• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
  • The Politics forum has been nuked. Please do not bring political discussion to the rest of the site, or you will be removed. Thanks.

NeoGAF Fantasy Football Paypal League(s) - Season 4

Status
Not open for further replies.

Cloudy

Banned
Jun 7, 2004
57,596
0
0
Can't believe this will be year 4 of this lol.

Season 1
Season 2
Season 3
Season 4 (Current)

So, I guess we should start having preliminary discussions about how we want to do it this year. As always, previous players get priority. Here's where we left off discussions last year:

- Allowing PR/KR stats in some form (maybe 25 yds a point?)
- TE as flex eligible
- Dropping a bench spot (from 6 to 5)
- Cutting the sack penalty to -0.5
- Upping the entry fee to $60-$75 so every playoff team gets something
- People bitching about the bad teams getting waiver priority (I thought it worked well but we can revisit it)

The first 3 would allow us to have a deeper FA pool.


List of No Quitters 4 GAFfers
List of NeoGAF Economy League GAFfers
 

Cloudy

Banned
Jun 7, 2004
57,596
0
0
Well the 16 from last year all get first crack. After that, it's first come, first serve. You have a pretty good chance since someone always drops out and I want to open it up to 20 this year.

Invites to last year's players are out. League page is in OP. Links to the first 3 seasons are at the top right

ps: Changes/additions I made from last year. Let me know what you guys think

- PR/KR = 25yds/1pt (New)
- Pick six thrown = -1 (New)
- 1 RB slot removed (2 last year)
- 1 bench slot removed (6 last year)
- Sack taken = -0.5 (Was -1 last year)
- Flex = WR/RB/TE (TE added)
- Waiver = Game time - Tuesday (New feature by Yahoo)
 

rinker

Member
May 15, 2007
730
0
0
yay fooseball!

I'll chime in the changes:
-I'm down for any buy-in
-TE on flex sounds cool, might make it rough to find decent starting TEs if we have a lot of teams though
-I dont like PR/KR points unless there is a designated slot for that, it sucks to see Percy Harvin outscore Larry Fitzgerald
-New waiver is awesome
 

Cloudy

Banned
Jun 7, 2004
57,596
0
0
I dont like PR/KR points unless there is a designated slot for that, it sucks to see Percy Harvin outscore Larry Fitzgerald

I don't really want to start policing rosters (besides making sure every spot is filled on gameday lol). Using special teams yards adds an extra dimension to roster strategy and gives everyone more options. If we're gonna do it, I don't see how we could restrict it to a certain spot.

I mean, besides Harvin, not too many return guys make a consistent impact in regular scoring. Picking up a guy like Cribbs would be a calculated risk but not so much if we have a PR/KR slot

As far as the TE issue, we could drop the bench size by 1 (to 5) if we have 20 teams. Just a thought
 
This is going to be in OT and not Community OT? crap.

- PR/KR = 25yds/1pt (New)
Ehhh, I guess as long as it doesn't get silly sure. I need to research if that seems right/low.
- Pick six thrown = -1 (New)
I kept saying there has to be a bigger penalty for QBs who don't give a fuck and toss 5 TDs a game. -1 feels kinda small, didn't we use -1 before any of the 1st 2 years?
- Sack taken = -.05 (Was -1 last year)
This was a hot button topic last year. Shouldn't it be 0.5 at least? 0.05 is WAY too low. I was thinking 0.75 actually.
- Flex = WR/RB/TE (TE added)
No prob. Just like you can go 3 WRs/3 RBs why not 2 TEs?
- Waiver = Game time - Tuesday (New feature by Yahoo)
Not sure what it is, although the whole waiver rule issue will be big later on.

PS2: We had a bit of overlap with the economy league last year. Stop being cheap and lets have one big one :p
People don't want to commit a ton of cash for FF, why not have multiple leagues? Especially when the league get too big, anything over 16 is silly and even 16 was tough.
 

Cloudy

Banned
Jun 7, 2004
57,596
0
0
I kept saying there has to be a bigger penalty for QBs who don't give a fuck and toss 5 TDs a game. -1 feels kinda small, didn't we use -1 before?

INTS are already -2. We've never had the pick 6 penalty

This was a hot button topic last year. Shouldn't it be 0.5 at least? 0.05 is WAY too low. I was thinking 0.75 actually.

