Live Chat Today With Greg Ambrosius At 3 p.m. EST

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Thu Mar 09, 2006 9:17 am

Originally posted by viper:

at the draft and whatever socializing occurs before and after, everyone should have name tags with their Chat name on them. I could care less what GG's real name is but his chat name is another thing. I don't have access to that. I don't even know who most of you guys are on the MBs. So that's not possible from our end. If you guys want to write that on your new, beautiful nametags, go ahead.

King of Queens · Post by **King of Queens** » Thu Mar 09, 2006 9:21 am

Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

One of the biggest reasons I was upset yesterday was the assumption that the last nine signups in Tampa were dead money. This was mentioned by one owner, but I believe the problem that most people had yesterday was that the last few entrants were guaranteed to be in the same league. It appears that is no longer the case. End of discussion.

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Thu Mar 09, 2006 9:21 am

Originally posted by Gordon Gekko:

quote:Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

You can disagree with our plans for this, but it is consistent with what we've done in 2004 NFBC, 2004 NFFC and 2005 NFFC. If you snooze you lose. Nobody questioned this in football, so hearing some of the same guys in that event suddenly call us unprofessional now is a bit puzzling. to be honest, i was aware of the phone leagues (not a problem) in the past, but I don't believe I was aware they were made up of the last few sign-ups (is this true?). [/QUOTE]No, not in every case, just like it won't be in this case. What I'm saying is that in football some of the last signups were put in New York 8 and they came from all over the place and not ONE person said anything. That league had some very veteran WCOFF guys and NFFC guys in it and it was as tough as any league. So yesterday's inference that this could be a pansy league really burned me.

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Thu Mar 09, 2006 9:25 am

I must prepare for an auction league tonight. Tom is handling the satellite leagues tonight, so good luck everyone.

Thanks for the chat. I feel better about this bunch today.

viper · Post by **viper** » Thu Mar 09, 2006 9:26 am

I do feel that it really takes one year to get to understand the drafting/playing differences the NFBC creates. Few people do drafts where 450 players are taken. Few people do FAAB. Not everyone specialzes in weekly move leagues. Very few, if any compete, in no-trade leagues. My guess is that the combination of this is unique to the NFBC now. I really think that was the real concern. I was asked about the NFBC by a guy named Jerald Yearous (sp?). He is a great player and is one of the very best ESPN players. As a rookie he would be scarey but I guess he decided against playing. He is the type of guy who should have done a satellite league and then joined up for the main event. To say the final 9 in TB are bad is absurd.

King of Queens · Post by **King of Queens** » Thu Mar 09, 2006 9:26 am

Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

What I'm saying is that in football some of the last signups were put in New York 8 and they came from all over the place and not ONE person said anything. That league had some very veteran WCOFF guys and NFFC guys in it and it was as tough as any league. So yesterday's inference that this could be a pansy league really burned me. This is exactly the reason I hesitated before bringing up the example. There is no question in my mind that New York 8 was completely on the up-and-up. HOWEVER, not all participants in the in the NFFC have participated in your events for the past three years. A lot of newcomers might take a look at that league and say, "Hmmm, this doesn't seem right." That's the only point I was trying to make by bringing up that example.

JohnZ · Post by **JohnZ** » Thu Mar 09, 2006 9:45 am

Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

You can disagree with our plans for this, but it is consistent with what we've done in 2004 NFBC, 2004 NFFC and 2005 NFFC. If you snooze you lose. Nobody questioned this in football, so hearing some of the same guys in that event suddenly call us unprofessional now is a bit puzzling.

[/QB][/quote]

Greg, you assume that we know exactly what happended for FB. So when you keep referring to the past, that puzzles me.

I was not in that league, and If there was MB discussion on it, I don't remember it. I don't need to remember it like you would have to.

All I care about is the rules we signed up and paid for are adhered to. If I caused any harm, then I apolgize, but I know you know it was not intentional. You have assured me that all picks will be random.

nydownunder · Post by **nydownunder** » Thu Mar 09, 2006 9:53 am

Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

quote:Originally posted by Gordon Gekko:

quote:Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

You can disagree with our plans for this, but it is consistent with what we've done in 2004 NFBC, 2004 NFFC and 2005 NFFC. If you snooze you lose. Nobody questioned this in football, so hearing some of the same guys in that event suddenly call us unprofessional now is a bit puzzling. to be honest, i was aware of the phone leagues (not a problem) in the past, but I don't believe I was aware they were made up of the last few sign-ups (is this true?). [/QUOTE]No, not in every case, just like it won't be in this case. What I'm saying is that in football some of the last signups were put in New York 8 and they came from all over the place and not ONE person said anything. That league had some very veteran WCOFF guys and NFFC guys in it and it was as tough as any league. So yesterday's inference that this could be a pansy league really burned me. [/QUOTE]Greg, All I have tried to do is get you to appreciate the biggest CON (as in Pros and Cons) of your method. Appreciate doesn't mean agree, but it also doesn't mean throw it away like it has no merit or that I am some idiot. The fact that it burned you suggests just that - "like as if it was some farfetched hypothesis". I deserve better for trying to help this league and getting everyone to see the other side of this issue for the leagues sake - that's "we". All I have heard from the other side is how it would inconvience them - which is all about "I" (not "we"). Some consideration and respect is all I, or anyone else whom suggests something rationale, asks for.

