willing to go higher and if you have to wait until the end of the RFA period and hold back WBs, then there are other guys that you're not going to bid on because you're waiting to see what happens to your player.  

I think it's a mistake, but thems the breaks.

You're not wrong BUT you seem to only be addressing one of many outcomes.  Often times when you or Chris have presented this case, it's done so as if everyone is going to conspire to leave your tagged player until the end in an effort to handcuff you or fuck you....but think about it...

Most if not everyone has 1 or 2 tagged players...it's illogical as shit that everyone would independently sit on their hands on all of these players until the end of the session because in that event, we would all be going to war over them AFTER all of the other auctions which isn't advantageous to anyone..and clearly so.

Will you have a decision to make in regards to playing RFA defensively in order to defend your tagged player later (if you so choose)? Absolutely.  But one does not have to tag a player with the intent to retain first of all.  Second of all, one can gamble that they can be on the offensive and still be in a position to defend their tagged player if in fact someone puts that player up for auction.

Also, the uncertainty of when tagged players are put up (if at all) will make the entire RFA session much more exciting as opposed to this shit where all the best players go up at once, go nearly uncontested because quite honestly most people are able to see alternative options right now so why bother paying big?  Whereas in 2017, two owners might be desperate late in the session and decide to go all-in for that last piece driving the auction result WAY UP...which is what auctions are supposed to be.

Lastly, I have said it before but I think everything one needs to know is right before our eyes...if it wasn't 200% advantageous to current owners to get their tagged players up first, you wouldn't see EVERYONE doing it like they have.  The SFT is your benefit.  The FT/TT/CT/EXT are tools for you to utilize but they're not meant to be advantageous to you.....you make what you can from them with numerous strategies.

I get that and appreciate the response.  Apparently, we differ on whether the tagging process is for guys you want to retain vs. guys you'd like to get some compensation for.  i look at those tags as guys I'd like to retain.  As such, this would essentially mean most people are going to have to play defense.  I don't necessarily think it's illogical as shit that everyone would sit back and wait to protect "their guy".  But, we'll see next year I guess.    

My personal prediction is that there will be a lot more defense and a lot less aggressive bidding on other players - you know, like the TT.

I appreciate your willingness to see how it goes.

While you could very well be right...
I too tend to use my tags "to retain" and that won't change. Nothing about what I am saying makes it all that hard but it is harder than the gift wrapped nature of things today.

Let's pretend that you're right...that everyone in my version is gonna tag with the mindset of getting compensated....how would that work? I mean that only plays out if nearly everyone goes after others tagged players AND THUS loses their tagged players to another...with maybe a few rare instances where someone has enough WB and picks to acquire more than 1 tagged player of another AND retain their own. I don't think that's reality.

If everyone sits back to play defense like you say, then the person who zigs when everyone zags is likely gonna win out....or like I said earlier we're all gonna be dumbos who play small ball for the first half of RFA only to go to war in the second half when we all are at our weakest point (WB-wise)....

Either way, I think the level at which owners are going to lose their tagged players is being overstated.


Back to top Go down
Morrison Minions
 
 
avatar

Posts : 7113

PostSubject: Re: My intent in 2017   Sun Apr 03, 2016 9:13 pm

Minnesota Eternals wrote:
Morrison Minions wrote:
Norfolk Bombers wrote:
Morrison Minions wrote:
Norfolk Bombers wrote:
Morrison Minions wrote:
Whiskey Creek Gadabouts wrote:
I agree with Chris whenever he posts his stated objective.  vote yes

It's the rules and I'll have to live with it, but as I've stated before, I think it will inhibit bidding.  When you are franchising someone you're not saying you'd only go 50wbs + a first... You're willing to go higher and if you have to wait until the end of the RFA period and hold back WBs, then there are other guys that you're not going to bid on because you're waiting to see what happens to your player.  

I think it's a mistake, but thems the breaks.

Fantasy football isn't about mitigating risk wink , it's about gambling, and holding your breath that the dice fall in your favor.

good post


I know, but your statement is exactly what Andy is trying to create.  You want a sure think use the SFT, otherwise you better hope things break your way...

Which is silly to me. Let's just put it on auto draft and hope for the best.

You act like it's a spin of the roulette wheel....how is there not a hundred avenues of strategy if you get a SFT, and an EXT and you have the ability to control your WB balance, your use of the TT and FT and CT and you can decide who to bid on, when to bid on them and manage your way through all of that just like 11 other motherfuckers?  It's strategy on steroids if anything.

I think some of you guys misinterpreted what the intent of RFA in RW was because of experiences elsewhere...
...or you prefer things much closer to the old dynasty format where you just get to keep your players forever which is the ultimate CONTROL.  

Here, you can have control but it's gonna take a shit ton of work because things are not handed out on a silver platter.

Like many things, I have faith that when people actually get to see what I am saying in action they will not only learn to enjoy it, they'll find it to be vastly superior to what they know already.

My strategy, which is mine, is that I use a budget. I have 200k to put on a house. There are 12 of those available. I put 100k deposit to hold one. The first 11 sell between 120k and 170k. I only had 100k left over, so I could not purchase any of them. Then the one I have a deposit on goes on the market, and sells for $250k. Now there are no houses left, and I'm left holding my 200k while sleeping on the street.


Back to top Go down
Minnesota Eternals
 
 
avatar

Posts : 22577

PostSubject: Re: My intent in 2017   Sun Apr 03, 2016 9:15 pm

Morrison Minions wrote:
Minnesota Eternals wrote:
Morrison Minions wrote:
Norfolk Bombers wrote:
Morrison Minions wrote:
Norfolk Bombers wrote:
Morrison Minions wrote:
Whiskey Creek Gadabouts wrote:
I agree with Chris whenever he posts his stated objective.  vote yes

It's the rules and I'll have to live with it, but as I've stated before, I think it will inhibit bidding.  When you are franchising someone you're not saying you'd only go 50wbs + a first... You're willing to go higher and if you have to wait until the end of the RFA period and hold back WBs, then there are other guys that you're not going to bid on because you're waiting to see what happens to your player.  

I think it's a mistake, but thems the breaks.

Fantasy football isn't about mitigating risk wink , it's about gambling, and holding your breath that the dice fall in your favor.

good post


I know, but your statement is exactly what Andy is trying to create.  You want a sure think use the SFT, otherwise you better hope things break your way...

Which is silly to me. Let's just put it on auto draft and hope for the best.

You act like it's a spin of the roulette wheel....how is there not a hundred avenues of strategy if you get a SFT, and an EXT and you have the ability to control your WB balance, your use of the TT and FT and CT and you can decide who to bid on, when to bid on them and manage your way through all of that just like 11 other motherfuckers?  It's strategy on steroids if anything.

I think some of you guys misinterpreted what the intent of RFA in RW was because of experiences elsewhere...
...or you prefer things much closer to the old dynasty format where you just get to keep your players forever which is the ultimate CONTROL.  

Here, you can have control but it's gonna take a shit ton of work because things are not handed out on a silver platter.

Like many things, I have faith that when people actually get to see what I am saying in action they will not only learn to enjoy it, they'll find it to be vastly superior to what they know already.

My strategy, which is mine, is that I use a budget. I have 200k to put on a house. There are 12 of those available. I put 100k deposit to hold one. The first 11 sell between 120k and 170k. I only had 100k left over, so I could not purchase any of them. Then the one I have a deposit on goes on the market, and sells for $250k. Now there are no houses left, and I'm left holding my 200k while sleeping on the street.

So you feel you should be guaranteed a house?

I feel you should have to earn it...and you can always get an apartment of things don't work out...and while in said apartment you can work your way into a house in the future.


Back to top Go down
New England Nineties
 
 
avatar

Posts : 5585

PostSubject: Re: My intent in 2017   Sun Apr 03, 2016 9:19 pm

Andy will this apply to current 2016 auctions?


scared


Back to top Go down
Morrison Minions
 
 
avatar

Posts : 7113

PostSubject: Re: My intent in 2017   Sun Apr 03, 2016 9:20 pm

Minnesota Eternals wrote:
Morrison Minions wrote:
Minnesota Eternals wrote:
Morrison Minions wrote:
Norfolk Bombers wrote:
Morrison Minions wrote:
Norfolk Bombers wrote:
Morrison Minions wrote:
Whiskey Creek Gadabouts wrote:
I agree with Chris whenever he posts his stated objective.  vote yes

It's the rules and I'll have to live with it, but as I've stated before, I think it will inhibit bidding.  When you are franchising someone you're not saying you'd only go 50wbs + a first... You're willing to go higher and if you have to wait until the end of the RFA period and hold back WBs, then there are other guys that you're not going to bid on because you're waiting to see what happens to your player.  

I think it's a mistake, but thems the breaks.

Fantasy football isn't about mitigating risk wink , it's about gambling, and holding your breath that the dice fall in your favor.

good post


I know, but your statement is exactly what Andy is trying to create.  You want a sure think use the SFT, otherwise you better hope things break your way...

Which is silly to me. Let's just put it on auto draft and hope for the best.

You act like it's a spin of the roulette wheel....how is there not a hundred avenues of strategy if you get a SFT, and an EXT and you have the ability to control your WB balance, your use of the TT and FT and CT and you can decide who to bid on, when to bid on them and manage your way through all of that just like 11 other motherfuckers?  It's strategy on steroids if anything.

I think some of you guys misinterpreted what the intent of RFA in RW was because of experiences elsewhere...
...or you prefer things much closer to the old dynasty format where you just get to keep your players forever which is the ultimate CONTROL.  

Here, you can have control but it's gonna take a shit ton of work because things are not handed out on a silver platter.

Like many things, I have faith that when people actually get to see what I am saying in action they will not only learn to enjoy it, they'll find it to be vastly superior to what they know already.

My strategy, which is mine, is that I use a budget. I have 200k to put on a house. There are 12 of those available. I put 100k deposit to hold one. The first 11 sell between 120k and 170k. I only had 100k left over, so I could not purchase any of them. Then the one I have a deposit on goes on the market, and sells for $250k. Now there are no houses left, and I'm left holding my 200k while sleeping on the street.

So you feel you should be guaranteed a house?

I feel you should have to earn it...and you can always get an apartment of things don't work out...and while in said apartment you can work your way into a house in the future.

What did I do that didn't earn a house? What did I do that earned me an apartment?


