45 Officially For Ultimate Leagues

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Sat Feb 18, 2006 1:52 am

Originally posted by The Lollygaggers:

Greg - what criterion are you planning to use to determine whether we'll switch from KDS to BBDS this year? It would have to be unanimous in each event. We are having 15 onwers in Las Vegas for one league and the Chi-TB-NY owners are currently scheduled to be in the other league. So we'd have to have unanimous decisions from every owner in those leagues. Sorry, but that's the way we have to do it.

Now, we are getting more interest in the Ultimate Leagues. Even though Big Fish is willing to give up his seat, there was another original owner who wants in as well and said he would take a spot if we get another league. So let's just keep taking the poll, keep taking the signups and see where this all leads us in the next two weeks.

Sound good?

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Sat Feb 18, 2006 7:43 am

Originally posted by :

Greg-

We want in for Big Fish in Ultimate if that's not settled yet.

Othwerise, do we have a spot reserved in the main event on Saturday yet? If not, we want one- from NYC. Let me know if you need credit card info, name, address, etc.

The worst part about filming Paradise Hotel 3 summers ago (otherise than not scoring the big cash prize or any of the models there) was not being able to monitor my fantasy team from June through August and a well-built team slipping from 2nd to 9th in 12. Shoot me an e-mail with your phone number, contact info to [email protected]. You're second on the waiting list and I'm waiting to hear back from Andy first. I don't have you in the main event yet, but we can take care of that today. Thanks.

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Sat Feb 18, 2006 10:28 am

Andy Robinson has taken the 30th spot in the Ultimate Draft League, although he would prefer it if we fill up another $5,000 Ultimate Auction League. Nick Cassavettes is also on standby, as is Scott Keikoan, Dave Kerpen and Bobby Brendler. If anyone else has any interest in a $5K spot, let me know and we'll just keep a tentative list. You never know, maybe we could still get 10-11 more signups in the next 2-3 weeks.

Thanks Andy and we now have a full 15 for Las Vegas in the Ultimate Draft League, which means LV-TB-NY will comprise the other league unless we somehow add one more.

[ February 18, 2006, 04:29 PM: Message edited by: Greg Ambrosius ]

King of Queens · Post by **King of Queens** » Sat Feb 18, 2006 11:01 am

I think Kimo said he'd do another Ultimate League if you moved it to Saturday night.

The Lollygaggers · Post by **The Lollygaggers** » Sun Feb 19, 2006 2:46 pm

Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

It would have to be unanimous in each event. We are having 15 onwers in Las Vegas for one league and the Chi-TB-NY owners are currently scheduled to be in the other league. So we'd have to have unanimous decisions from every owner in those leagues. Sorry, but that's the way we have to do it.

Greg – I won’t argue with your answer for 2006, since we’re a month from draft day. But can we use a more reasonable criterion for rule changes in the future? 100% support or the idea fails?! It only takes a 2/3 majority to change the US Constitution!

When you changed the main event to KDS a few months ago, the poll you used to justify the change showed 70% in favor of KDS out of 73 total voters (only 22% of the 330 NFBC participants). Right now, we have 85% in favor of BBDS out of 14 total voters (47% of the 30 Ultimate Draft participants). Can we decide now that if we have a 2/3 majority in favor of BBDS next year, we’ll switch to that selection method?

cindy · Post by **cindy** » Sun Feb 19, 2006 2:48 pm

thats a pretty strong argument lolly

GoldenEagle · Post by **GoldenEagle** » Sun Feb 19, 2006 3:00 pm

Originally posted by The Lollygaggers:

Greg – I won’t argue with your answer for 2006, since we’re a month from draft day. But can we use a more reasonable criterion for rule changes in the future? 100% support or the idea fails?! It only takes a 2/3 majority to change the US ConstitutionIn defense of Greg, he actually has 10,000 reasons to not change the rules mid-stream. Two guys signed up under the standard rules and committed their $5,000 each on that basis. If they just want to stick with the rule they signed up for, they're entitled to that right, and Greg should be applauded for protecting those guys and their money and the integrity of the tournament.

Personally, I don't have dog in this fight (I'm in Auction Ultimate) so I could take the BBDS or leave it. For a low stakes satellite, maybe it's no big deal to switch. If two guys want to drop out, so what. But this is the Ultimate.

[ February 19, 2006, 09:04 PM: Message edited by: GoldenEagle ]

The Lollygaggers · Post by **The Lollygaggers** » Sun Feb 19, 2006 3:20 pm

GoldenEagle – I doubt that the two “no” votes would drop out of Ultimate if we switched to BBDS…I know I wouldn’t be too upset if a rule got changed because I was overwhelmingly outvoted. Also, it’s evident from the vote results so far and from several threads on this board that BBDS is a popular idea. Maybe Greg would get more signups (another 10,000 reasons, to use your lingo) if we switched to BBDS?

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Sun Feb 19, 2006 3:25 pm

Originally posted by The Lollygaggers:

quote:Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

It would have to be unanimous in each event. We are having 15 onwers in Las Vegas for one league and the Chi-TB-NY owners are currently scheduled to be in the other league. So we'd have to have unanimous decisions from every owner in those leagues. Sorry, but that's the way we have to do it.

Greg – I won’t argue with your answer for 2006, since we’re a month from draft day. But can we use a more reasonable criterion for rule changes in the future? 100% support or the idea fails?! It only takes a 2/3 majority to change the US Constitution!

When you changed the main event to KDS a few months ago, the poll you used to justify the change showed 70% in favor of KDS out of 73 total voters (only 22% of the 330 NFBC participants). Right now, we have 85% in favor of BBDS out of 14 total voters (47% of the 30 Ultimate Draft participants). Can we decide now that if we have a 2/3 majority in favor of BBDS next year, we’ll switch to that selection method? [/QUOTE]You're talking about changing the drafting strategy while we were taking signups and AFTER we've taken signups. Of course you need 100 percent approval from the owners who are laying down five thousand dollars each when you do that. Even George W. couldn't get away with 2/3 majority after the money is in.

Next year when we introduce the Ultimate Draft Leagues, maybe we'll assign one as BBDS right away and see who grabs the spots. With so much interest in the Ultimate Leagues now, that would make sense for 2007.

The Lollygaggers · Post by **The Lollygaggers** » Sun Feb 19, 2006 4:36 pm

Greg – As I said in an earlier post, I won’t argue with your decision for 2006. I don’t, however, agree with your idea for a separate BBDS league next year.

BBDS isn’t a radical departure from the current system – we’re already ranking our draft preference as part of the KDS process. All BBDS does is ask for a bid in addition to our rank order, something we already do when bidding on free agents during the season. To add a separate Ultimate league for such a small detail adds a layer of complexity that doesn’t make sense to me.

Arranging the leagues by geography is already complicated enough. Does it make sense to add four more facilitators if, say, this separate BBDS league fills with 8 participants in Vegas, 4 in NY, 2 in Chicago and 1 in Tampa Bay? Do you want to set a precedent of creating a separate league for every suggested rule tweak in the future? Why can’t we just vote on BBDS in Ultimate like we did for KDS in the main event?

My reason for bringing this up now is partly out of frustration. As I said in an earlier post, BBDS has more support among Ultimate participants than KDS did in the main event. Again, I won’t argue with your decision to require a 100% yes vote for the 2006 event. But can we agree now to hold a vote in, say, August for BBDS, and, if 2/3 of the voters approve, it will be used for 2007 Ultimate?

Captain Hook · Post by **Captain Hook** » Sun Feb 19, 2006 5:39 pm

Perhaps when there is a vote, you can consider the other logical alternative - a small amount for the BDDS procedure, such that if someone doesn't want to bid any money on the spots, they have more money for FA bidding, while those spending the minimum amount aren't punished in their FA amount - which still gives those who feel strongly about a bid the chance to do it and thus have fewer FA dollars.