And you shouldn't be worried about the perception of that league...with where you're heading with it, it's actually a selling point for both seasoned vets and newbies alike.

[ March 10, 2006, 07:30 AM: Message edited by: nydownunder ]

Walla Walla · Post by **Walla Walla** » Thu Mar 09, 2006 5:22 pm

I get blasted for saying things most of the time. I have it coming. Well probably all the time.

This one I don't get though. John you were a partner for Greg in the last draft? Why are you being such an ass right now??? Is this a inside joke or is there something more to it.

JohnZ · Post by **JohnZ** » Thu Mar 09, 2006 9:12 pm

Originally posted by Walla Walla:

I get blasted for saying things most of the time. I have it coming. Well probably all the time.

This one I don't get though. John you were a partner for Greg in the last draft? Why are you being such an ass right now??? Is this a inside joke or is there something more to it.

Thanks for the rebuttal time

One last time...

*Tom posted to GG that Rule 16 was going to be changed. "The last league will be comprised of the sign-ups after the first 30. Sorry Gordon."

*FOUR others before MY post posted the same concern.

*I posted I had a major problem with that. I'm not sorry I have a major problem with that. It's my nature to solve problems quickly and be blunt about it. It's the only way people from NY will respect you.

(that's a compliment NY, don't jump on me!) When it's all said and done, the only job of a game operator is to provide an even playing field. KP has always done this in the past. Tom posted today that he was stunned. I hope he understands I was stunned by the finality of his statement that a rule was being changed. It was sooooooo against every prior experience.

*Then, Tom posted again that he talked to Greg and that his comment would stand. This was more stunning to me than the first one and prompted my next post.

* I hope this helps you understand where I was coming from and that frustration. I'm not trying to be an ass. I'm a paying customer that had legitmate concerns.

*Greg, as always, fixed this and has assured us all that it will be random. If the rules said the last 15 would be on the phone, I'd be fine with that, but they don't.

I understand Greg's frustration in all of this, and if he understands mine, then he and I will have as much fun in LV as we did last weekend in Phoenix. I'd say I'm buying the first beer, but he owes me so many I've lost track.

Can I name my team MR RULE 16?

j/k

[ March 10, 2006, 03:16 AM: Message edited by: UFS ]

Top Dawg · Post by **Top Dawg** » Fri Mar 10, 2006 2:15 am

I am not losing any sleep worrying about the way leagues will be assinged. Greg and Tom will handle it properly. They always have.

If we can just put this topic to bed once and for all then maybe the boys will finalize the sign-ups, run credit cards and assign leagues.

Pete

King of Queens · Post by **King of Queens** » Fri Mar 10, 2006 2:24 am

Agreed. The posts over the past two days are merely explanatory, which was only necessary because people's feelings got hurt. Now let's all have a group hug, sing Kumbaya, and move on.

Gordon Gekko · Post by **Gordon Gekko** » Fri Mar 10, 2006 3:56 am

Originally posted by King of Queens:

was only necessary because people's feelings got hurt. my feelings weren't hurt. i (and others) asked legit questions

viper · Post by **viper** » Fri Mar 10, 2006 6:13 am

there are concerns and the swords are multi-edged.

Which is worse looking at the NYC situation where there are 2 people over a pefect fit:

1) do you want to just have 2 people drafting on the phone a thereby really lose the experience of the live drafts but incurring all the travel expenses

2) being placed in a league (and maybe even knowing that you will be placed in a specific league ahead of time) because you signed up within the specified timeframe but after the last correct number for a league is reached.

Customer satisfaction says #1 is bad.

Event integrity says #2 is bad.

nydownunder · Post by **nydownunder** » Fri Mar 10, 2006 6:47 am

Originally posted by viper:

there are concerns and the swords are multi-edged.

Which is worse looking at the NYC situation where there are 2 people over a pefect fit:

1) do you want to just have 2 people drafting on the phone a thereby really lose the experience of the live drafts but incurring all the travel expenses

2) being placed in a league (and maybe even knowing that you will be placed in a specific league ahead of time) because you signed up within the specified timeframe but after the last correct number for a league is reached.

Customer satisfaction says #1 is bad.

Event integrity says #2 is bad. 1) I would like to think people are compelled to play in this league for reasons more than the in-person draft. I couldn't even tell what someone looked like from mine last year. It still may be the #1 reason, but I would like to think other aspects in totality make up more. I also think the likeliness of someone in the NYC incurring minimal costs (ie hotel, travel) is higher than any other location because they are simply commuting. I also think a great mnay of us whom signed up earlier are a bit more diehard about this comp, thus would accept such a scenario happening as pure chance (ie [ March 10, 2006, 12:48 PM: Message edited by: nydownunder ]

viper · Post by **viper** » Fri Mar 10, 2006 8:27 am

my expenses in traveling to NYC are over $500 out of pocket dollars plus taking a day off work. For this "minimal" dollar amount, I could have almost played two additional $500 satellite leagues.

If I am the "nearly lone ranger" in New york so be it but for me it will make the draft experience a bit less fun and I would guess an extra hour in the draft given that 3 or 4 boards will have to be maintained around the country. I wonder how a 60 second clock would work with 4 cities involved. Glad this isn't my problem.

[ March 10, 2006, 02:29 PM: Message edited by: viper ]