ProFSL: Pro Fantasy Sports Leagues
Fantasy Leagues => Franchise GM: History Books => Franchise GM => MLB Leagues => Franchise GM: Archives => Topic started by: papps on January 13, 2014, 02:28:29 PM
-
I would like to put it out there about potentially changing the rule for final bid time from 72 hours to 48 hours to win a FA. 72 hours seems a bit excessive to me. We promote activity in this league and I think that 48 hours is long enough for a bid to stand to be final. I wanted to get the thoughts of the rest of you on this rule. Thanks everyone!
-
I would like to put it out there about potentially changing the rule for final bid time from 72 hours to 48 hours to win a FA. 72 hours seems a bit excessive to me. We promote activity in this league and I think that 48 hours is long enough for a bid to stand to be final. I wanted to get the thoughts of the rest of you on this rule. Thanks everyone!
I agree with Papps here 100%
I do not like the 72 hr rule as we do promote being active here and if someone cannot get on here in 3 days or less they do not belong .Look at the leagues I'm in and I work a lot as of lately and I manage to find the time cause I like it here.
:iatp:
-
:iatp:
48 also lessens the "poacher effect"
-
Agreed :iatp:
-
:iatp:
I'm new here, but agree with all these comments. I much prefer a 48 hour window.
-
This proposal has merit and I will put it on the list to bring up with the RC. Since FA has started with the same 72 Hours clock that FGM has always used this change will not be going in to affect during this FA season. I am also not really for changes to happen during a season. If the RC approves to change the clock to 48 hours it will likely start with FA in 2015.
Shooter
-
This proposal has merit and I will put it on the list to bring up with the RC. Since FA has started with the same 72 Hours clock that FGM has always used this change will not be going in to affect during this FA season. I am also not really for changes to happen during a season. If the RC approves to change the clock to 48 hours it will likely start with FA in 2015.
Shooter
This is a not a major change that has to wait until next year. I can see keeping it 72 hours for CI's but we should be able to change it if voted to pass for this year. It seems like people are on board with the idea. What about opening up the discussion to including it to be changed for this year? I can see waiting until next year for something that affects rosters or resigning players but this rule doesn't affect much. I'd be ok with anything the group decides but FA is open for one day, I don't think it will hurt for this to go live when the next position opens up. Just my two cents. :thumbsup:
-
I agree with Chris. I also agree with Shooter on big changes not taking effect, but if the league is in harmony on this, why not, it's our universe :thumbsup: this is a minor rules tweak and one that helps the league by and large. I can't see someone planning on using 72 hrs as part of their strategy...
-
This is a not a major change that has to wait until next year. I can see keeping it 72 hours for CI's but we should be able to change it if voted to pass for this year. It seems like people are on board with the idea. What about opening up the discussion to including it to be changed for this year? I can see waiting until next year for something that affects rosters or resigning players but this rule doesn't affect much. I'd be ok with anything the group decides but FA is open for one day, I don't think it will hurt for this to go live when the next position opens up. Just my two cents. :thumbsup:
I don't see it being a major change for strategy of the league but this league has been around for 5 year and has used a 72 hour clock for the entire time which would still make this a major change for the league and the GMs in the league. The more I think about it changing it after FA might not be a bad time to do it if the RC approves the change. I still don't think changing it during or between portions of FA is a good idea. CI position may push into the P portion of FA and then the rule change might be confusing to some GMs.
-
I will say that I am ok with whatever is ultimately decided. One thing to keep in mind is that no one has been won yet in FA, so theoretically the change could be made seamlessly. I love this league! :koolaid:
-
I hope there are not a lot of 71 or 71.5 hrs bids on bids that sat that long
-
I have no problem with 48hrs. effective immediately
-
Personally I prefer 72 hours - there's plenty of time in the offseason, and I'd rather let the clock run a little longer to ensure everyone has plenty of time to see players that have been bid on and decide if they want to bid or not.
In my opinion, this is a situation of "it 'aint broke"
-
Personally I prefer 72 hours - there's plenty of time in the offseason, and I'd rather let the clock run a little longer to ensure everyone has plenty of time to see players that have been bid on and decide if they want to bid or not.
In my opinion, this is a situation of "it 'aint broke"
Not being rude or crude but we may be finished by March Just my opinion.
Wait till you get to 71 hrs and you think you will have that player and someone bids on him.72 hrs starts all over again,It's happened to a few of us.Very unpleasant.but it is what it is just hope it goes along well.
This is not a negative situation for me just it is very unpleasant to have this happen,48 hr clock id not so bad
-
Personally I prefer 72 hours - there's plenty of time in the offseason, and I'd rather let the clock run a little longer to ensure everyone has plenty of time to see players that have been bid on and decide if they want to bid or not.