Back to top Go down
Norfolk Bombers
 
 
avatar

Posts : 5690

PostSubject: Re: My intent in 2017   Sun Apr 03, 2016 9:22 pm

Morrison Minions wrote:
Minnesota Eternals wrote:
Morrison Minions wrote:
Minnesota Eternals wrote:
Morrison Minions wrote:
Norfolk Bombers wrote:
Morrison Minions wrote:
Norfolk Bombers wrote:
Morrison Minions wrote:
Whiskey Creek Gadabouts wrote:
I agree with Chris whenever he posts his stated objective.  vote yes

It's the rules and I'll have to live with it, but as I've stated before, I think it will inhibit bidding.  When you are franchising someone you're not saying you'd only go 50wbs + a first... You're willing to go higher and if you have to wait until the end of the RFA period and hold back WBs, then there are other guys that you're not going to bid on because you're waiting to see what happens to your player.  

I think it's a mistake, but thems the breaks.

Fantasy football isn't about mitigating risk wink , it's about gambling, and holding your breath that the dice fall in your favor.

good post




I know, but your statement is exactly what Andy is trying to create.  You want a sure think use the SFT, otherwise you better hope things break your way...

Which is silly to me. Let's just put it on auto draft and hope for the best.

You act like it's a spin of the roulette wheel....how is there not a hundred avenues of strategy if you get a SFT, and an EXT and you have the ability to control your WB balance, your use of the TT and FT and CT and you can decide who to bid on, when to bid on them and manage your way through all of that just like 11 other motherfuckers?  It's strategy on steroids if anything.

I think some of you guys misinterpreted what the intent of RFA in RW was because of experiences elsewhere...
...or you prefer things much closer to the old dynasty format where you just get to keep your players forever which is the ultimate CONTROL.  

Here, you can have control but it's gonna take a shit ton of work because things are not handed out on a silver platter.

Like many things, I have faith that when people actually get to see what I am saying in action they will not only learn to enjoy it, they'll find it to be vastly superior to what they know already.

My strategy, which is mine, is that I use a budget. I have 200k to put on a house. There are 12 of those available. I put 100k deposit to hold one. The first 11 sell between 120k and 170k. I only had 100k left over, so I could not purchase any of them. Then the one I have a deposit on goes on the market, and sells for $250k. Now there are no houses left, and I'm left holding my 200k while sleeping on the street.

So you feel you should be guaranteed a house?

I feel you should have to earn it...and you can always get an apartment of things don't work out...and while in said apartment you can work your way into a house in the future.

What did I do that didn't earn a house? What did I do that earned me an apartment?  

Not save enough money to spend $251K on a house.


Back to top Go down
Morrison Minions
 
 
avatar

Posts : 7113

PostSubject: Re: My intent in 2017   Sun Apr 03, 2016 9:24 pm

Norfolk Bombers wrote:
Morrison Minions wrote:
Minnesota Eternals wrote:
Morrison Minions wrote:
Minnesota Eternals wrote:
Morrison Minions wrote:
Norfolk Bombers wrote:
Morrison Minions wrote:
Norfolk Bombers wrote:
Morrison Minions wrote:
Whiskey Creek Gadabouts wrote:
I agree with Chris whenever he posts his stated objective.  vote yes

It's the rules and I'll have to live with it, but as I've stated before, I think it will inhibit bidding.  When you are franchising someone you're not saying you'd only go 50wbs + a first... You're willing to go higher and if you have to wait until the end of the RFA period and hold back WBs, then there are other guys that you're not going to bid on because you're waiting to see what happens to your player.  

I think it's a mistake, but thems the breaks.

Fantasy football isn't about mitigating risk wink , it's about gambling, and holding your breath that the dice fall in your favor.

good post




I know, but your statement is exactly what Andy is trying to create.  You want a sure think use the SFT, otherwise you better hope things break your way...

Which is silly to me. Let's just put it on auto draft and hope for the best.

You act like it's a spin of the roulette wheel....how is there not a hundred avenues of strategy if you get a SFT, and an EXT and you have the ability to control your WB balance, your use of the TT and FT and CT and you can decide who to bid on, when to bid on them and manage your way through all of that just like 11 other motherfuckers?  It's strategy on steroids if anything.

I think some of you guys misinterpreted what the intent of RFA in RW was because of experiences elsewhere...
...or you prefer things much closer to the old dynasty format where you just get to keep your players forever which is the ultimate CONTROL.  

Here, you can have control but it's gonna take a shit ton of work because things are not handed out on a silver platter.

Like many things, I have faith that when people actually get to see what I am saying in action they will not only learn to enjoy it, they'll find it to be vastly superior to what they know already.

My strategy, which is mine, is that I use a budget. I have 200k to put on a house. There are 12 of those available. I put 100k deposit to hold one. The first 11 sell between 120k and 170k. I only had 100k left over, so I could not purchase any of them. Then the one I have a deposit on goes on the market, and sells for $250k. Now there are no houses left, and I'm left holding my 200k while sleeping on the street.

So you feel you should be guaranteed a house?

I feel you should have to earn it...and you can always get an apartment of things don't work out...and while in said apartment you can work your way into a house in the future.

What did I do that didn't earn a house? What did I do that earned me an apartment?  

