Page 1 of 1
FF question
Posted: Wed Oct 19, 2005 8:03 pm
by jiminphilly
In our league we allow a roster size of 14 with one slot for the IR.
The starting lineup must consist of-qb,rb,rb,wr,wr,wr,te,k,def.
That leaves 5 spots for the bench. An owner in our league currently is without a kicker on his roster but has 6 guys on the bench. Since we use CBS our league settings indicate his roster is illegal.
Does your league mandate that the starting roster be legal by game time or does it mandate that your starting roster must only be legal at all times?
Posted: Wed Oct 19, 2005 8:13 pm
by Cueball
Ask your wife
Posted: Wed Oct 19, 2005 8:14 pm
by G.O.
i think yahoo only requires you are legal come game time. not sure, but they might just let you play with the slot empty if you dont have anybody.
Posted: Wed Oct 19, 2005 8:14 pm
by Sirfindafold
cbs normally requires it be legal or you will not be credited with any points.
Re: FF question
Posted: Wed Oct 19, 2005 8:21 pm
by BBMarley
jiminphilly wrote:In our league we allow a roster size of 14 with one slot for the IR.
The starting lineup must consist of-qb,rb,rb,wr,wr,wr,te,k,def.
That leaves 5 spots for the bench. An owner in our league currently is without a kicker on his roster but has 6 guys on the bench. Since we use CBS our league settings indicate his roster is illegal.
Does your league mandate that the starting roster be legal by game time or does it mandate that your starting roster must only be legal at all times?
I used Sportsline before- and this is how it was for us. He would need to have an active kicker. He doesn't have to carry a back-up as he can leave that kicker in on his bye week- but he must ALWAYS have a kicker in the lineup- whether they are playing or not.
Posted: Wed Oct 19, 2005 8:56 pm
by jiminphilly
The way I see it.. that owner has an unfair advantage of holding onto a guy till saturday or sunday and releasing him.. making him unavailable to the rest of the league. He can than go after a kicker which are a lot easier to find than WR or RB and when your a team with injury problems, it sucks to bet beat out for a guy on waivers by a team that can't field a legal team.
It could also give him an unfair advantage with trading with a team that has several owners pursuing a player on another owners roster via trade.
Our commish does not see it that way.
Posted: Wed Oct 19, 2005 8:58 pm
by BBMarley
jiminphilly wrote:The way I see it.. that owner has an unfair advantage of holding onto a guy till saturday or sunday and releasing him.. making him unavailable to the rest of the league. He can than go after a kicker which are a lot easier to find than WR or RB and when your a team with injury problems, it sucks to bet beat out for a guy on waivers by a team that can't field a legal team.
It could also give him an unfair advantage with trading with a team that has several owners pursuing a player on another owners roster via trade.
Our commish does not see it that way.
I agree with you Jim- you should get the thoughts from your entire league and take it to the Commish... if he doesn't agree still- then find a new commish or league next year
Posted: Wed Oct 19, 2005 9:04 pm
by BSmack
jiminphilly wrote:The way I see it.. that owner has an unfair advantage of holding onto a guy till saturday or sunday and releasing him.. making him unavailable to the rest of the league. He can than go after a kicker which are a lot easier to find than WR or RB and when your a team with injury problems, it sucks to bet beat out for a guy on waivers by a team that can't field a legal team.
It could also give him an unfair advantage with trading with a team that has several owners pursuing a player on another owners roster via trade.
Our commish does not see it that way.
Nothing says you can't use this strategy?