In my opinion, this is a situation of "it 'aint broke"
But to some of us it is broke. The offseason is long enough that teams should have an idea of who they want. 48 hours is plenty of time for a league that preaches high activity. Just my opinion. :thumbsup:
-
This is only league I know of with a clock this long, this is PAINFULL
-
This is only league I know of with a clock this long, this is PAINFULL
:iatp:
-
The 72-hr rule is one of the worst legacy rules lingering around older ProFSL leagues. IMO, this rule needs to be removed from all leagues that still use it. Yes, it is too late to remove it for CI, but starting with the next position it could easily be changed.
-
Regardless of whether it's a "minor" or a "major" rule change, I don't think we should be changing rules after an established practice has begun. I cannot recall when this has ever been done in this particular league. Just because it's done in some other league doesn't necessarily mean we should set aside what we do in FGM.
As for the "poaching effect", no matter what the time limit is, if someone swoops in an posts a bid close to the end of the time limit, someone is going to go ballistic. I've seen a multitude of PROFSL members get upset when such a bid is made and what is always ignored is that no rule has been violated--although, judging by the anger I've seen when it happens, you would assume it has. With that, I hope we don't have someone post about the "infamous unwritten rules" associated with baseball.
Finally, although this is a friendly league and we're all entitled to an opinion, I find it interesting that a GM who has just entered the league would post an abrasive comment regarding membership in this league.
Just saying....
-
Regardless of whether it's a "minor" or a "major" rule change, I don't think we should be changing rules after an established practice has begun. I cannot recall when this has ever been done in this particular league. Just because it's done in some other league doesn't necessarily mean we should set aside what we do in FGM.
As for the "poaching effect", no matter what the time limit is, if someone swoops in an posts a bid close to the end of the time limit, someone is going to go ballistic. I've seen a multitude of PROFSL members get upset when such a bid is made and what is always ignored is that no rule has been violated--although, judging by the anger I've seen when it happens, you would assume it has. With that, I hope we don't have someone post about the "infamous unwritten rules" associated with baseball.
Finally, although this is a friendly league and we're all entitled to an opinion, I find it interesting that a GM who has just entered the league would post an abrasive comment regarding membership in this league.
Just saying....
What comment was abrasive?
-
Personally as a GM I like the longer clock and slower pace of FGM FA over some other leagues that use a 48 Hour clock and all positions are open at the same time. As a GM you can analyze and study the available players in FA as much as you want before FA opens but the hardest part to do is to analyze the FA Market while the bids are being placed. I may really like one player before the market opens but after he gets bid out of my range I need to be able to move on and look for another player that will fit my needs for what I am willing and able to pay. The 72 hour clock gives me a little longer to sort out the market.
Most of the arguments for the 48 hour clock seem to be because most GMs hate the late bids. Whether the clock is 48 hours or 72 hours GMs are still going to get upset with last minute or last hour bids. The Benefit of a 72 hour clock to me is that when you do get outbid late there will likely be more options for you to turn your attention to while with a 48 hour clock some other FA options might have already closed and then you are forced to get in a bidding war for that one player.
I know that we want the league to be filled with the most active managers that we can get. However we all have a personal life outside of PROFSL. I don't know if lowering the clock to 48 hours would actually improve activity in the league or if the less active GMs would continue with their normal habits. This is a move that could penalize the less active GMs, causing a further spread between the upper and lower level of the league and decreasing the stability of the league and increasing turnover with GMs. A lot of you have stated that you don't think this is a major change and it could be implemented quickly. This may not be a major change to you personally but as commissioner I must approach these things very carefully and weigh the potential long term benefits and consequences of this move.
My last comment is not at anyone in this league or PROFSL but more of an observation of society in general. I have noticed that more and more people want instant gratification and are increasingly unwilling to wait for things. To me patience is currently one of the most underrated virtues in society.
-
Different GM's like either 72 or 48 hours for different reasons. Nobody has a bad argument for either side. With that being said, since this is not a rule change that requires rewriting or changing processes is it possible to put it up for a league vote so everyone can have a voice on this topic? Majority would win. Thoughts?
-
I agree with Bob's final paragraph to the letter, but I do think patience is a virtue only when instant is a detriment. Said another way, certain rules carry with them inherent benefits to keep the status quo (1st and 2nd amendments come to mind). Other rules are changed based on demand, sometimes over night (DOMA, ACA come to mind). It appears to me that the original 72 hr rule was based on nothing more than a whim. I don't mean that to sound negative, I just mean that there appears to be no precedent/data used to determine said time frame. After all, FGM is the flagship league. Now that we have evidence of the rule in practice, it is evident to a majority that the rule is archaic and restrictive in nature. My concern isn't so much the poachers (although a problem, not paramount) but the paralysis caused by FA and the surrounding uncertainty. 48hrs requires more strategy IMO as one must really be prepared to shift focus. A good litmus test to me would be to ask the question "if we started a league today, how long would the bid clock be set at. Change for the sake of change is futile, as is standing pat for the sake of standing pat. If the league can be bettered immediately by tweaking a procedural rule, I think we'd be negligent to delay said improvement. Whether or not this proposed change is "for better" is up for debate, but if it's determined that it is, delay is not the best approach, IMO.
