Page 1 of 1
Overall vs League
Posted: Mon Jul 02, 2007 6:57 am
by Walla Walla
A recent ruling by the NFBC raises the question of Rules. If you have a team that may win it's league but not the overall is that cause for the NFBC crew to change the pool of players for the next weeks Free agents? The reason being is it might effect the overall standings? If this is the case than there should be no payoffs for league winners. Just lump it into one final payment for the top teams. The ruling might benifit the overall teams but kills any idea
of a fair one team contest.
Overall vs League
Posted: Mon Jul 02, 2007 11:12 am
by mdz129
Jones should be out and you should have bid on Marmol or Corpas or anyone else who might close out a game.
Overall vs League
Posted: Mon Jul 02, 2007 11:55 am
by Chest Rockwell
Originally posted by Walla Walla:
A recent ruling by the NFBC raises the question of Rules. If you have a team that may win it's league but not the overall is that cause for the NFBC crew to change the pool of players for the next weeks Free agents? The reason being is it might effect the overall standings? If this is the case than there should be no payoffs for league winners. Just lump it into one final payment for the top teams. The ruling might benifit the overall teams but kills any idea
of a fair one team contest.
No matter what the rules are you will finish last so no need debating.
Overall vs League
Posted: Mon Jul 02, 2007 11:57 am
by Red Sox Nation
Originally posted by Walla Walla:
A recent ruling by the NFBC raises the question of Rules. If you have a team that may win it's league but not the overall is that cause for the NFBC crew to change the pool of players for the next weeks Free agents? The reason being is it might effect the overall standings? If this is the case than there should be no payoffs for league winners. Just lump it into one final payment for the top teams. The ruling might benifit the overall teams but kills any idea
of a fair one team contest.
Take Jones out of the pool!