gilbertology 0 Posted August 8, 2006 Share Posted August 8, 2006 I think the rule should be to always PM the captain. It is the team leader's job to make sure people get there for their match, and if he can't be there as a backup, to make sure another teammate is there as a backup so that there are always two people in case of an emergency. This is why I like the idea of minimum three teammates. Say you want to play ALL your games and get almost all profits. That's fine, you just need to find someone who would be willing to act as a backup for maybe a 5% share, or even for nothing if you personally know the guy and he'll do it. He may not be as good a player as the teammate playing all the games, but during the season he would probably only have to play 0-2 games in case an emergency comes up for the team captain. In addition, there will be more demand from others not in the league right now to play next year, and since we are not kicking teams out for defaults, and assuming we stay with 32 teams, then the players that want to be a part of this next year should be able to at least have that chance. Link to post Share on other sites
zimmer4141 0 Posted August 8, 2006 Share Posted August 8, 2006 I mentioned it before. 21 games is perfect. Reduces the confusion with tie breakers and is fair within the conference. Also, we're extending the season by 1.5 months already...we don't need to add ANOTHER month to the schedule.This is a great league...let's not mess with it too much.3 games against each division opponent (9 total)1 game against each conference opponent not in your division (12 total) By adding the games below it becomes a crapshoot because some matchups will be signifigantly harder than others. Imagine if you have to play Theraflu and Daniel and then watching a division rival play the weakest Hearts teams. 1 game against each team from 1 division in the other conference (4 total) Baseball is no big deal because there are 160+ games. For a short season it could mean everything. Only other way to do it would be to only have 2 games within the division and play more cross-conference games. But then we run into tiebreaker headaches again.That doesn't matter for division rivals because each team from one division plays the same 4 teams in the other conference. Divisions will be matched up, and because most divisions are relatively balanced, that isn't a huge problem. Link to post Share on other sites
The Czar 0 Posted August 8, 2006 Share Posted August 8, 2006 I think the rule should be to always PM the captain. It is the team leader's job to make sure people get there for their match, and if he can't be there as a backup, to make sure another teammate is there as a backup so that there are always two people in case of an emergency. This is why I like the idea of minimum three teammates. Say you want to play ALL your games and get almost all profits. That's fine, you just need to find someone who would be willing to act as a backup for maybe a 5% share, or even for nothing if you personally know the guy and he'll do it. He may not be as good a player as the teammate playing all the games, but during the season he would probably only have to play 0-2 games in case an emergency comes up for the team captain. In addition, there will be more demand from others not in the league right now to play next year, and since we are not kicking teams out for defaults, and assuming we stay with 32 teams, then the players that want to be a part of this next year should be able to at least have that chance. I agree with a lot of this post, but I strenuosly object to the bolded portion. Link to post Share on other sites
mcpickl 0 Posted August 9, 2006 Share Posted August 9, 2006 I agree with a lot of this post, but I strenuosly object to the bolded portion.me too.I'm also a big fan of playing teams in division three times each to have a head to head tiebreaker. Link to post Share on other sites
Randy Reed 0 Posted August 9, 2006 Author Share Posted August 9, 2006 me too.I'm also a big fan of playing teams in division three times each to have a head to head tiebreaker.If you read my original post about tiebreakers you'll see why this is unnecessary.And if you read the thread about where most defaults come from teams with 1 or 2 peeps you'd also understand the importance of having a backup for emergencies. Link to post Share on other sites
mcpickl 0 Posted August 9, 2006 Share Posted August 9, 2006 If you read my original post about tiebreakers you'll see why this is unnecessary.And if you read the thread about where most defaults come from teams with 1 or 2 peeps you'd also understand the importance of having a backup for emergencies.i real your original(and really long) post and still like the idea of three games against each of your division opponents. i like the idea of having the head to head tiebreaker as opposed to say getting down to something like common opponents. Call me crazy, I'd rather have the tiebreaker be what i did in three games against the team i'm tied with than 7 games other guys did against me and the other team.i also read the post about where most defaults came from this year. i know most came from teams with one or two "peeps", so why should a team be forced to have three teammates? Why not force a team to have five teammates? no defaults came from teams of five. Why not fifty teammates? then almost certainly someone would show up. Its silly to force a team to have to have three teammates if the captain doesn't want it. I haven't met one single FCP member face to face. why should I have to take on teammates that i do not know, and have no idea i can trust, if I'm willing to put up $500 myself and take my chances with less than three? Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts