People who liked this post
Spoilers

  • Paydirt Footba...
    • League Home
    • Power Rankings
    • Hall of Champions
  • League Forums
  • Players
    • Search
    • Draft History
    • Trades
  • Coaches
    • Search

  • Community
  • Log In
Rule proposals 1991forward
League News/General Discussion
  • ‹
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • ›
slowtospeak
Re: Rule proposals 1991forward
by slowtospeak @ 11/28/2021 1:48 am
MVRowner wrote:
I propose an overrule of our voting for the results of the VERSION QUESTION poll and keep the Paydirt Football League in version 4.5 for the 1992 season.
I have made some major decisions with 4.6 in mind, specifically bowing out of the QB derby when I did. Some things have happened since, especially getting screwed on the offensive line in training camp, that will get me killed anyhow. I will, however, object strenuously to any attempt to pull the rug out from me after I have planned for the new version.
Liked by Meatmen
Meatmen
Re: Rule proposals 1991forward
by Meatmen @ 11/29/2021 1:38 am
Well that would make 11, there are 10 GM'[s in seth's Big Data League, 2 or 3 in MFN 1 and 4 in League of legends who have planned ahead and opted to figure the new version out. I am hesitant to put this question to a revote bc #1 it was solidly voted down. #2 many of us veteran players have been frustrated with 4.5 for way to long. I can't count the #of players/friends that just left the game bc of boredom and frustration with this version. I'm not talking S*** on JDB or MFN just stating MHO. #3 I'd bet on your dog ate your homework or you didn't do any homework, now you want a passing grade. I'm not in favor of revisiting this question, **** (we all know there is always a **** when meatman is around), If you can get someone to second your propsal you are within your rights to have it put to a vote. just don't be suprised if you get voted down 30-2!.......................................................MM
Last edited 11/29/2021 6:46 am
billstein
Re: Rule proposals 1991forward
by billstein @ 11/29/2021 4:04 am
For what it's worth, and just throwing in my support for Slow and Meat.

The announcement to move to 4.6 was made long enough ago that teams looking for success after this season have most likely made moves towards their 4.6 rosters.

Changing it now would be like changing voter laws during an election season... (Wait... maybe a bad comparison ;) )
Liked by Meatmen, CrazyRazor, $B$Dog$
trslick
Re: Rule proposals 1991forward
by trslick @ 11/29/2021 9:58 am
Some of us have been here for a long while and seen many versions, you do the best you can
to change, then hope you got it right the first time!
Liked by Meatmen, CrazyRazor, $B$Dog$
CrazyRazor
Re: Rule proposals 1991forward
by CrazyRazor @ 11/29/2021 4:58 pm
Let it roll to v4.6
Liked by Meatmen
MVRowner
Re: Rule proposals 1991forward
by MVRowner @ 11/29/2021 11:53 pm
My reasoning for not wanting to transition to 4.6, was because of an overpowered rushing exploit I found in one of the leagues I'm in. All I'll say is that I'm on pace for 3 1000+ yard RBs and I have passed for under 1000 yards passing yards by around the halfway point of the season.
I am willing to withdraw my proposal because I didn't think about the other league owners who are already prepared for the 4.6 update. I was thoughtless when I originally made the proposal so my apologies on that.
Liked by Meatmen
MVRowner
Re: Rule proposals 1991forward
by MVRowner @ 11/29/2021 11:54 pm
There also is a possible 3000 yard rusher forbidding any devastating injury.
Liked by Meatmen
Meatmen
Re: Rule proposals 1991forward
by Meatmen @ 11/30/2021 9:04 am
I am torn over wetther we should suspend the rules for the first season as seth did in big data. We seem to be doing ok with the gentlemens agreement in that league. Not sure if it will fly here? I am also tempted to turn injuries down or way low the first season as well? I am debating a formal proposal. I know he did it for the sake of colllecting data. Now that QB's are running again do we need to address the glaring elephant/exploit on the feild? Who will be the first to run a non QB on the Play action plays? (I hope it's meatman I never liked that guy) Does is produce? anyone seen it happen?

YES we are movng on to v4.6. ....................................................................MM
Last edited 11/30/2021 2:05 pm
MVRowner
Re: Rule proposals 1991forward
by MVRowner @ 11/30/2021 1:15 pm
Talk about making an overpowered wildcat formation, if someone has a dual threat QB.
Last edited 11/30/2021 6:16 pm
jgcruz
Re: Rule proposals 1991forward
by jgcruz @ 11/30/2021 4:42 pm
Meatmen wrote:
I am torn over wetther we should suspend the rules for the first season as seth did in big data. We seem to be doing ok with the gentlemens agreement in that league. Not sure if it will fly here? I am also tempted to turn injuries down or way low the first season as well? I am debating a formal proposal. I know he did it for the sake of colllecting data. Now that QB's are running again do we need to address the glaring elephant/exploit on the feild? Who will be the first to run a non QB on the Play action plays? (I hope it's meatman I never liked that guy) Does is produce? anyone seen it happen?

YES we are movng on to v4.6. ....................................................................MM

Gentlemen's agreements aren't always honored. I just played a game in Seth's league where a CB was lined up at DT. Needless to say, the DB had 10 tackles from that position. How allowing that helps with analyzing the new game engine beats me. I think you should reconsider whether to permit players from playing out of position.
Liked by Smirt211, Meatmen
  • ‹
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • ›
Copyright ©2013-2026 Catalyst Productions | Weather data powered by Visual Crossing
Game Engine Version 4.6 | Website Version 5790fa3
Terms & Conditions | Privacy Policy