Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Boards Fantasy Football 2016

123457

Comments

  • #302
    brinty
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,333 ✭✭✭brinty


    AdamConnor7 wrote: »
    Brock Osweiler at NE or Tyrod vs the Cardinals? Don't think either guy will do great but struggling on who to start. Anybody want to offer some advice?

    TYrod


  • #303
    Deco99
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,642 ✭✭✭Deco99


    Trade offer. Deangelo Williams for theo riddick. Proposed by the riddick owner who has lev bell. Should deangelo owner trade?


  • #304
    adrian522
    Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 16,139 Mod ✭✭✭✭adrian522


    What other RB's have you got? Williams value will plummet after week 4 but not sure Riddick is a good enough offer.


  • #305
    Deco99
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,642 ✭✭✭Deco99


    adrian522 wrote: »
    What other RB's have you got? Williams value will plummet after week 4 but not sure Riddick is a good enough offer.

    CJ and booker as cover. Gurley. Duk johnson.


  • #306
    Raoul
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,791 ✭✭✭Raoul


    I wouldn't bother. Riddick may not be the every down back. Could just be the pass catching back. Dwayne Washington could be the RB. You have all those other guys. Bell could get injured/suspended before the fantasy playoffs and then you have Williams again who is excellent.


  • Advertisement
  • #307
    Deco99
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,642 ✭✭✭Deco99


    Matt Jones and Spencer Ware for Riddick?


  • #308
    Raoul
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,791 ✭✭✭Raoul


    Deco99 wrote: »
    Matt Jones and Spencer Ware for Riddick?

    Same argument really. If Charles gets injured again then you have a top 10 Rb there whereas can you really depend on Riddick?


  • #309
    keithdelahunty
    Registered Users Posts: 168 ✭✭keithdelahunty


    Something that has always quzzuled me. Why do some managers leave an empty bench spot week to week. I see managers dropping a player and not picking up replacement. I understand not using a Waiver claim but surely come Thursday morning picking up a player does not cost you anything and takes a player away from rivals and you could get lucky with a sleeper.


  • #310
    jester1980
    Registered Users Posts: 742 ✭✭✭jester1980


    Anyone know as a GM is there a way to cancel a trade going through?


  • #311
    brinty
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,333 ✭✭✭brinty


    jester1980 wrote:
    Anyone know as a GM is there a way to cancel a trade going through?


    Can you cancel the trade
    Should be an option to do that prior go it going through


  • Advertisement
  • #312
    gerryfed
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 691 ✭✭✭gerryfed


    As far as I'm aware, you can't. Otherwise you could accept trades before a weekend, wait to see if you're coming off better or worse, then decide to cancel it...


  • #313
    jester1980
    Registered Users Posts: 742 ✭✭✭jester1980


    I was giving up snead, blount and lacy for Hopkins and ingram, but didnt realize lacy was injured when we did it so don't want to do the lad over, I think the only way is if he keeps his roster full and wont be an available space then.


  • #314
    gerryfed
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 691 ✭✭✭gerryfed


    jester1980 wrote: »
    I was giving up snead, blount and lacy for Hopkins and ingram, but didnt realize lacy was injured when we did it so don't want to do the lad over, I think the only way is if he keeps his roster full and wont be an available space then.

    You're a better man than me so :P


  • #315
    jester1980
    Registered Users Posts: 742 ✭✭✭jester1980


    gerryfed wrote: »
    You're a better man than me so :P

    HAHA


  • #316
    brinty
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,333 ✭✭✭brinty


    jester1980 wrote: »
    I was giving up snead, blount and lacy for Hopkins and ingram, but didnt realize lacy was injured when we did it so don't want to do the lad over, I think the only way is if he keeps his roster full and wont be an available space then.

    wow thats some trade
    you were winning on that one


  • #317
    Guffy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,178 ✭✭✭Guffy


    You can ask the league or gm to veto the trade.


  • #318
    jester1980
    Registered Users Posts: 742 ✭✭✭jester1980


    I am the GM, but couldn't see anywhere to do it, ive asked everyone to veto it, and told the fella to make sure roster full so hopefully its covered.


  • #319
    Raoul
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,791 ✭✭✭Raoul


    jester1980 wrote: »
    I am the GM, but couldn't see anywhere to do it, ive asked everyone to veto it, and told the fella to make sure roster full so hopefully its covered.