OR, since it's an Ultimate League - let's do the bidding with real $ - above and beyond the entry fee

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Mon Feb 20, 2006 3:36 am

We have another owner interested in the $5K Ultimate Draft League in Las Vegas on Sunday, March 19th. The waiting list is adding up and it's possible that we could still get a third Ultimate Draft League going. Give me a holler if you have an interest. Thanks.

Red Sox Nation · Post by **Red Sox Nation** » Mon Feb 20, 2006 6:14 am

Thanks Greg by standing by your words. I'm not in favor of the bidding for draft spots and I signed up under the Kentucky Derby System.

The Lollygaggers · Post by **The Lollygaggers** » Mon Feb 20, 2006 6:40 am

Red Sox Nation – Out of curiosity, why do you prefer KDS to using FAAB dollars to bid on draft position? Also, would you have a problem playing under the BBDS system in 2007 Ultimate if 2/3 of your fellow owners voted for the rule change?

Red Sox Nation · Post by **Red Sox Nation** » Mon Feb 20, 2006 8:08 am

Lollygaggers- I just feel that the FAAB dollars are too valuable to waste on a draft choice and my belief is that most owners agree with me here. Now the voting is for the bidding but I think what would happen is that everyone would be "cheap" hoping to see everyone spend dollars and that wouldn't happen. So I think a bunch of us would have unfavorable draft positions. I like the KD system because it does give us some say. I'm confident that even though it is random i won't end up with one of the 4 spots that i don't want.

In 2007 if greg changed the format i would probably have to adjust but for 2006 I'm looking forward to the KDS which i signed up for.

CC's Desperados · Post by **CC's Desperados** » Mon Feb 20, 2006 8:24 am

Originally posted by Red Sox Nation:

Lollygaggers- I just feel that the FAAB dollars are too valuable to waste on a draft choice and my belief is that most owners agree with me here. Now the voting is for the bidding but I think what would happen is that everyone would be "cheap" hoping to see everyone spend dollars and that wouldn't happen. So I think a bunch of us would have unfavorable draft positions. I like the KD system because it does give us some say. I'm confident that even though it is random i won't end up with one of the 4 spots that i don't want.

In 2007 if greg changed the format i would probably have to adjust but for 2006 I'm looking forward to the KDS which i signed up for. No guts no glory!! BBDS is the future so why hold it up. Are you saying you are not a top player and can't make the proper adjustments for BBDS? But, if Greg changed it next year, you might find a way to figure it out. The KD method offers you nothing. It will only help people who want to move down in the draft(as in closer to 15). Maybe, one of two player move up a spot or two based on someone moving down. If you don't want to spend your fab money for a draft spot, then don't. If you want to pick down the draft it isn't going to cost you much or anything at all. If you look at your team last year, I'm sure you wasted at least a couple hundred dollars on a stiff that didn't help you at all.

I think this group of players are ready to move forward to BBDS. I'm not going to hold this up. I look forward to the challange.

overyourshoulder · Post by **overyourshoulder** » Mon Feb 20, 2006 9:38 am

Come on boys, play nice. You think this system is so great? Then spread the money bid on the draft spots equally amongst the guys that don't want to bid on draft spots. The guys that want to buy a draft spot can and the guys that want to save their money for FAAB get a few extra bucks as compensation. Let's see now how brave you boys really are!

CC's Desperados · Post by **CC's Desperados** » Mon Feb 20, 2006 9:44 am

Originally posted by overyourshoulder:

Come on boys, play nice. You think this system is so great? Then spread the money bid on the draft spots equally amongst the guys that don't want to bid on draft spots. The guys that want to buy a draft spot can and the guys that want to save their money for FAAB get a few extra bucks as compensation. Let's see now how brave you boys really are! So you want double jeopardy? I don't see and Alaskan sign ups unless I missed something. Are you a player or follower?

Kevin D · Post by **Kevin D** » Mon Feb 20, 2006 9:57 am

This topic has been widely discussed in the past. If we're talking about a league of players who feel they are the best. Then "Live" bidding, using FAAB $$'s, immediately preceding the draft, with the start 21 minutes after the last position (15th) is awarded (gotta have time to find your seat.) That's what I would like. Truly the best players would rise to the top.

BANZAI!!!!!

la Jolla · Post by **la Jolla** » Mon Feb 20, 2006 10:26 am

Not a bad idea Kevin, I like that concept the most. As far as Bidding vs. Derby, I cannot see the advantage to Derby whatsoever. I respect your decision, Sox, not to use bidding, but for five grand I think most of us would want some say in where we draft instead of pulling names out of a hat. If your plunking down that kind of money, I know your confident in what your doing, I just don't understand preferring the randomness is all. Hopefully you'll reconsider, if not there's always next year.

GoldenEagle · Post by **GoldenEagle** » Mon Feb 20, 2006 12:10 pm

Re: KDS vs. BBDS vs. Random Draw.

There's nothing inherently "better" or "worse" about any of these 3 methods. They all have merit and they all work. One is not "advanced" and another is not "stone age". They're just different.

On an overall basis, I would urge Greg and Krause to try to resist the temptation to keep making the rules longer and longer every year. OK to close a loophole or clarify a situation in the interest of fairness.

I see the draft spot hullabaloo something that could add 300 words to the rules, and make a very tiny difference in the outcome. If you keep doing this every year, eventually the rules will be as long as the IRS Code, which is not good.

And each of the new changes favors the prior year participants, who gain experience in "one more thing" and discriminates against the newer players who are at a disadvantage in each incremental layer of complexity. This is not ideal for the competitive balance and Krause's goals of broadening the appeal of all the events to a wider audience.

A new guy could end up feeling more and more like he's having to throw away his first year's entry fee just to get his feet wet and learn the ropes. A far more ideal posture for Krause is to make the rules simple and familiar so as many new guys as possible believes he can win right away without reservation or too steep of a learning curve. I mean, how many "home leagues" use KDS or BBDS?

This one change is not evil. It might even be a change for the better. Time will tell. But watch the pattern, it could be detrimental to the health of the whole thing if we get carried away with over-catering to the desires of just the 50 most active MB posters.

The way we have it right now, NFBC is growing, and there's plenty of "fresh meat" for all the experienced guys. We don't have to keep stacking the deck in the veterans' favor at the expense of newbies. Keep adding complex rules and eventually the event will plateau out and then you'll be forced to "eat your own" as the fresh meat will be gone for good.

[ February 20, 2006, 06:27 PM: Message edited by: GoldenEagle ]

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Mon Feb 20, 2006 12:50 pm

Only four owners repeated as league champions last year and many first-year players won league titles last year, so I'm not sure how tough this contest is for first-timers.

I understand the argument here, but to say that KDS affects only two or three owners is absurd. We've already seen in the satellite leagues and magazine leagues where many owners get much better spots than what they would have gotten in a random draw because several owners like to move down or even to the end of the draft. I agree that BBDS is better than KDS and maybe we can use it in certain leagues in 2007, but it's tough to do it in 2006 when we didn't introduce the concept before taking signups. If we had unanimous decisions in one league, then okay.

KDS is not complicating the system, unless we don't explain it properly.

King of Queens · Post by **King of Queens** » Mon Feb 20, 2006 12:51 pm

Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

I agree that BBDS is better than KDS You heard it here first.

King of Queens · Post by **King of Queens** » Mon Feb 20, 2006 1:06 pm

I guess I'll throw my hat in the ring for this debate. My 2 cents is that we all signed up for this event under the KDS format, and that's what should happen in 2006 if even one person has a dissenting opinion. Changing the rules this close to opening day is not right.

That said, I'm all for a BBDS league. I especially liked the "Alaskan" BBDS variety, where teams that don't bid get to split the money spent on draft slot bidding. A nice wrinkle, and a good way to prevent things from getting out of control (as some people are afraid of).