ProFSL: Pro Fantasy Sports Leagues
Fantasy Leagues => Franchise GM: History Books => Franchise GM => MLB Leagues => Franchise GM: Archives => Topic started by: Brent on October 10, 2013, 07:44:44 PM
-
Since all these votes are coming from me wanting to switch to the Cubs and it looks like that is going to be voted down, I proposed another solution.
Can I just have the team logo/name and keep my Angels team and the Cubs team goes to the Angles which would help the new owner as it would be a better team and it would have Trout actually on the Angels which would be appealing to a new owner. The salary caps are close enough that it really wouldn't make a difference.
-
Thats is same thing I was thinking being huge Cubs fan, but problem is each team is set up according to the payroll they have now and in future for each team specific.
-
Since all these votes are coming from me wanting to switch to the Cubs and it looks like that is going to be voted down, I proposed another solution.
Can I just have the team logo/name and keep my Angels team and the Cubs team goes to the Angles which would help the new owner as it would be a better team and it would have Trout actually on the Angels which would be appealing to a new owner. The salary caps are close enough that it really wouldn't make a difference.
I don't think this would be good because it would affect the competitive balance within the league.
-
Nevermind, screw-it. I don't care anymore. I'm going to continue with my rebuild of the Angels and win this league in a couple years.
-
Nevermind, screw-it. I don't care anymore. I'm going to continue with my rebuild of the Angels and win this league in a couple years.
That would be awesome, but your Cubs transfer is not dead in the water yet.
-
That would be awesome, but your Cubs transfer is not dead in the water yet.
Well even when changing names and the teams remain the same becomes and issue then we have bigger issues. After these latest rulings it means that unless you were part of the original owners and were able to get your favorite team from the start up, should you be a replacement owner at some point you would more than likely never get or be allowed to get your favorite team. The only two ways you could is if 1. you were in the league from the start or 2. a vacant team is your favorite team and you are new to FGM as if you are a current manager you are not allowed to change to your favorite team even if it is for the betterment of the league.
-
One thing we could do is grandfather all 30 GMs as of today to be able to use a clause for taking your favorite team and do that just once. Brent has a great point here.
This would give all of us the opportunity if it opened up, but the league would sell itself to new GMs that if they want their favorite team then they should wait until it is open.
-
One thing we could do is grandfather all 30 GMs as of today to be able to use a clause for taking your favorite team and do that just once. Brent has a great point here.
This would give all of us the opportunity if it opened up, but the league would sell itself to new GMs that if they want their favorite team then they should wait until it is open.
Will all due respect, that would undermine the voting currently taking place by the RC, especially when you consider that it could theoretically allow up to 30 transfers assuming that no GM already owns his favorite team.
-
One thing we could do is grandfather all 30 GMs as of today to be able to use a clause for taking your favorite team and do that just once. Brent has a great point here.
This would give all of us the opportunity if it opened up, but the league would sell itself to new GMs that if they want their favorite team then they should wait until it is open.
I have never really understand the argument for wanting to GM your favorite team. The players in the league are so mixed up that very few of the original players are still on the same organization so in the end it is only a logo. If my favorite team, the Twins, came open I wouldn't want to change teams because I have put a lot of hard work and effort in to building my current team.
-
Will all due respect, that would undermine the voting currently taking place by the RC, especially when you consider that it could theoretically allow up to 30 transfers assuming that no GM already owns his favorite team.
Not entirely Roy. The primary purpose of the RC in legislation is to create rules that safeguard the league for its future while limiting the negative impact on current GMs. A grandfathering rule for the current 30 satisfies the second part of that statement. The 30 GMs would have to declare favorite teams, and a decent amount of them are already managing their favorite team, so the number is less than 30. Likewise, many GMs are attached to their fantasy franchises and have no interest in managing their favorite team or switching, so this only comes down to a few GMs who have interest in moving to their favorite teams when they open. On top of that, ensuring they have the appropriate service time reduces the field even more.
-
I have never really understand the argument for wanting to GM your favorite team. The players in the league are so mixed up that very few of the original players are still on the same organization so in the end it is only a logo. If my favorite team, the Twins, came open I wouldn't want to change teams because I have put a lot of hard work and effort in to building my current team.
It's just a personal preference thing. Like I said in this idea, all I want to do is change the name of the team, that is it. I don't want the players.
-
Not entirely Roy. The primary purpose of the RC in legislation is to create rules that safeguard the league for its future while limiting the negative impact on current GMs. A grandfathering rule for the current 30 satisfies the second part of that statement. The 30 GMs would have to declare favorite teams, and a decent amount of them are already managing their favorite team, so the number is less than 30. Likewise, many GMs are attached to their fantasy franchises and have no interest in managing their favorite team or switching, so this only comes down to a few GMs who have interest in moving to their favorite teams when they open. On top of that, ensuring they have the appropriate service time reduces the field even more.
I am not trying to screw things up in this league, I am just asking for a small name change, that's it. It's amazing that if you don't agree with the vast majority thing you are ridiculed for having a favorite team.
Let's address the real issue here. There was a huge uproar b/c nobody wanted a manager to switch to a team with Trout, that is the issue although nobody would admit that.
-
I can't speak for anyone else but I can assure you that Mike Trout has nothing to do with it
-
It's just a personal preference thing. Like I said in this idea, all I want to do is change the name of the team, that is it. I don't want the players.
Fair enough I can understand that it may just be your preference to be that franchise.
Mike trout has nothing to do with it for me. I am having the RC vote on this issue so that once and for all FGM will have a concrete way to handle transfers in the league and what is allowed. I didn't do it just because someone was going to get Mike Trout. We have seen this issue come up in the past and I wanted the RC to vote on and put rules into place that explain what is allowed and isn't allowed when it comes to transfers within the league.
This was not done to prevent you from moving to the Cubs but was about a long term solution to the problem of internal transfers within FGM.
-
I couldn't care less about Trout or any other player for that matter. I am just tired of the constant shifting of GMs from one team to the next (not pandemic but still too frequent for my taste). The entire idea of the league is to take a team and grow it as best one can. I want GMs who want into the league because of the league, not the team.