Not save enough money to spend $251K on a house.  

So to EARN A house, any house at all, I have to save more money than everyone else?


Back to top Go down
Minnesota Eternals
 
 
avatar

Posts : 22577

PostSubject: Re: My intent in 2017   Sun Apr 03, 2016 9:26 pm

Shawn, really?

You yourself said others got houses for 120-170....if you need to spend 251 then that's your fault for missing the boat or aiming at the best house on the street.



Back to top Go down
Morrison Minions
 
 
avatar

Posts : 7113

PostSubject: Re: My intent in 2017   Sun Apr 03, 2016 9:30 pm

Minnesota Eternals wrote:
Shawn, really?

You yourself said others got houses for 120-170....if you need to spend 251 then that's your fault for missing the boat or aiming at the best house on the street.


I did no such thing. The house I went for was appraised for the least amount. It just happened to be the last one on the block for sale. A house that was for sale, a house that I wanted to buy, and a house that I wasn't allowed to try to buy until someone else tried to buy it first.

This is how I play this game. I have a budget. I would like to utilize my budget. So yes, I am for real.


Back to top Go down
Minnesota Eternals
 
 
avatar

Posts : 22577

PostSubject: Re: My intent in 2017   Sun Apr 03, 2016 9:32 pm

Morrison Minions wrote:
Minnesota Eternals wrote:
Shawn, really?

You yourself said others got houses for 120-170....if you need to spend 251 then that's your fault for missing the boat or aiming at the best house on the street.


I did no such thing. The house I went for was appraised for the least amount. It just happened to be the last one on the block for sale. A house that was for sale, a house that I wanted to buy, and a house that I wasn't allowed to try to buy until someone else tried to buy it first.

This is how I play this game. I have a budget. I would like to utilize my budget. So yes, I am for real.

Well 11 other people didn't feel the house was worth going after until it was the last one on the block and you apparently already had your dream house because you didn't use your SFT on this Barbie Dream house that according to you is now gonna cost 251k....you had options and still do...hell you can trade your other houses to quickly get the cash to get this house if you really want to.



Back to top Go down
Morrison Minions
 
 
avatar

Posts : 7113

PostSubject: Re: My intent in 2017   Sun Apr 03, 2016 9:35 pm

Minnesota Eternals wrote:
Morrison Minions wrote:
Minnesota Eternals wrote:
Shawn, really?

You yourself said others got houses for 120-170....if you need to spend 251 then that's your fault for missing the boat or aiming at the best house on the street.


I did no such thing. The house I went for was appraised for the least amount. It just happened to be the last one on the block for sale. A house that was for sale, a house that I wanted to buy, and a house that I wasn't allowed to try to buy until someone else tried to buy it first.

This is how I play this game. I have a budget. I would like to utilize my budget. So yes, I am for real.

Well 11 other people didn't feel the house was worth going after until it was the last one on the block and you apparently already had your dream house because you didn't use your SFT on this Barbie Dream house that according to you is now gonna cost 251k....you had options and still do...hell you can trade your other houses to quickly get the cash to get this house if you really want to.


None of which applies to utilizing a budget.


Back to top Go down
New England Nineties
 
 
avatar

Posts : 5585

PostSubject: Re: My intent in 2017   Sun Apr 03, 2016 9:40 pm

Morrison Minions wrote:
Minnesota Eternals wrote:
Shawn, really?

You yourself said others got houses for 120-170....if you need to spend 251 then that's your fault for missing the boat or aiming at the best house on the street.


I did no such thing. The house I went for was appraised for the least amount. It just happened to be the last one on the block for sale. A house that was for sale, a house that I wanted to buy, and a house that I wasn't allowed to try to buy until someone else tried to buy it first.

This is how I play this game. I have a budget. I would like to utilize my budget. So yes, I am for real.

Well there are 11 other players in this game, and they all play it differently, and the whole point of RFA is that those other 11 owners get a say in how much your players cost to keep (SFT/Ext notwithstanding).

If the owners bid more than you budget for a player, then you let him go. If they don't, you get to keep him. I don't really see the problem.



Back to top Go down
Minnesota Eternals
 
 
avatar

Posts : 22577

PostSubject: Re: My intent in 2017   Sun Apr 03, 2016 9:42 pm

Morrison Minions wrote:
Minnesota Eternals wrote:
Morrison Minions wrote:
Minnesota Eternals wrote:
Shawn, really?

You yourself said others got houses for 120-170....if you need to spend 251 then that's your fault for missing the boat or aiming at the best house on the street.


I did no such thing. The house I went for was appraised for the least amount. It just happened to be the last one on the block for sale. A house that was for sale, a house that I wanted to buy, and a house that I wasn't allowed to try to buy until someone else tried to buy it first.

This is how I play this game. I have a budget. I would like to utilize my budget. So yes, I am for real.

Well 11 other people didn't feel the house was worth going after until it was the last one on the block and you apparently already had your dream house because you didn't use your SFT on this Barbie Dream house that according to you is now gonna cost 251k....you had options and still do...hell you can trade your other houses to quickly get the cash to get this house if you really want to.


None of which applies to utilizing a budget.

So because you have a budget and want a house, you should have one?

You'll be hard pressed to find someone more pro-budget than me but I realize that sometimes one just might not have enough capital to acquire something they want.