    I think after the trade the GM can just add and remove the players and then add them to other team.

    Anyone care to offer an opinion to this other trade problem I posted about in here:
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056426293&page=4


  • #320
    Neamhshuntasach
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,171 ✭✭✭Neamhshuntasach


    Why do the waivers clear on Thursday's? Nearly every other league i've played in has always been Wednesday morning. You miss out on the scramble of picking up backups from the waivers when someone gets injured in practice during the week. Like if someone is on the ball and keeps up with FF news and goes to check if the backup to an injured starter is available. But finds he's still on waivers. He may have been a FA. But all the extra time just gives someone with a higher priority the chance to find out about it and scoop him up. Even if not needed.


  • #321
    TOss Sweep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,905 ✭✭✭TOss Sweep


    Neamhshuntasach wrote: »
    Why do the waivers clear on Thursday's? Nearly every other league i've played in has always been Wednesday morning. You miss out on the scramble of picking up backups from the waivers when someone gets injured in practice during the week. Like if someone is on the ball and keeps up with FF news and goes to check if the backup to an injured starter is available. But finds he's still on waivers. He may have been a FA. But all the extra time just gives someone with a higher priority the chance to find out about it and scoop him up. Even if not needed.

    Whether Wednesday or Thursday guys would have been picked up by waivers especially in a 16 team league. Any chance of a guy being a FA on the Wednesday or Thursday that will make an impact will be slim to none either way. I don't see the argument for the extra day. I play in both in various leagues with different waiver options and never seen the benefit either way especially in large leagues.


  • Advertisement
  • #322
    Neamhshuntasach
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,171 ✭✭✭Neamhshuntasach


    TOss Sweep wrote: »
    Whether Wednesday or Thursday guys would have been picked up by waivers especially in a 16 team league. Any chance of a guy being a FA on the Wednesday or Thursday that will make an impact will be slim to none either way. I don't see the argument for the extra day. I play in both in various leagues with different waiver options and never seen the benefit either way especially in large leagues.

    Not true at all. Especially approaching mid season. I'm in 6 leagues. 3 of them 16 team leagues. And i picked up the backup in all 5 other leagues today minutes after the news broke.

    I've also done the same twice in various leagues so far this season after someone got injured in practice on Wednesday. At this stage of the season there are lots of people without the roster space to take a gamble on a flier. Or might have too high a waiver priority and don't want to waste it on them if it's any way risky. So they would rather wait till on FA. Like i am currently doing with my number 1 priority.

    Another one is, player gets injured on Tuesday. There is a clear backup and a few people submit waivers. Let's say priority number 4, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 16. All submit on Tuesday. But Thursday morning waiver priority 3 finds out the news and decides to stick the waiver in. That extra day has afforded them the ability to get him despite others being on the ball.


  • #323
    TOss Sweep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,905 ✭✭✭TOss Sweep


    In a competitive league it really doesn't matter where the waiver falls because your chance of getting him is as good as everyone else and there is no competitive edge in either format. It all comes down to how you use your waivers seen as we use the go to the back of the line system and how alert you are with the potential backups. In fact in the Premier League I have yet to see a guy become available as a backup due to injury that has made a massive impact. The reason being the league is so competitive these guys have already been taken a long time ago.

    Besides injury reports are fickle at best and you usually find out on a Monday and Tuesday that a guy is carrying an injury from the weekend and then Thursday through Sunday if he is actually playing.

    Fantasy Football is a mixture of Skill and luck.


  • #324
    BKWDR
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,175 ✭✭✭BKWDR


    TOss Sweep wrote: »

    Fantasy Football is a mixture of Skill and luck.

