• Changing RCF's index page, please click on "Forums" to access the forums.

RBF League 2023 - Gary Barnidge Classic!

Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Should we make this a buy-in league for $25 each?

  • Yes

    Votes: 9 90.0%
  • No

    Votes: 1 10.0%

  • Total voters
    10
My two guys even keeper worthy aren't worth 4th round picks. and Stafford was selected.... 5th round in 2014.
That makes him a 1st round pick? Not happening.

I would have a better team if @FiveThous had skipped the draft and filling up with free agents than this thing that appears before me called a roster.

edit. this isn't whining. it is an explanation
 
My two guys even keeper worthy aren't worth 4th round picks. and Stafford was selected.... 5th round in 2014.
That makes him a 1st round pick? Not happening.

I would have a better team if @FiveThous had skipped the draft and filling up with free agents than this thing that appears before me called a roster.

edit. this isn't whining. it is an explanation

Before striking the trade with @SixPACK I would have happily traded my franchise for that one straight up. Five actually made a deadline trade with me to set himself up for this year, if he didn't finish last. Best of luck, you are going to need it.
 
Check this for my Keepers Keys, as I believe they were both undrafted:

Davante Adams, WR Green Bay
Rob Kelley, RB Washington
 
My two guys even keeper worthy aren't worth 4th round picks. and Stafford was selected.... 5th round in 2014.
That makes him a 1st round pick? Not happening.

I would have a better team if @FiveThous had skipped the draft and filling up with free agents than this thing that appears before me called a roster.

edit. this isn't whining. it is an explanation

Suck it up, Buttercup!

Hi guys, hope you're having a wonderful day.

how YOU doin!?
Tlumacki_patriotspractice_sports247-001.jpg
 
Last edited:
Keepers should be mandatory. You should be punished for sucking and not obtaining at least 2 serviceable players.

It's possible to have 2 serviceable players on a roster, yet not want to give-up the value they'd cost to keep.
 
It's possible to have 2 serviceable players on a roster, yet not want to give-up the value they'd cost to keep.

We have seen teams struggle with this decision before. Again, I'm more than willing to step in and make a decision, but I prefer to hear from as many other members as I can before I make new rules.

Right now I'm leaning towards both keepers being optional and no trading past season assets besides the two keeper players. My preference comes from better parity. Everyone should feel like they can turn a bad season around the next year.
 
We have seen teams struggle with this decision before. Again, I'm more than willing to step in and make a decision, but I prefer to hear from as many other members as I can before I make new rules.

Right now I'm leaning towards both keepers being optional and no trading past season assets besides the two keeper players. My preference comes from better parity. Everyone should feel like they can turn a bad season around the next year.

Oh, I hope you don't think I'm actively lobbying.. I'm just illustrating a counter-point to the philosophy; don't care what the rule actually is.

The only thing I ask from any commish is to set the ground-rules prior to the draft. It seems simple, but I've had a league where we drafted, then the commish decided to add TE to the WR/RB "flex" slot. I felt like it was awful for the commish to decide he wanted to change it after I strategized on how to draft TEs based on only being allowed to have one playing per week... I've left the league (for more egregious shit) since, but that crap is inexcusable.
 
We have seen teams struggle with this decision before. Again, I'm more than willing to step in and make a decision, but I prefer to hear from as many other members as I can before I make new rules.

Right now I'm leaning towards both keepers being optional and no trading past season assets besides the two keeper players. My preference comes from better parity. Everyone should feel like they can turn a bad season around the next year.
Personally, I think keepers should be optional.

If you don't want to keep someone, don't. No penalties.

Just my opinion.
 
We have seen teams struggle with this decision before. Again, I'm more than willing to step in and make a decision, but I prefer to hear from as many other members as I can before I make new rules.

Right now I'm leaning towards both keepers being optional and no trading past season assets besides the two keeper players. My preference comes from better parity. Everyone should feel like they can turn a bad season around the next year.

Don't you think that rewarding good team construction and planning ahead for a future year should be rewarded? I can see how you don't require keepers, but I think being able to trade any assets I have to help my team because I was smart enough to give myself that option.

Don't reward mediocrity or give everyone a trophy here.
 
Don't you think that rewarding good team construction and planning ahead for a future year should be rewarded? I can see how you don't require keepers, but I think being able to trade any assets I have to help my team because I was smart enough to give myself that option.

Don't reward mediocrity or give everyone a trophy here.

Teams that were successful the previous year are rewarded through two keepers. Teams that traded assets in the present for future assets also maximize the benefits of having a great team. For example, if you traded your fourth receiver you never used for a future pick before the trade deadline last year, you could have used the fruits of a good team to be even better this season.

Your suggestion of trading members of last year's roster who weren't keepers increases the rewards past what we agreed. Expanding from one keeper to two keepers was already an expansion, and it is enough for now in my book. You've laid out your vote, let's hear from others.
 
Being able to trade players from a past season makes no sense....

Just join a Dynasty league if that's what you want.
 
Question, since I used both keepers last year on UDFA, I lost my last 2 picks. It used Rnd 13 on Baldwin and Rnd 14 on Barnidge. I only intend to continue to keep Baldwin. Does it automatically go up to 12th round or would it stay at 13th round?
 
The proposition to allow stacked teams to hoard is weak unless the rules are laid out when the league is born. Changing that now is basically gerrymandering. What-if the commish decides, "hey, I had a good team last year. This year, I'm going to make rules that let me keep it!"

Congrats, you had a good team last year. Do it again.
 
The proposition to allow stacked teams to hoard is weak unless the rules are laid out when the league is born. Changing that now is basically gerrymandering. What-if the commish decides, "hey, I had a good team last year. This year, I'm going to make rules that let me keep it!"

Congrats, you had a good team last year. Do it again.

Geez...just asking the questions that relate to other keeper leagues I've been in that allow for the trading of draft picks.

Don't be bitter because you suck at this game and aren't trying to maximize your team's chances for winning. That's the goal of these things, you know.
 
Geez...just asking the questions that relate to other keeper leagues I've been in that allow for the trading of draft picks.

Don't be bitter because you suck at this game and aren't trying to maximize your team's chances for winning. That's the goal of these things, you know.

Aren't you touchy.. :chuckle:

I've got 2 keepers; have since last week my man. Just calling it like it is.

Reached the semi's last year taking someone else's shell of a team, so I'm not sure you're aware of what you're talking about.
 

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Video

Episode 3-12: "Max Strus Juice"

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Spotify

Episode 3:11: "Clipping Bucks."
Top