Again, not saying your scenario cannot happen but a few folks here are ONLY addressing the worst possible outcome while not acknowledging any of the others...there are so many ways you can proceed under my version of RFA that honestly, if at the end you're standing there without at the end, you either got REALLY REALLY UNLUCKY or you misplayed your hand. I mean, are 12 people going to get fucked over? 11? If others can manage then why not you?


Back to top Go down
New England Nineties
 
 
avatar

Posts : 5585

PostSubject: Re: My intent in 2017   Sun Apr 03, 2016 9:42 pm

Morrison Minions wrote:
Minnesota Eternals wrote:
Morrison Minions wrote:
Minnesota Eternals wrote:
Shawn, really?

You yourself said others got houses for 120-170....if you need to spend 251 then that's your fault for missing the boat or aiming at the best house on the street.


I did no such thing. The house I went for was appraised for the least amount. It just happened to be the last one on the block for sale. A house that was for sale, a house that I wanted to buy, and a house that I wasn't allowed to try to buy until someone else tried to buy it first.

This is how I play this game. I have a budget. I would like to utilize my budget. So yes, I am for real.

Well 11 other people didn't feel the house was worth going after until it was the last one on the block and you apparently already had your dream house because you didn't use your SFT on this Barbie Dream house that according to you is now gonna cost 251k....you had options and still do...hell you can trade your other houses to quickly get the cash to get this house if you really want to.


None of which applies to utilizing a budget.

Of course it does. You saved for something that was outside of your budget. That's kinda the point of a market.


Back to top Go down
Morrison Minions
 
 
avatar

Posts : 7113

PostSubject: Re: My intent in 2017   Sun Apr 03, 2016 9:45 pm

I think you guys are missing the point that you are saying everyone needs to budget to have the most money. That doesn't make sense.

12 people aren't going to get fucked over. ONE person is going to get fucked over. I feel bad for that poor sap. Especially if it's me.


Back to top Go down
Minnesota Eternals
 
 
avatar

Posts : 22577

PostSubject: Re: My intent in 2017   Sun Apr 03, 2016 9:47 pm

I have to laugh (actually cry) because Chris hasn't even gotten in on this yet....

One good thing to consider for those who disagree with me...if you're right and it's a disaster then I think I will see it and adjust as we've done in the past...but I'm beyond confident that the reality of my version of RFA is miles ahead of this current thing and you will all be converted once you roll through it.


Back to top Go down
Morrison Minions
 
 
avatar

Posts : 7113

PostSubject: Re: My intent in 2017   Sun Apr 03, 2016 9:48 pm

New England Nineties wrote:
Morrison Minions wrote:
Minnesota Eternals wrote:
Morrison Minions wrote:
Minnesota Eternals wrote:
Shawn, really?

You yourself said others got houses for 120-170....if you need to spend 251 then that's your fault for missing the boat or aiming at the best house on the street.


I did no such thing. The house I went for was appraised for the least amount. It just happened to be the last one on the block for sale. A house that was for sale, a house that I wanted to buy, and a house that I wasn't allowed to try to buy until someone else tried to buy it first.

This is how I play this game. I have a budget. I would like to utilize my budget. So yes, I am for real.

Well 11 other people didn't feel the house was worth going after until it was the last one on the block and you apparently already had your dream house because you didn't use your SFT on this Barbie Dream house that according to you is now gonna cost 251k....you had options and still do...hell you can trade your other houses to quickly get the cash to get this house if you really want to.


None of which applies to utilizing a budget.

Of course it does. You saved for something that was outside of your budget. That's kinda the point of a market.

I used a budget of 200k for a 120k house. That doesnt qualify for saving for something outside my budget. That shouldn't be my fault. It would have went for 120k if I were allowed to buy it at the beginning, but I wasn't allowed to purchase it.


Back to top Go down
Minnesota Eternals
 
 
avatar

Posts : 22577

PostSubject: Re: My intent in 2017   Sun Apr 03, 2016 9:49 pm

Morrison Minions wrote:
I think you guys are missing the point that you are saying everyone needs to budget to have the most money. That doesn't make sense.

12 people aren't going to get fucked over. ONE person is going to get fucked over. I feel bad for that poor sap. Especially if it's me.

If 11 people make out and 1 guy gets fucked over, then that 1 guy should really do some soul searching to figure out why others had success while he had failure. Capitalism >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Socialism


Back to top Go down
Morrison Minions
 
 
avatar

Posts : 7113

PostSubject: Re: My intent in 2017   Sun Apr 03, 2016 9:50 pm

Minnesota Eternals wrote:
I have to laugh (actually cry) because Chris hasn't even gotten in on this yet....

One good thing to consider for those who disagree with me...if you're right and it's a disaster then I think I will see it and adjust as we've done in the past...but I'm beyond confident that the reality of my version of RFA is miles ahead of this current thing and you will all be converted once you roll through it.

I want you to know that I'm happy to move on with whatever rules are in place. I'm only trying to explain how I view the situation.

With the new rule, I will have to rethink the options of using the tags at all.


Back to top Go down
Minnesota Eternals
 
 
avatar

Posts : 22577

PostSubject: Re: My intent in 2017   Sun Apr 03, 2016 9:51 pm

Morrison Minions wrote:
New England Nineties wrote:
Morrison Minions wrote:
Minnesota Eternals wrote:
Morrison Minions wrote:
Minnesota Eternals wrote:
Shawn, really?

You yourself said others got houses for 120-170....if you need to spend 251 then that's your fault for missing the boat or aiming at the best house on the street.


I did no such thing. The house I went for was appraised for the least amount. It just happened to be the last one on the block for sale. A house that was for sale, a house that I wanted to buy, and a house that I wasn't allowed to try to buy until someone else tried to buy it first.

This is how I play this game. I have a budget. I would like to utilize my budget. So yes, I am for real.

Well 11 other people didn't feel the house was worth going after until it was the last one on the block and you apparently already had your dream house because you didn't use your SFT on this Barbie Dream house that according to you is now gonna cost 251k....you had options and still do...hell you can trade your other houses to quickly get the cash to get this house if you really want to.


None of which applies to utilizing a budget.

Of course it does. You saved for something that was outside of your budget. That's kinda the point of a market.

I used a budget of 200k for a 120k house. That doesnt qualify for saving for something outside my budget. That shouldn't be my fault. It would have went for 120k if I were allowed to buy it at the beginning, but I wasn't allowed to purchase it.

In your extreme negative outcome scenario, the silver lining is that 11 other motherfuckers burned their cash on houses that went for too much money in your eyes...so you can now rent for a year and be in the drivers seat for a house next year with all your saved cash. Boom. Winner!


Back to top Go down
Morrison Minions
 
 
avatar

Posts : 7113

PostSubject: Re: My intent in 2017   Sun Apr 03, 2016 9:51 pm

Minnesota Eternals wrote:
Morrison Minions wrote:
I think you guys are missing the point that you are saying everyone needs to budget to have the most money. That doesn't make sense.

12 people aren't going to get fucked over. ONE person is going to get fucked over. I feel bad for that poor sap. Especially if it's me.

If 11 people make out and 1 guy gets fucked over, then that 1 guy should really do some soul searching to figure out why others had success while he had failure.  Capitalism >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Socialism

Ahh, but you are standing here as the Socialist leader that is preventing people from purchasing what they want to purchase.


Back to top Go down
Bergen Brawlers
 
 
avatar

Posts : 5100

PostSubject: Re: My intent in 2017   Sun Apr 03, 2016 9:51 pm

I think that Andy's proposed approach most closely mirrors the NFL approach and I'm on board with it. May I lose a guy? Maybe. It's not a problem now because I'm not wed to any of my guys. But this is a zero sum game so if you make sure you get your guy, you must necessarily guarantee that another owner (11 actually) don't get him. Give me a set of rules and I'll abide by them. And work out the appropriate strategy.


Back to top Go down
Minnesota Eternals
 
 
avatar

Posts : 22577

PostSubject: Re: My intent in 2017   Sun Apr 03, 2016 9:53 pm

Morrison Minions wrote:
Minnesota Eternals wrote:
I have to laugh (actually cry) because Chris hasn't even gotten in on this yet....

One good thing to consider for those who disagree with me...if you're right and it's a disaster then I think I will see it and adjust as we've done in the past...but I'm beyond confident that the reality of my version of RFA is miles ahead of this current thing and you will all be converted once you roll through it.

I want you to know that I'm happy to move on with whatever rules are in place. I'm only trying to explain how I view the situation.

With the new rule, I will have to rethink the options of using the tags at all.

Good. I want people thinking.

Right now, nobody is thinking. They're tagging players they want to keep, they're starting those auctions because it's advantageous to them in retaining said players and then they are free as a bird to proceed through RFA without a fear in the world.

That proves everything I have been trying to say.


Back to top Go down
Minnesota Eternals
 
 
avatar

Posts : 22577

PostSubject: Re: My intent in 2017   Sun Apr 03, 2016 9:55 pm

Bergen Brawlers wrote:
I think that Andy's proposed approach most closely mirrors the NFL approach and I'm on board with it. May I lose a guy?  Maybe.  It's not a problem now because I'm not wed to any of my guys.  But this is a zero sum game so if you make sure you get your guy, you must necessarily guarantee that another owner (11 actually) don't get him. Give me a set of rules and I'll abide by them.  And work out the appropriate strategy.  

The bolded is ironic since I'm usually the first guy to say I don't burn a single calorie trying to make my leagues mimic the NFL. laughing I'll take the help where I can get it though.


Back to top Go down
New England Nineties
 
 
avatar

Posts : 5585

PostSubject: Re: My intent in 2017   Sun Apr 03, 2016 9:56 pm

Morrison Minions wrote:
New England Nineties wrote:
Morrison Minions wrote:
Minnesota Eternals wrote:
Morrison Minions wrote:
Minnesota Eternals wrote:
Shawn, really?

You yourself said others got houses for 120-170....if you need to spend 251 then that's your fault for missing the boat or aiming at the best house on the street.


I did no such thing. The house I went for was appraised for the least amount. It just happened to be the last one on the block for sale. A house that was for sale, a house that I wanted to buy, and a house that I wasn't allowed to try to buy until someone else tried to buy it first.

This is how I play this game. I have a budget. I would like to utilize my budget. So yes, I am for real.