I typed that wrong. It's -0.5

Not sure what it is, although the whole waiver rule issue will be big later on.

The link I posted describes it pretty well

People don't want to commit a ton of cash for FF, why not have multiple leagues? Especially when the league get too big, anything over 16 is silly and even 16 was tough.

20 with 1 less roster spot, W/R/T Flex and PR/KR incentive seems doable IMO. And like half the guys in the main league were in economy as well IIRC lol Anyways we'll decide after more folks give their two cents...

ps: I would like this to stay in this forum at least until we have all the spots filled
 

bjb

Banned
Feb 14, 2009
4,746
0
0
I'm down for this as well. Just curious though - the old fee was $75 and is now $100? Or will it be somewhere in that ballpark.
 

Puddles

Banned
Jan 19, 2010
14,766
0
0
So, I guess we should start having preliminary discussions about how we want to do it this year. As always, previous players get priority. Here's where we left off discussions last year:

- Allowing PR/KR stats in some form (maybe 25 yds a point?)
- TE as flex eligible
- Cutting the sack penalty to -0.5
- Upping the entry fee to $75-$100 so every playoff team gets something
- People bitching about the bad teams getting waiver priority (I thought it worked well but we can revisit it)

The first 2 could allow us to have more players (max would still be 20). I think that'd be cool.

PS2: We had a bit of overlap with the economy league last year. Stop being cheap and lets have one big one :p

1) PR/KR stats are cool, but 25 yds per point is a little too low. I'd set it at 30.
2) TE as flex eligible is fine.
3) Hell no at $100.
4) FAAB or bust.
5) FUCK having 20 players. 16 players is already pretty shitty. 20 would be taking-a-laxative-in-India shitty.
 
INTS are already -2. We didn't have the pick 6 penalty last year
oh you mean a Pick 6.... well that's kinda tough since some of them can be due to shitty Defensive tackling, not an actual bad throw. I have no feeling one way of the other though.
The link I posted describes it pretty well

ps: I would like this to stay in this forum at least until we have all the spots filled
I'm referring to the style of waivers, not the time. Would Free Agent Acquisition Budgets be used?
 

Cloudy

Banned
Jun 7, 2004
57,596
0
0
I'm down for this as well. Just curious though - the old fee was $75 and is now $100? Or will it be somewhere in that ballpark.

S1 was $20
S2 was $30
S3 was $50
S4 is ?

There is also an economy league that is like $10 (Puddles runs that)
 

Cloudy

Banned
Jun 7, 2004
57,596
0
0
I'm referring to the style of waivers, not the time. Would Free Agent Acquisition Budgets be used?

Not unless most folks want that. I'd personally rather not use it but this is a democracy :p
 

Puddles

Banned
Jan 19, 2010
14,766
0
0
I'll be running the $10 Economy League again this year.

Regarding pricing for the regular league, $60 is cool, and I could even go to $75, but I'd definitely balk at $100 in a league this big. It's too hard to recover from a major injury with that many people competing with you on waivers. Also, that's just a lot of money to spend.

My vote would be keeping it at $50, or $60 if we really want to increase the buy-in.
 

Cloudy

Banned
Jun 7, 2004
57,596
0
0
My reason for a possible increase the buy-in is so we can give all 8 playoff teams a prize. Just keeps it competitive even through the consolation games..

$60-$75 sounds good

edit: Puddles, you can pm me info on the economy league and I'll put it in the OP
 
My reason for a possible increase the buy-in is so we can give all 8 playoff teams a prize. Just keeps it competitive even through the consolation games..

$60-$75 sounds good
a) If there are 8 playoff teams, where are you getting 20 people from? Hell 16 is a bit much anyway.
b) Really, you should only get paid if you make the Semis. Why get paid for just making the playoffs and losing in Round 1? I've lost in Round 1, and know the sting of being 1 win away from the money.
 

Cloudy

Banned
Jun 7, 2004
57,596
0
0
The max amount of playoff teams you can have is 8 due to 3 weeks for playoffs (week 17 excluded). That doesn't stop you from having up to 20 teams tough :p
 

acksman

Member
May 9, 2006
2,170
5
1,005
I have signed up. The number of players we had last year vs the amount of (healthy) players was lopsided.

I don't mind the dollar amount, but I would like to at least not have running backs be the deciding factor this year. Flex for TE is good, although if any indication of last year and if we increase the teams, there will be none available to flex.
 