    Mostly luck


  • #325
    brinty
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,333 ✭✭✭brinty


    BKWDR wrote:
    Mostly luck


    It's all a game of chance too....
    Skill
    Luck
    Chance
    And Devine intervention


  • #326
    Paladonia
    Registered Users Posts: 152 ✭✭Paladonia


    Decided to drop Davante Adams and then he goes and does that.. :(


  • #327
    brinty
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,333 ✭✭✭brinty


    Paladonia wrote: »
    Decided to drop Davante Adams and then he goes and does that.. :(

    I share your pain
    I had Leonard Floyd sitting on the bench and Danny Trevethan starting!!!!

    apologies: this was in one of my Dynasty IDP leagues


  • #328
    TaosHum
    Registered Users Posts: 1,746 ✭✭✭TaosHum


    Paladonia wrote: »
    Decided to drop Davante Adams and then he goes and does that.. :(

    Only reason I dropped him was because NFL.com had him down as Questionable and because I wasn't staying up to watch it, I didn't take the chance.

    Oh well :(


  • #329
    Paladonia
    Registered Users Posts: 152 ✭✭Paladonia


    This might be a stupid question, but it's my first year playing FF so bear with me...

    When it comes to playoff weeks, are the players on teams who don't make the playoffs free to be picked up by the teams that do?


  • #330
    Raoul
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,791 ✭✭✭Raoul


    Paladonia wrote: »
    This might be a stupid question, but it's my first year playing FF so bear with me...

    When it comes to playoff weeks, are the players on teams who don't make the playoffs free to be picked up by the teams that do?

    Nope. Players stay on each teams roster.


  • Advertisement
  • #331
    Paladonia
    Registered Users Posts: 152 ✭✭Paladonia


    Raoul wrote: »
    Nope. Players stay on each teams roster.

    So do playoff teams tend to raid unsuccessful teams, as those teams have little to no incentive to keep their star players?


  • #332
    TOss Sweep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,905 ✭✭✭TOss Sweep


    Paladonia wrote: »
    Raoul wrote: »
    Nope. Players stay on each teams roster.

    So do playoff teams tend to raid unsuccessful teams, as those teams have little to no incentive to keep their star players?

    Nope as trade deadline will be long passed. So those players will be locked to those teams unless they release them.


  • #333
    gerryfed
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 691 ✭✭✭gerryfed


    Anyone any interest in trading?

    My team is the 2 Gurleys 1 Cup ;) Hit me up!


  • #334
    Raoul
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,791 ✭✭✭Raoul


    gerryfed wrote: »
    Anyone any interest in trading?

    My team is the 2 Gurleys 1 Cup ;) Hit me up!

    It may help to post in the leagues chat? :D


  • #335
    gerryfed
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 691 ✭✭✭gerryfed


    Raoul wrote: »
    It may help to post in the leagues chat? :D

    Thought the league forum might be a reasonable place to post... but noted ;)


  • #336
    Raoul
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,791 ✭✭✭Raoul


    gerryfed wrote: »
    Thought the league forum might be a reasonable place to post... but noted ;)

    Yeah this is the general thread, which league are you looking to trade in?


  • Advertisement
  • #337
    gerryfed
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 691 ✭✭✭gerryfed


    Raoul wrote: »
    Yeah this is the general thread, which league are you looking to trade in?

    Haha sh*t, my bad!!

    Too many forums, too many leagues, too little sense...

    Back into my cave I go :P


  • #338
    Deco99
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,642 ✭✭✭Deco99


    Trade question. Julio jones for derek carr and jordy Nelson. Julio owner is only playing consolation ladder but eli is his QB. Two owners are related. Veto or fair? Should never have let trade deadline this late


    Alot of newbs in league so have money back for winner of bottom half


  • #339
    gerryfed
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 691 ✭✭✭gerryfed


    Deco99 wrote: »
    Trade question. Julio jones for derek carr and jordy Nelson. Julio owner is only playing consolation ladder but eli is his QB. Two owners are related. Veto or fair? Should never have let trade deadline this late


    Alot of newbs in league so have money back for winner of bottom half

    You definitely can't veto it in my eyes. QB7 & WR5 for WR3. You might not like the trade, or would rather be on a certain side... but definitely not 'veto-able'...


  • #340
    Marcus Antonius
    Registered Users Posts: 1,675 ✭✭✭Marcus Antonius


    Deco99 wrote: »
    Trade question. Julio jones for derek carr and jordy Nelson. Julio owner is only playing consolation ladder but eli is his QB. Two owners are related. Veto or fair? Should never have let trade deadline this late


    Alot of newbs in league so have money back for winner of bottom half

    Reeks of collusion! I'd agree with the above poster though, you might not like the trade but probably shouldn't veto it.


  • #341
    Realt Dearg Sec
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,902 ✭✭✭✭Realt Dearg Sec


    Deco99 wrote: »
    Trade question. Julio jones for derek carr and jordy Nelson. Julio owner is only playing consolation ladder but eli is his QB. Two owners are related. Veto or fair? Should never have let trade deadline this late


    Alot of newbs in league so have money back for winner of bottom half



  • Advertisement
  • #342
    Guffy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,178 ✭✭✭Guffy


    Its not collusion tbf. Def not vetoable. Not a great trade given he has eli but i don't think it collusion. I wouldn't do it but still.


  • #343
    TOss Sweep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,905 ✭✭✭TOss Sweep


    Going to be one of those that is hard to tell whether it is collusion or not. It can certainly reek of it if one team is in the Winners bracket and the other not and the team in the winners bracket is getting the better deal. But without knowing them who knows. If at face value the trade is a decent trade then you can't call it collusion really especially seen as most trade deadlines are usually November 27th so the opportunity to trade is still there even if close to the playoffs


  • #344
    Guffy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,178 ✭✭✭Guffy


    The only thing is, there is a prize for the winner of the consilation bracket


  • #345
    maverick_21
    Registered Users Posts: 198 ✭✭maverick_21


    Sounds like a dodgy trade to me but its hard to veto at the same time.


  • #346
    Raoul
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,791 ✭✭✭Raoul


    gufc21 wrote: »
    The only thing is, there is a prize for the winner of the consilation bracket

    Yeah, if there is a prize for this then it is hard to say the trade is unfair.


  • #347
    TOss Sweep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,905 ✭✭✭TOss Sweep


    Raoul wrote: »
    Yeah, if there is a prize for this then it is hard to say the trade is unfair.

    I would agree if that is the case as both have something to fight for in the playoffs. So taking it at face value nothing wrong with the trade really.


  • #348
    AirDemon
    Registered Users Posts: 210 ✭✭AirDemon


    I'm late to the party on this but anyway.... I can't see how it was an unfair trade but even if it was an unfair trade that doesn't mean it should be vetoed.
    If your league does not have a trade deadline then there is no reason to veto it because of timing even if a team has been eliminated from the playoffs.

    If the trade is unfair, as in one owner is giving up too much.... This still isn't a reason to veto. Just because you don't like a trade doesn't mean you can veto it. If I'm trading WR1 for the WR25 because I think this week WR25 will hit and WR1 won't and I have my reasons (stupid or not) then you can't veto my trade.

    Veto isn't there to control/limit other people's management of their team. Are you going to be willing to go back if the trade doesn't work out as you expect? Say that WR25 does hit, and the WR1 gets a 0... then the owner loses the game and misses out on the playoffs because of it. Are you willing to go back and say, you were right.... We screwed you, here's your money back.

    The ONLY reason to veto is if it looks like collusion... So the above example may look like collusion but jumping the gun and vetoing just because you decide you wouldn't like to do the trade or think one owner got a great deal isn't enough.

    I'd get rid of veto's completely, if you need to veto in a league it sounds like you need to ditch the league or the players colluding and get a new league.


  • #349
    AdamConnor7
    Registered Users Posts: 57 ✭✭AdamConnor7


    This is coming season will only be my second playing fantasy football on Boards.ie so I'm not sure if this is the right way to propose this but would there be much support for reducing the number of teams in a league? Personally I found that 16 was too much. I think 10 or 12 would be better. Just a thought..


  • #350
    Raoul
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,791 ✭✭✭Raoul


    AdamConnor7 wrote: »
    This is coming season will only be my second playing fantasy football on Boards.ie so I'm not sure if this is the right way to propose this but would there be much support for reducing the number of teams in a league? Personally I found that 16 was too much. I think 10 or 12 would be better. Just a thought..
    Probably a bit late. There are 6 or 7 divisions now all comprised of 16 teams. It is tough but most of us are in 2 or 3 leagues and usually this 16 team league offers a different challenge to the other ones. So...stay with the 16 and just get in another smaller one too ;)


  • #351
    ftse100
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 187 ✭✭ftse100


    I think 16 works well. If you want to do well you really have to stay on top of your team week in week out.


  • Advertisement
Advertisement