Well 11 other people didn't feel the house was worth going after until it was the last one on the block and you apparently already had your dream house because you didn't use your SFT on this Barbie Dream house that according to you is now gonna cost 251k....you had options and still do...hell you can trade your other houses to quickly get the cash to get this house if you really want to.


None of which applies to utilizing a budget.

Of course it does. You saved for something that was outside of your budget. That's kinda the point of a market.

I used a budget of 200k for a 120k house. That doesnt qualify for saving for something outside my budget. That shouldn't be my fault. It would have went for 120k if I were allowed to buy it at the beginning, but I wasn't allowed to purchase it.

This is where the house analogy falls down. In RFA, your players hit the open market for everyone to bid on. You have no control over how much they will bid, regardless of what you "budget." Some people have 180 WB's. Some people have 400 WB's. That goes into your WB strategy.

Fortunately for the owners, you have some options to protect players, tags that will push down their market value. But you should still be, IMO, at the mercy of the market in terms of determining how much that player, tagged or not, is worth. So in that sense, your "budget" isn't really relevant, because it's not up to you. You're not even really a buyer, which again, is why the whole just come along and buy a house analogy fails.

It's just a league mechanism. When players expire, they expire, and you effectively lose them. Except for the tags. But it's still up to the other 11 owners what price you have to pay, and that's how it should be IMO.


Back to top Go down
Morrison Minions
 
 
avatar

Posts : 7113

PostSubject: Re: My intent in 2017   Sun Apr 03, 2016 10:00 pm

New England Nineties wrote:
Morrison Minions wrote:
New England Nineties wrote:
Morrison Minions wrote:
Minnesota Eternals wrote:
Morrison Minions wrote:
Minnesota Eternals wrote:
Shawn, really?

You yourself said others got houses for 120-170....if you need to spend 251 then that's your fault for missing the boat or aiming at the best house on the street.


I did no such thing. The house I went for was appraised for the least amount. It just happened to be the last one on the block for sale. A house that was for sale, a house that I wanted to buy, and a house that I wasn't allowed to try to buy until someone else tried to buy it first.

This is how I play this game. I have a budget. I would like to utilize my budget. So yes, I am for real.

Well 11 other people didn't feel the house was worth going after until it was the last one on the block and you apparently already had your dream house because you didn't use your SFT on this Barbie Dream house that according to you is now gonna cost 251k....you had options and still do...hell you can trade your other houses to quickly get the cash to get this house if you really want to.


None of which applies to utilizing a budget.

Of course it does. You saved for something that was outside of your budget. That's kinda the point of a market.

I used a budget of 200k for a 120k house. That doesnt qualify for saving for something outside my budget. That shouldn't be my fault. It would have went for 120k if I were allowed to buy it at the beginning, but I wasn't allowed to purchase it.

This is where the house analogy falls down. In RFA, your players hit the open market for everyone to bid on. You have no control over how much they will bid, regardless of what you "budget." Some people have 180 WB's. Some people have 400 WB's. That goes into your WB strategy.

Fortunately for the owners, you have some options to protect players, tags that will push down their market value. But you should still be, IMO, at the mercy of the market in terms of determining how much that player, tagged or not, is worth. So in that sense, your "budget" isn't really relevant, because it's not up to you. You're not even really a buyer, which again, is why the whole just come along and buy a house analogy fails.

It's just a league mechanism. When players expire, they expire, and you effectively lose them. Except for the tags. But it's still up to the other 11 owners what price you have to pay, and that's how it should be IMO.

Not so at all. If I'm allowed to bid as I see fit, without restrictions, then I can put my 200k up for the house I want right from the start. Either I get the house or I don't. If I dont, then I have 200k that I can buy one of the other 11 houses with.


Back to top Go down
Minnesota Eternals
 
 
avatar

Posts : 22577

PostSubject: Re: My intent in 2017   Sun Apr 03, 2016 10:02 pm

Going to bed soon, and have to work tomorrow so I'll just leave on this note...

@Brad, Shawn and I have no doubt Chris.....I absolutely appreciate your willingness to go through this sort of stuff with me even when you disagree. If it falls flat like you think then at least you know I am not so stubborn that I'll go down with it just because it's my idea. We have endured 4 years of THIS (whatever you want to call it) so at least 1 year of what I had intended originally should settle the debate somewhat.



Back to top Go down
Morrison Minions
 
 
avatar

Posts : 7113

PostSubject: Re: My intent in 2017   Sun Apr 03, 2016 10:05 pm

One thing that you'll want to include in the new rule... you cannot start a bid for ANY of the players that you have "rights" to (strange verbiage). Only makes sense that this covers all of the players, and not just the tagged ones.


Back to top Go down
Minnesota Eternals
 
 
avatar

Posts : 22577

PostSubject: Re: My intent in 2017   Sun Apr 03, 2016 10:05 pm

Morrison Minions wrote:
New England Nineties wrote:
Morrison Minions wrote:
New England Nineties wrote:
Morrison Minions wrote:
Minnesota Eternals wrote:
Morrison Minions wrote:
Minnesota Eternals wrote:
Shawn, really?

You yourself said others got houses for 120-170....if you need to spend 251 then that's your fault for missing the boat or aiming at the best house on the street.