AlteredBeast

Fork 'em, Sparky!
May 30, 2005
14,543
2
1,775
37
You rat bastards better not pull the trigger early this year. I want in on that sweet sweet revenge.
 

Cloudy

Banned
Jun 7, 2004
57,596
0
0
I have signed up. The number of players we had last year vs the amount of (healthy) players was lopsided.

I don't mind the dollar amount, but I would like to at least not have running backs be the deciding factor this year. Flex for TE is good, although if any indication of last year and if we increase the teams, there will be none available to flex.

Hmm...since everyone doesn't like it so far, I'll drop the max down to 16. To make the FA deeper, should we still drop one bench spot?

You rat bastards better not pull the trigger early this year. I want in on that sweet sweet revenge.

Did you play last year? If not, I'll add you on the vet waiting list

I signed up. Is the draft date and time set in stone? I'd rather not have to be paying attention to a draft during the Clemson/Auburn game if at all possible :)

No, we can change it to accommodate everyone but I'd like it Friday or Saturday that weekend if possible
 
I don't mind the dollar amount, but I would like to at least not have running backs be the deciding factor this year. Flex for TE is good, although if any indication of last year and if we increase the teams, there will be none available to flex.
Most people want 4 RBs per roster. With 16 teams you do the math on that... ugh.

One way to take away the stockpiling of RBs is make it so there's 1 RB slot. Not sure that's possible though.
 

Cloudy

Banned
Jun 7, 2004
57,596
0
0
Most people want 4 RBs per roster. With 16 teams you do the math on that... ugh.

One way to take away the stockpiling of RBs is make it so there's 1 RB slot. Not sure that's possible though.

I'll look into that right now

edit: I can set it to 1 RB as opposed to 2. I'm not sure that'll stop the stockpiling though. A good RB is still a great asset
 

Cloudy

Banned
Jun 7, 2004
57,596
0
0
Ok, here's the new roster setup. Any disagreements, let me know.

Starting Positions (Offense) changed from 'QB,WR,WR,RB,RB,TE,W/R/T' to 'QB,WR,WR,RB,TE,W/R/T'

I also decreased bench from 6 slots to 5. I've updated my previous posts with these changes
 
I should've been clear, while I think decreasing RBs to 1 would hurt RB stockpiling, I dunno if we should. It's definitely interesting, I'd like to hear everyone else's opinion on that. I really like less bench slots too.


Assuming everyone has a normal lineup (Assume 2 RBs for this)

Bench:
2nd TE
3rd RB
3th WR
4th WR
2nd QB

And that's not counting teams who like to carry a 2nd K or D/ST. Now that I think about it the reduction of bench slots + the addition of TE in the Flex probably kills you at RB more. So maybe you don't have to switch to 1 RB, I'd like to hear the opinion from the group on that though.
 

Cloudy

Banned
Jun 7, 2004
57,596
0
0
I don't really think it matters either way. When a RB gets hurt, his replacement usually becomes a productive fantasy player. Obviously this might not help the manager with the hurt RB but there's certainly no "shortage" lol

If we are gonna keep only one RB slot, we are losing a roster slot though or else, you'll stll have the same "hoarding" or as I like to call it, strategic roster management :p

I have no opinion eitherway but let's hear what others think. For now it's 1 RB slot and 5 bench slots. There are pros (less runaway victories by good RB drafters) and cons (If your QB has a bad game, you are probably doomed) lol
 

acksman

Member
May 9, 2006
2,170
5
1,005
I really like less bench slots too.


This, did we have 5 bench spots last year? Maybe reduce it to 4. It would really make you think hard if you keep that extra QB on the bench or a RB. What I saw last year was 3RB or 3WR benched just in case with a QB and some carried a extra defense or TE. By making the flex a TE that should allow a bit more flexibility.
 

UberTag

Member
Feb 17, 2011
37,331
0
650
Kitchener, ON
Just tossed my hat back in the fantasy ring for another crack at the NeoGAF title.
And, failing that, I hope to at least take down The Big Blue Crew 4 once or twice. :)

As for scoring changes, I like adding TE to the flex spot.
I like penalizing less for sacks.
I'm fine with a higher entry fee.

I wouldn't mind rolling with an auction waiver format (FAAB) instead of basement dwellers getting waiver priority. Otherwise, I love the new "game time waivers" concept.

Not sure I love only having 6 scoring offensive positions. Removes a lot of versatility with roster setting. I'm fine with having shallow benches especially if expanding to 20 teams is still in the cards.

Instead of going 1 RB-5 Bench, I'd prefer 2 RB, 1 W/T flex (no RB) and 4 Bench (and restrict the bench to only allow for 1 RB bench spot). Does Yahoo! allow a straight Wide Receiver/Tight End flex spot? I agree that letting a team steamroll with 3 lucky RB hits in a 16-team league isn't something we want to see again.
 

Cloudy

Banned
Jun 7, 2004
57,596
0
0
Good ideas, Ubertag. I need to think it over before I comment (translation: still at work lol)

Ps: We had 6 bench spots last season. It is currently set to 5
 
Jun 3, 2009
2,628
0
875
Cincinnati
I am 100% down for joining the Economy League again. Finished 4th last year (somehow) and would like to redeem myself and put on a true showing this upcoming season!
 

GCQuinton

Member
May 29, 2005
7,168
0
1,335
Raleigh, North Carolina
- Allowing PR/KR stats in some form (maybe 25 yds a point?)

I'm cool with this.

- TE as flex eligible

Cool with this too.

- Dropping a bench spot (from 6 to 5)

If we add TE as a flex, I'd keep this as is, but I wouldn't complain if it dropped to 5.

Cutting the sack penalty to -0.5

No opinion.

- Upping the entry fee to $60-$75 so every playoff team gets something

I'm good with upping it to $60-$75, but like some others have said, I'd prefer it just be the teams in the semis.

- People bitching about the bad teams getting waiver priority (I thought it worked well but we can revisit it)

I like this the way it is.
 

Cloudy

Banned
Jun 7, 2004
57,596
0
0
Instead of going 1 RB-5 Bench, I'd prefer 2 RB, 1 W/T flex (no RB) and 4 Bench (and restrict the bench to only allow for 1 RB bench spot). Does Yahoo! allow a straight Wide Receiver/Tight End flex spot? I agree that letting a team steamroll with 3 lucky RB hits in a 16-team league isn't something we want to see again.

There is no way to specify the bench positions but I agree with the WR/TE flex and 2RBs. I've implemented that while leaving the bench at 5 (as opposed to 6 slots last year). As always, this is subject to change depending on what folks think

ps: I also decided to change INT penalty to -1 (from -2 last year) since we're adding the pick 6 penalty (-1) as well
 
I really like the W/T Flex, takes RB stockpiling out of the equation even more. WRs become more important but there are a shitton of them out there. TEs is not really an issue since alot of teams use 2 and not every FF team will employ 2 TEs. Also, the FF Draft will only be 14 rounds. That should cut off 15-20 minutes.

I really would like new GAFfer blood in here also. At the most we have 7 spots left, I'd love to see some of the other NFL-GAF nuts like DMczaf in here. I can see it already... the all Tampa Bay Bucs team. :D
ps: I also decided to change INT penalty to -1 (from -2 last year) since we're adding the pick 6 penalty (-1) as well
ehhhh Pick 6's are very rare compared to INTs, I think you should keep it as is IMHO.
Just tossed my hat back in the fantasy ring for another crack at the NeoGAF title.
And, failing that, I hope to at least take down The Big Blue Crew 4 once or twice. :)
After meeting with ownership they've given me another chance. I've revamped my whole draft philosophy, this year your ass is grass!
 

minx

Member
Dec 26, 2007
4,062
0
0
I played last year and will play again this year. I'm on my phone so ill post my opinion on more rule changes but mainly, FUCK 20 people. 16 is already too much. 14 is the sweet spot. No more than 16.
 

UberTag

Member
Feb 17, 2011
37,331
0
650
Kitchener, ON
9 teams down... 7? spots left to fill.
May be a good idea to PM the remaining folks from last year on GAF.
I'm probably not the only one that doesn't check their Yahoo!-affiliated E-Mail address regularly.

Sooner we get the returnees locked in, the sooner the newbies on the waiting list can get added to the mix.
 

Cloudy

Banned
Jun 7, 2004
57,596
0
0
ehhhh Pick 6's are very rare compared to INTs, I think you should keep it as is IMHO.

I can change it back but I was trying to go with Yahoo defaults on the default stats. Does that make you reconsider?
 

Crazymoogle

Member
Jun 7, 2004
14,948
0
1,340
What, no PM when this shit gets going? Goddamn cloudy. Well just like Lebron I've got my title so whatevs

Since Cloudy started making some wild proposals I guess I better chime in.

The Frankman said:
Not sure what it is, although the whole waiver rule issue will be big later on.

It's just a no-brainer rule change that was so obvious Yahoo added it to default rules.

Last year: We had a choice of Sunday-Tuesday waivers or Thursday-Tuesday waivers. Sunday gives you time to make moves until 10:00am PT, but you could pick up anyone playing a thursday game during or after the game, which was pretty unfair. Thursday prevents those pickups but then there's no pickups at all Friday, Saturday, Sunday, which equally sucked.

This year:
1. The DB is smart enough to just lock each player individually based on gametime until Wednesday morning.
2. Bye week players go on waivers when MNF begins.
3. Any BN (Bench) player on your roster can be dropped for someone else, even if their game has begun. (ie: if Frankman didn't start Felix Jones during a thursday game, he can dump him for somebody who plays sunday without being locked in until after waivers)

Cloudy said:
Roster: QB,WR,WR,RB,RB,TE,W/T
Bench: -1

+ Tight Ends definitely need to be flex compatible, it's just a no brainer given league-size.
+ 2RB/2WR makes too much sense. Glad you switched back.
+ -1 Bench is a great idea, will keep waivers fresh and options open.

= W/T. Hmm. Given 5 bench slots most teams are going to draft 4-5 WR and 3-4 RB, which means 64 RB and 75 WR. This has a few results:

a. WRs 50-75 score significantly better than RB 50-75, basically almost double once you hit 75. It's more boom-and-bust, but the WRs at 70-75 are still more recognizeable than the RBs at the same spot.

b. On the other hand, this means we are all basically drafting 3WR. TE obviously when fortune provides, but there were only 24 viable TEs last year so it's highly unlikely everyone is going to be rolling with 2 TEs this season.

So I'm split. It kills a viable draft strategy to pick RB value, but it does emphasize WR in waivers over the course of the season.

cloudy said:
Sacks: -0.5
Pick 6: -1

Fine with these. I thought the -1 for sacks was too brutal especially with the elite QB class forming. Pick 6 is funny and a good offset since this league scores INTs lower than my keeper league. I may bring this one up in that league as an idea.

cloudy said:
PK/KR points

This is always the controversial issue because:

a) it's basically never covered by any draft guide
b) it's basically never standard in any popular league system
c) it can do some wonky things to player values.

However! If we adjust last season based on 0.04pts/yard (25yds = 1pt), the following emerges:

RBs:
#2. Darren Sproles: +43pts (RB7 -> RB4)
#3. Leon Washington: +43pts (unused -> RB45)
#4. Joe McKnight: +43pts (unused -> RB46)
#23. Dexter McCluster: +28pts (RB39 -> RB33)

WRs:
#6. Josh Cribbs: +39pts (WR54 -> WR27)
#7. Randall Cobb: +37pts (WR85 -> WR52)
#12. Ted Ginn Jr.: +32pts (still mostly useless)
#15. Devin Hester: +28pts (becomes WR52)
#27. Percy Harvin: +21pts (WR7 -> WR5)

The long and short of it is that Sproles and Harvin both get significant stock jumps, but nobody becomes overpowering based on yardage, and it adds a few guys into the receiver and RB pool. At best, +40 means an extra 2.5pts/week. And some of these guys shown here will either not play as much this year or get moved up to full time receiving, at which point returns might not happen as much. Harvin and Sproles are a sort of special breed.

The other factor to consider is within the kickoff rules last year, there were more touchbacks, further limiting ridiculous return games.

So I think I'm okay with it. Doesn't change the rules nearly as much as I thought it would.
 
3. Any BN (Bench) player on your roster can be dropped for someone else, even if their game has begun. (ie: if Frankman didn't start Felix Jones during a thursday game, he can dump him for somebody who plays sunday without being locked in until after waivers)
As usual another amazing post by Crazymoogle.... but you HAD to mention me and Felix Jones? :( One thing though:
W/T. Hmm. Given 5 bench slots most teams are going to draft 4-5 WR and 3-4 RB, which means 64 RB and 75 WR. This has a few results:
See I don't think it makes sense to carry four good RBs if you can only start two, with roster flexibility that constrained I think people would rather carry a 2nd Defense/2nd Kicker/2nd TE rather than a scrubby RB4, even if that RB is a KR/PR (LaRod Stephens-Howling). And ALOT of people carried 2 D/ST or 2 Kickers last year.
Dinner Out and Kememsi are also in. Not sure why they haven't signed in yet though
GODFUCKINGDAMMIT!
 

Cloudy

Banned
Jun 7, 2004
57,596
0
0
Need some time to digest your post, Moogle. Will respond shortly lol

ps: There's this thread and the yahoo invite lol
 

UberTag

Member
Feb 17, 2011
37,331
0
650
Kitchener, ON
See I don't think it makes sense to carry four good RBs if you can only start two, with roster flexibility that constrained I think people would rather carry a 2nd Defense/2nd Kicker/2nd TE rather than a scrubby RB4, even if that RB is a KR/PR (LaRod Stephens-Howling). And ALOT of people carried 2 D/ST or 2 Kickers last year.
I think the emphasis on Crazymoogle's comment is that most teams will DRAFT 4 running backs. Not that they'll necessarily carry them long-term. And drafting that way does make sense because extra TEs/Defense/Kickers will always be available on the wire.

Don't be like me last season and draft 2 Tight Ends and then start Lance Kendricks over Gronk which lost me my Week 1 matchup by a mere handful of points. Don't be cute with starting personnel because some schlub has a decent game or two against 3rd string defenders during the preseason. <slaps head repeatedly>
 

Crazymoogle

Member
Jun 7, 2004
14,948
0
1,340
See I don't think it makes sense to carry four good RBs if you can only start two, with roster flexibility that constrained I think people would rather carry a 2nd Defense/2nd Kicker/2nd TE rather than a scrubby RB4, even if that RB is a KR/PR (LaRod Stephens-Howling). And ALOT of people carried 2 D/ST or 2 Kickers last year.

You're not necessarily wrong, but given the current roster setup, I'd imagine you'd want your bench to be this:

WR-WR-RB-QB-W/R/T

That final slot there could be another WR or a TE, but in a large league value is still lost very quickly so I think you draft for value. If I can get a top 40 RB (Ryan Grant, Peyton Hillis, Toby Gerhart, etc. all qualified as that last year) I may very well do it over a top 70 WR (Arrelious Benn, Brian Hartline, etc) that is functionally just waiver fodder. It's very likely that 4th RB will be dropped due to waiver motility but in the draft you are looking for perks first.

I think guys like S-H just won't even be played under the current structure (admittedly a big improvement over last year's dregs!)
 

Cloudy

Banned
Jun 7, 2004
57,596
0
0
Ok, read through Moogle's post and the 2 replies. A lot of good points made (especially the special teams stuff)

Fine with these. I thought the -1 for sacks was too brutal especially with the elite QB class forming. Pick 6 is funny and a good offset since this league scores INTs lower than my keeper league. I may bring this one up in that league as an idea.

Remember, we had INTs at -2 last year. I just brought it back to -1 to match the Yahoo default since we were adding the pick 6. Gonna be fun seeing how many late-game meltdowns we get over that lol
 

Cloudy

Banned
Jun 7, 2004
57,596
0
0
BTW, even with 5 bench spots, I'll be drafting the backup to one of my RBs or any other productive RB for insurance/trade-bait. I just won't carry an extra defense or low risk/high reward gamble like I normally do.

In other words, I will try for 4 RBs in the draft
 

Cloudy

Banned
Jun 7, 2004
57,596
0
0
I signed up for a Yahoo Pro $100 league. Anyone who wants to possibly play with me should pick 8/25 as your draft date (10pm et)
 

UberTag

Member
Feb 17, 2011
37,331
0
650
Kitchener, ON
I signed up for a Yahoo Pro $100 league. Anyone who wants to possibly play with me should pick 8/25 as your draft date (10pm et)
I'd entertain the thought except that I'm at a convention that weekend.
I am going to join one of the big money Fantasy Football Players Championship leagues this season. Will probably take a crack at the $150 buy-in level.

For anyone that's interested (or misses the waiting list cut for the NeoGAF league), there's a convenient rundown of money league sites to reference at FantasyPros.com.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.