NFBC Message Boards

Josh Fields was listed as 3B eligible on the official eligibity list (#29). He is showing up as only UTL eligible. Whether or not he should be 3B eligible, I assume that the official list must rule, so he needs to be be made 3B eligible in the system.

Bump on this one... We had a little technical difficulty during our Chicago auction with Josh Fields' position eligibility. I would really like Greg or Tom to say UTL only so that I don't have to hate Jack

He was on the official eligibility sheet as 3B eligible.

He also only played 12 games at 3B last year, which doesn't qualify him for 3B according to the rules.



I was going by the sheet and Jack was going by the rules. To me it is pretty clear cut now that Fields is UTL only, but I thought since someone else had a question on it we could get an official ruling. Especially since Jack came to me after the auction and then said that he may have been wrong about the UTL only. I would really hate for Fields by some act of God be 3B eligible, become the AL MVP, and Andy LaRoche be a complete bust.

Originally posted by Jackstraw:

Bump on this one... We had a little technical difficulty during our Chicago auction with Josh Fields' position eligibility. I would really like Greg or Tom to say UTL only so that I don't have to hate Jack You could then change your name to "Jackhate" rather than Jackstraw.

Originally posted by Jackstraw:

He also only played 12 games at 3B last year, which doesn't qualify him for 3B according to the rules.



I was going by the sheet and Jack was going by the rules. To me it is pretty clear cut now that Fields is UTL only, but I thought since someone else had a question on it we could get an official ruling. Especially since Jack came to me after the auction and then said that he may have been wrong about the UTL only. I would really hate for Fields by some act of God be 3B eligible, become the AL MVP, and Andy LaRoche be a complete bust. The ruling was made once and for all prior to or at the main that Fields was 3B eligible because the sheet listed him as such. I asked Scott during the middle of the draft what the official ruling was, and he said Fields was 3B eligible. So I drafted Fields.



Sorry about that mixup. Go Andy LaRoche.

Please, Andy LaRoche, please hit 40 HR with 150 RBI!



Jackhate just doesn't roll off the tongue like Jackstraw does

Originally posted by jim.s:

Josh Fields was listed as 3B eligible on the official eligibity list (#29). He is showing up as only UTL eligible. Whether or not he should be 3B eligible, I assume that the official list must rule, so he needs to be be made 3B eligible in the system. Josh Fields is eligible at 3B. He played less than 20 games in the majors last year (14) and 12 at third base. According to our rules, he qualifies at 3B.



I heard about the misunderstanding in the Chicago Auction League from Scott and all I can say is that Fields was listed at 3B on the eligibility sheets we provided and on the web site. He has been 3B eligible in all of our NFBC Satellite Leagues, live drafts/auctions and the online championship and is 3B eligible on the game site now.



Good luck all.

Oh well, so much for hope and creating my own reality...



Now it is back to faith



The mantra - "Andy LaRoche is the next ARod, Andy LaRoche is the next ARod, Andy LaRoche is the next ARod..."

Speaking of eligibility sheets, would it be possible to list the players in alphabetical order in the future. It would make it a little easier to find players.



Even better would be one list of all players sorted alphabetically, with thier eligible positions in a column on the right.



[ April 01, 2009, 10:10 AM: Message edited by: Beezman ]

Originally posted by Beezman:

Speaking of eligibility sheets, would it be possible to list the players in alphabetical order in the future. It would make it a little easier to find players.



Even better would be one list of all players sorted alphabetically, with thier eligible positions in a column on the right. Last names first would also be a benefit.

This thread never received an "official" answer, and is probably where the confusion came from:



http://nfbcboards.stats.com/cgi-bin/ult ... 760#000000