I did no such thing. The house I went for was appraised for the least amount. It just happened to be the last one on the block for sale. A house that was for sale, a house that I wanted to buy, and a house that I wasn't allowed to try to buy until someone else tried to buy it first.

This is how I play this game. I have a budget. I would like to utilize my budget. So yes, I am for real.

Well 11 other people didn't feel the house was worth going after until it was the last one on the block and you apparently already had your dream house because you didn't use your SFT on this Barbie Dream house that according to you is now gonna cost 251k....you had options and still do...hell you can trade your other houses to quickly get the cash to get this house if you really want to.


None of which applies to utilizing a budget.

Of course it does. You saved for something that was outside of your budget. That's kinda the point of a market.

I used a budget of 200k for a 120k house. That doesnt qualify for saving for something outside my budget. That shouldn't be my fault. It would have went for 120k if I were allowed to buy it at the beginning, but I wasn't allowed to purchase it.

This is where the house analogy falls down. In RFA, your players hit the open market for everyone to bid on. You have no control over how much they will bid, regardless of what you "budget." Some people have 180 WB's. Some people have 400 WB's. That goes into your WB strategy.

Fortunately for the owners, you have some options to protect players, tags that will push down their market value. But you should still be, IMO, at the mercy of the market in terms of determining how much that player, tagged or not, is worth. So in that sense, your "budget" isn't really relevant, because it's not up to you. You're not even really a buyer, which again, is why the whole just come along and buy a house analogy fails.

It's just a league mechanism. When players expire, they expire, and you effectively lose them. Except for the tags. But it's still up to the other 11 owners what price you have to pay, and that's how it should be IMO.

Not so at all. If I'm allowed to bid as I see fit, without restrictions, then I can put my 200k up for the house I want right from the start. Either I get the house or I don't. If I dont, then I have 200k that I can buy one of the other 11 houses with.

Right but you could have bid on the other 11 houses in my scenario too...you just chose not to and essentially put all your eggs n one basket waiting for the ONE HOUSE. You're also speaking as if you deserve a house...that sort of guarantee shouldn't exist...if it did then why not just kick back and relax, the government will ensure you get a house. laughing


Back to top Go down
Morrison Minions
 
 
avatar

Posts : 7113

PostSubject: Re: My intent in 2017   Sun Apr 03, 2016 10:06 pm

Minnesota Eternals wrote:
Morrison Minions wrote:
New England Nineties wrote:
Morrison Minions wrote:
New England Nineties wrote:
Morrison Minions wrote:
Minnesota Eternals wrote:
Morrison Minions wrote:
Minnesota Eternals wrote:
Shawn, really?

You yourself said others got houses for 120-170....if you need to spend 251 then that's your fault for missing the boat or aiming at the best house on the street.


I did no such thing. The house I went for was appraised for the least amount. It just happened to be the last one on the block for sale. A house that was for sale, a house that I wanted to buy, and a house that I wasn't allowed to try to buy until someone else tried to buy it first.

This is how I play this game. I have a budget. I would like to utilize my budget. So yes, I am for real.

Well 11 other people didn't feel the house was worth going after until it was the last one on the block and you apparently already had your dream house because you didn't use your SFT on this Barbie Dream house that according to you is now gonna cost 251k....you had options and still do...hell you can trade your other houses to quickly get the cash to get this house if you really want to.


None of which applies to utilizing a budget.

Of course it does. You saved for something that was outside of your budget. That's kinda the point of a market.

I used a budget of 200k for a 120k house. That doesnt qualify for saving for something outside my budget. That shouldn't be my fault. It would have went for 120k if I were allowed to buy it at the beginning, but I wasn't allowed to purchase it.

This is where the house analogy falls down. In RFA, your players hit the open market for everyone to bid on. You have no control over how much they will bid, regardless of what you "budget." Some people have 180 WB's. Some people have 400 WB's. That goes into your WB strategy.

Fortunately for the owners, you have some options to protect players, tags that will push down their market value. But you should still be, IMO, at the mercy of the market in terms of determining how much that player, tagged or not, is worth. So in that sense, your "budget" isn't really relevant, because it's not up to you. You're not even really a buyer, which again, is why the whole just come along and buy a house analogy fails.

It's just a league mechanism. When players expire, they expire, and you effectively lose them. Except for the tags. But it's still up to the other 11 owners what price you have to pay, and that's how it should be IMO.

Not so at all. If I'm allowed to bid as I see fit, without restrictions, then I can put my 200k up for the house I want right from the start. Either I get the house or I don't. If I dont, then I have 200k that I can buy one of the other 11 houses with.

Right but you could have bid on the other 11 houses in my scenario too...you just chose not to and essentially put all your eggs n one basket waiting for the ONE HOUSE.  You're also speaking as if you deserve a house...that sort of guarantee shouldn't exist...if it did then why not just kick back and relax, the government will ensure you get a house. laughing

No sir, I could not bid on a single one of those houses, because I had my money wrapped up in the one that I'm not allowed to try to purchase.


Back to top Go down
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: My intent in 2017   

Back to top Go down
 
My intent in 2017
View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 1 of 2Go to page : 1, 2  Next

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
Roster Wars :: The Roster Wars Clubhouse :: Main RW Lobby-
Jump to: