Waiver Rule

This rule would not take effect until March 1st 2013, if passed.

This one might start as soon as the regular season, would have to discuss it with tom at least first, but it doesn't really come into effect until the season starts so we could bend the rules/amend them to make more sense.

neither does the 40 man roster rule so how does this get to be put into action this year if it passes but that doesnt?

Cat M wrote:neither does the 40 man roster rule so how does this get to be put into action this year if it passes but that doesnt?

40 man roster does matter before the start of the season. The size of a roster matters as soon as free agency starts. therefore I am not allowing that to change since free agency has already begun. The waiver rule won't come into effect until the start of the season therefore if it were to pass relatively soon I could see amending the rules to allow it. same for the franchise tag since it wouldn't come into effect until the end of the season. This is mine and tom's league, and you should be glad you have some say in rule changes. I am willing to bet that giving everyone a say is rare in most leagues.

the size of the roster doesnt matter till the season starts because we allow them to go over anyways and they dont have to meet it until later so whats the difference they are gonna spend up to cap anyways, so why bother not allowing this rule if it passes this year? the cap is the number that matters they are still gonna have to be under that and we have time to adjust to total players still. seems silly to be worried about a number we dont follow till later anyway and we have time till then ...kinda like the waiver date

ok so if in a month the nfl says, "hey guys have 90 men on your roster" that wouldn't matter to teams? They wouldn't spend slightly different at all? no, you go in planning to x amount to spend on x amount of players. I am not going to let people think yeah i can do this and this, then oh, I'm not going to have as deep of a team as some. Get over it. Serious I'm sick of your complaining about rules. Deal or get out.

how is my trying to understand why a rule is made but others rules dont follow it my fault if the commisioners werent wishy washy then it wouldnt matter but when you cant clarify it because you dont wanna deal with it just seems crazy. and no it doesnt affect how you spend because we didnt change the cap value thats the key to it the number of plays is insignificant

anyone want cat's team?

this is just a free fantasy football league....i dont understand the anger!

Cat M wrote:how is my trying to understand why a rule is made but others rules dont follow it my fault if the commisioners werent wishy washy then it wouldnt matter but when you cant clarify it because you dont wanna deal with it just seems crazy. and no it doesnt affect how you spend because we didnt change the cap value thats the key to it the number of plays is insignificant

first of all yes it does. if I can have 40 men I would prepare to spend less at the top. so i can get more low level guys i like. second of all, there is an implied necessary and proper idea behind all rules adjustments. if we feel a rule can go into effect today and not change the way people prepared in a significant way that hurts the league, we'd probably do it. Third, please keep it up.

wtf r u seriously mad about there are honestly people sick of dealing with your bs attitide towards this and because multiple others have the same view as me does seem to make me think that you are being kind of subjective towards what rules you want. if more people want it in this year then not as there should by any rule vote then it should be in. because you wanna be lazy and not go back get the votes before the forum and actually get it done like the commisioner should then its bs that we have you as a commissioner in the first place. like stop whining that you have to do stuff for the league when you started this whole thing to begin with

WE HAVE RULES! LIVE WITH THEM OR LEAVE I COULD CARE LESS. https://kongdynasty.forumotion.net/t11-official-rules

dan i have no problem with the rules, the problem lies with which ones you chose to include to begin with some you enforce and some you dont and the ones you do are ridiculous and the ones you dont just rarely seem to benefit any one or "the league" that you always fall back on as trying to qualify your reasoning with. it just irritates people besides me that you have no willingness to listen when theres a "rule " in place and it might have already been voted changed if you had stayed upon the votes from the beginning instead of just oops we are moving they no longer are usable and then oops the time ran out they dont count for this year. like leave the rules up there never to be taken down that are proposed and let everyone vote when all have voted then see if they fall into that year if not they go onto the next. that waivers havent started yet makes sense that we can still change that rule, that rosters havent been set for the year makes sense that we could add the 40 man roster it doesnt change how many a person should get it changed what they spend and since you can go over cap it doesnt affect them until the season starts since theres no penalties until then, so in reality people can do whatever they please. therefor it affects nothing until then so it should be able to put into affect as much as waivers, specially since maybe i need save alot of cap because a victor cruz may come up in waivers and the rule hasnt changed so that could affect the years and amount i spend on them. basically your claims against the change are no more powerful then mine against it, why not just ask the league to see what everyone thinks and get it done that way instead of whining that im whining when im just stating an opposite view point

because this rule:

18) When voting to change a league rule, at least 6 members must vote in favor of the rule. In case of a tie, the rule will not pass. You must have one commissioner’s approval to officially propose a change via the league message board, forum, or email. Rules must be passed by March 1st to be in effect for the league which starts on March 1st.

clearly states a statute of limitations on voting. We reached that limit. I have no way to see which people which way on here to compare to the espn voting. So as far as I can tell neither got over 5. no proof either way. I tried, I voted yes, heck I wanted this rule. But I'm not bending the rules when imho, it changes the game for the worst to make this change right now. there is no way I am letting it start til next offseason, in the name of fairness. people deserve the right to be prepared.

The intent of rule 18 was so that rules like the 40 man roster, that do change the mechanics of free agency aren't thrown upon the players mid-game. sure we could all change our bidding patterns now to fit this rule, in the case of it passing, but that will lead to players likely going for less than they should in the case of the rule failing. The Roster Rule is not taking affect until next offseason IF it passes.

No matter what you say it does change the strategy people have to increase the roster. yes it changes things prior to the to the start of the season. Tom and I already agreed neither passed this off-season, and weren't exactly happy. But we moved on, figured we'd try to pass it again this year.

The waiver rule doesn't change any mechanics that are currently in play. I'm also not saying it will for sure be used this year if it passes, I said Tom and I would look into making it start this year, as well as looking into the franchise tag rule. doesn't mean it will happen, just they are comfortably outside of the intent of the rule and that means the amending/bending of current rules would need consideration.

it's not like the 40 man roster was even a 100% to pass sorta thing. it was like 5-3 or 5-4...could have possibly failed.

I thought waivers went as follows:

If a player is dropped DURING the season, other teams can pick up the player off waivers and pick up his contract AS IS. Not for a $1 or whatever they want.... If he clears waivers, he is a free agent and we could bid on him. Is this not the way it works?

also, clear out all of Cat and Dan's argument. Nobody is going to take the time to read through it...

joshm wrote:I thought waivers went as follows:

If a player is dropped DURING the season, other teams can pick up the player off waivers and pick up his contract AS IS. Not for a $1 or whatever they want.... If he clears waivers, he is a free agent and we could bid on him. Is this not the way it works?

also, clear out all of Cat and Dan's argument. Nobody is going to take the time to read through it...

It does work like that for dropped players. But you can pick up unsigned players by wednesday at like 430am, and sign them technically for any $ amount and up to 5 years.

Dan's last two posts are pretty solid points. Yeah.... I actually took the time to read this crap! Rules are rules, and it COULD affect certain owners differently than others if we change the rule for this offseason. However, since the rule clearly states can't be put in effect for this season AFTER March 1st, then it HAS to wait until next season.

I hope this is put to rest, and I'm sorry for giving Cat more ammo! That's never a good thing

I'm just sorry i mentioned a chance to allow the waiver and franchise tag to take place this season...

Thank you for wasting an hour of my time with an argument you two roommates could have had in-person. Now I'll make you read my lengthy take on it.

An increase in roster size decreases the $/player you have in your salary cap. It does affect free agency. If you want to put that to a vote, I don't think it's necessarily unreasonable; but, it should be a unanimous vote. I, for one, would vote yes only if we also agreed to restart free agency.

As for the actual rule, on which I was hoping to read ANYWHERE in the above conversation, I think it makes sense for the way the league is set up; but, why do we need an instant-sign formatted free agency in an auction-based league? I'm unsure all the implications; but, what if we just got rid of in-season free agency and made everyone go through waivers. Then, you'd have your element of fairness; and, you could sign a mid-season acquisition to as long a deal as you want. I don't get why we need two differently-formatted player acquisition systems mid-season.

If this rule passes you'll just have managers out of the playoff hunt gambling to see if a players clears waivers so they can sign them to a long-term deal. Then this impact player goes to supposedly the worst playoff team, and the guy who worked so hard for the one seed is suddenly in the least desirable spot. Those are my thoughts.

Now for more examples of conversations that don't belong here:

Bill: As you know, l'm quite keen on comic books. Especially the ones about superheroes. I find the whole mythology surrounding superheroes fascinating. Take my favorite superhero, Superman. Not a great comic book. Not particularly well-drawn. But the mythology... The mythology is not only great, it's unique.
The Bride: [who still has a needle in her leg] How long does this shit take to go into effect?
Bill: About two minutes, just long enough for me to finish my point. Now, a staple of the superhero mythology is, there's the superhero and there's the alter ego. Batman is actually Bruce Wayne, Spider-Man is actually Peter Parker. When that character wakes up in the morning, he's Peter Parker. He has to put on a costume to become Spider-Man. And it is in that characteristic Superman stands alone. Superman didn't become Superman. Superman was born Superman. When Superman wakes up in the morning, he's Superman. His alter ego is Clark Kent. His outfit with the big red "S", that's the blanket he was wrapped in as a baby when the Kents found him. Those are his clothes. What Kent wears - the glasses, the business suit - that's the costume. That's the costume Superman wears to blend in with us. Clark Kent is how Superman views us. And what are the characteristics of Clark Kent. He's weak... he's unsure of himself... he's a coward. Clark Kent is Superman's critique on the whole human race. Sorta like Beatrix Kiddo and Mrs. Tommy Plimpton.
The Bride: Aso. The point emerges.
Bill: You would've worn the costume of Arlene Plimpton. But you were born Beatrix Kiddo. And every morning when you woke up, you'd still be Beatrix Kiddo. Oh, you can take the needle out.
The Bride: [does so] Are you calling me a superhero?
Bill: I'm calling you a killer. A natural born killer. You always have been, and you always will be. Moving to El Paso, working in a used record store, goin' to the movies with Tommy, clipping coupons. That's you, trying to disguise yourself as a worker bee That's you tryin' to blend in with the hive. But you're not a worker bee. You're a renegade killer bee. And no matter how much beer you drank or barbecue you ate or how fat your ass got, nothing in the world would ever change that.

Bruce Wayne: Targeting me won't get their money back. I knew the mob wouldn't go down without a fight, but this is different. They crossed the line.
Alfred Pennyworth: You crossed the line first, sir. You squeezed them, you hammered them to the point of desperation. And in their desperation, they turned to a man they didn't fully understand.
Bruce Wayne: Criminals aren't complicated, Alfred. Just have to figure out what he's after.
Alfred Pennyworth: With respect Master Wayne, perhaps this is a man that *you* don't fully understand, either. A long time ago, I was in Burma. My friends and I were working for the local government. They were trying to buy the loyalty of tribal leaders by bribing them with precious stones. But their caravans were being raided in a forest north of Rangoon by a bandit. So, we went looking for the stones. But in six months, we never met anybody who traded with him. One day, I saw a child playing with a ruby the size of a tangerine. The bandit had been throwing them away.
Bruce Wayne: So why steal them?
Alfred Pennyworth: Well, because he thought it was good sport. Because some men aren't looking for anything logical, like money. They can't be bought, bullied, reasoned, or negotiated with. Some men just want to watch the world burn.

Young Noah: We can just finish out the summer and see what happens then.
Young Allie: Please don't do this, you don't mean it. Oh why wait until the summer ends? Why don't you do it right now?
[pushes Noah against car]
Young Allie: Huh? C'mon. Do it! Do it!
[repeatedly pushes Noah, starts hitting Noah, Noah starts hitting himself]
Young Allie: You know what? I'm gonna do it! It's over. Okay? it's over.
Young Noah: [opens his arms for a hug] Come here.
Young Allie: Don't touch me! I hate you! I hate you!
Young Noah: OK, I'm going.
Young Allie: Why don't you just go then?
[pushes Noah in the car]
Young Allie: Get out! Leave!
[kicks Noah's car]
Young Allie: Go!... No, no, just wait a minute, we're not really breaking up are we? Come on. This is just a fight we're having and tomorrow will be like it never happend right?

Brandon M wrote:Thank you for wasting an hour of my time with an argument you two roommates could have had in-person. Now I'll make you read my lengthy take on it.

An increase in roster size decreases the $/player you have in your salary cap. It does affect free agency. If you want to put that to a vote, I don't think it's necessarily unreasonable; but, it should be a unanimous vote. I, for one, would vote yes only if we also agreed to restart free agency.

As for the actual rule, on which I was hoping to read ANYWHERE in the above conversation, I think it makes sense for the way the league is set up; but, why do we need an instant-sign formatted free agency in an auction-based league? I'm unsure all the implications; but, what if we just got rid of in-season free agency and made everyone go through waivers. Then, you'd have your element of fairness; and, you could sign a mid-season acquisition to as long a deal as you want. I don't get why we need two differently-formatted player acquisition systems mid-season.

If this rule passes you'll just have managers out of the playoff hunt gambling to see if a players clears waivers so they can sign them to a long-term deal. Then this impact player goes to supposedly the worst playoff team, and the guy who worked so hard for the one seed is suddenly in the least desirable spot. Those are my thoughts.

The point of this rule, or at least my reasoning, is to keep players from being undervalued long term. An example is Mike Vick. Also to make people decided between, attempting to allow someone to clear waiver in order to attempt to sign multiple years, or pick up off waivers and deal with only one year. I'm sure there are ways to use any rule to your advantage if you don't care about fairness and just wanna be a dick.

Winner winner, chicken dinner. This rule has the necessary 6 votes to pass, so before some smart-ass changes their mind, I'm closing it. Starting with the 2013 season, all waiver claims will be for $1, 1 year