-
My opinion is that Agents, IRL, play a slow game and allow the market to develop. 72 hours allows the market to develop.
-
Different GM's like either 72 or 48 hours for different reasons. Nobody has a bad argument for either side. With that being said, since this is not a rule change that requires rewriting or changing processes is it possible to put it up for a league vote so everyone can have a voice on this topic? Majority would win. Thoughts?
The RC has always governed rule changes in FGM and I would not want to set a precedent that potential changes like this don't go through the RC. The RC will handle all changes, big or small, to the rules in FGM and this process will not change.
-
My opinion is that Agents, IRL, play a slow game and allow the market to develop. 72 hours allows the market to develop.
I respect Joe's opinion/perspective, however...
If we are going to be beholden to "real life" we need to blow up the EDR and revamp it's rules. A market isn't some mythical entity, it's a platform for exchange of goods/services created by willing producers and consumers. A market's development will happen organically so long as artificial mechanisms of control aren't arbitrarily imposed on said market. That being said, 48, 72 or 10000 hr clocks do not necessarily affect our market per se, rather it affects the "enjoyment" factor and, by proxy, the long term vitality of the league. I'm not sure mirroring real life MLB is as important as making this league as strong/fun as possible.
-
I respect Joe's opinion/perspective, however...
If we are going to be beholden to "real life" we need to blow up the EDR and revamp it's rules. A market isn't some mythical entity, it's a platform for exchange of goods/services created by willing producers and consumers. A market's development will happen organically so long as artificial mechanisms of control aren't arbitrarily imposed on said market. That being said, 48, 72 or 10000 hr clocks do not necessarily affect our market per se, rather it affects the "enjoyment" factor and, by proxy, the long term vitality of the league. I'm not sure mirroring real life MLB is as important as making this league as strong/fun as possible.
:iatp:
I would like to see a vote of all GM's on this matter of FA clock.It's suppose to be a fun league after all all of us make the league without us there is no league so let all managers vote for this small change winner takes all or we go back to what it was and keep it that way
-
Personally I prefer 72 hours - there's plenty of time in the offseason, and I'd rather let the clock run a little longer to ensure everyone has plenty of time to see players that have been bid on and decide if they want to bid or not.
In my opinion, this is a situation of "it 'aint broke"
:iatp:
-
Regardless of whether it's a "minor" or a "major" rule change, I don't think we should be changing rules after an established practice has begun. I cannot recall when this has ever been done in this particular league. Just because it's done in some other league doesn't necessarily mean we should set aside what we do in FGM.
As for the "poaching effect", no matter what the time limit is, if someone swoops in an posts a bid close to the end of the time limit, someone is going to go ballistic. I've seen a multitude of PROFSL members get upset when such a bid is made and what is always ignored is that no rule has been violated--although, judging by the anger I've seen when it happens, you would assume it has. With that, I hope we don't have someone post about the "infamous unwritten rules" associated with baseball.
Finally, although this is a friendly league and we're all entitled to an opinion, I find it interesting that a GM who has just entered the league would post an abrasive comment regarding membership in this league.
Just saying....
:iatp: :iatp: :iatp:
-
Other rules are changed based on demand, sometimes over night (DOMA, ACA come to mind).
I can't believe you tried to use the ACA as a positive . . .
-
I can't believe your reading comprehension skills would lead you to believe I used it in any context insinuating positive or negative connotation. I simply used it as an illustration of laws/rules being changed in the immediate. If you must know, I consider the ACA as the final nail in the "American Experiment" coffin. I also disagree with overturning DOMA, but it's yet another example of laws being changed overnight, which was what I was attempting to illustrate.
-
For the record, I disagree with changing the clock from 72 to 48 hours.
-
This movement has gone quiet. Can we either set this aside as no change or take a vote? Quorum should be 2/3 GMs. Create a tread just for the vote, make it anonymous if need be. Vote by bubbles?
We should also setup a part of the season for discussing rule adjustments. This is happening all year and pieces keep moving at a dizzying pace. The rules we have work by enlarge, and loop holes can be closed during the offseason. This is much like how professional sports are handled. We could create a thread, if you have an idea for a change, post it into the thread and it will be discussed at a proposed "rule adjustment period".
I realize the irony that I am in fact proposing a rule change, but this I think would be a true enhancement.