New Sticky Note

The new user interface is in preview!

Want to check it out? Click here! (If you don't like it, you can still switch back)

League Forums

Main - League News/General Discussion

Re: Rule Porposals

By setherick
7/04/2020 10:59 pm
This is worth cross posting. This is the reason why I'm adamant on a 276# threshold for DEs. I was replying to the creation of two other similar rules which I see as potentially flawed:

Basically, my concern with 265#, and bigger concern for your 255#, weight limits is that AC and weight have a direct relationship. The lighter a player is the faster they accelerate in the same way that the lighter the player is the faster the player moves period. I'm not just talking that their AC score is higher here either. They engage their AC faster which is why a WR with low AC speeds away from an LB with higher AC even if they have the same SP. (This by the way was the whole reason for trying McKeon at DE in the first place -- not just his SP -- I knew he would get to top SP faster than any OL could ever get off the line, and I've replicated the success in leagues with LBs that have much lower AC scores. I haven't found an 84 AC DE to experiment with yet, and 276# 80+ SP DEs are dogs off the snap.)

Re: Rule Porposals

By Mcarovil
7/04/2020 11:30 pm
Here here!

CrazyRazor wrote:
jgcruz wrote:
Please be specific about what you are seconding (thirding). Thanks.


Are you serious?!! Smdh

I 2nd the proposal of limiting DE's to the DE position & atleast 276#'s.

I 2nd the proposal of disabling the Trade Meter as well as opening HoF nomination to all GM's.

Re: Rule Porposals

By Meatmen
7/07/2020 11:36 pm
jouameng wrote:
Proposing the disabling of the Trade Meter as well as opening the HoF nomination to all GM's.


I second this proposal................................well I guess I third it LOL...................................MM
Last edited at 7/07/2020 11:38 pm

Re: Rule Porposals

By setherick
2/27/2021 8:07 pm
I'm proposing min weights and positional numbers for all positions. Other leagues are having success with this, and it makes roster management a whole lot more interesting.

Re: Rule Porposals

By jgcruz
2/27/2021 8:51 pm
setherick wrote:
I'm proposing min weights and positional numbers for all positions. Other leagues are having success with this, and it makes roster management a whole lot more interesting.


I agree in principle (so there will be your second after the specifics are worked through). However, because it will impact rosters - sometimes dramatically - I suggest we work on a specific proposal with the intention that it become effective next season. However, if the majority wants to move sooner, i.e., it will go into immediate effect, I'm open to it. Please therefore make your specific proposal.

Re: Rule Porposals

By setherick
2/27/2021 9:13 pm
jgcruz wrote:
setherick wrote:
I'm proposing min weights and positional numbers for all positions. Other leagues are having success with this, and it makes roster management a whole lot more interesting.


I agree in principle (so there will be your second after the specifics are worked through). However, because it will impact rosters - sometimes dramatically - I suggest we work on a specific proposal with the intention that it become effective next season. However, if the majority wants to move sooner, i.e., it will go into immediate effect, I'm open to it. Please therefore make your specific proposal.


I wouldn't be as restrictive for some positions as I've seen other leagues (except for DEs, which I'm adamant about 276# for the reasons stated before).

RB - 210 - 7 pounds below ideal weight = 93 max SP (I've seen some leagues put this at 200#, but that's not that big of a difference from WR @ 197# ... also you can get 200# RBs by taking every generated TE and moving them to WR since they won't drop below 200 at generated weight)

FB/TE - 236 - 7 pounds below FB ideal weight = 89 max SP (only way to get this is to find a 186# WR and move him to FB)

LB - 229 - 7 pounds below ideal weight = 90 max SP (only way to get this is to find a 179# generated DB and move him to LB - good luck)
Last edited at 2/27/2021 9:15 pm

Re: Rule Porposals

By CrazyRazor
2/27/2021 9:29 pm
setherick wrote:
jgcruz wrote:
setherick wrote:
I'm proposing min weights and positional numbers for all positions. Other leagues are having success with this, and it makes roster management a whole lot more interesting.


I agree in principle (so there will be your second after the specifics are worked through). However, because it will impact rosters - sometimes dramatically - I suggest we work on a specific proposal with the intention that it become effective next season. However, if the majority wants to move sooner, i.e., it will go into immediate effect, I'm open to it. Please therefore make your specific proposal.


I wouldn't be as restrictive for some positions as I've seen other leagues (except for DEs, which I'm adamant about 276# for the reasons stated before).

RB - 210 - 7 pounds below ideal weight = 93 max SP (I've seen some leagues put this at 200#, but that's not that big of a difference from WR @ 197# ... also you can get 200# RBs by taking every generated TE and moving them to WR since they won't drop below 200 at generated weight)

FB/TE - 236 - 7 pounds below FB ideal weight = 89 max SP (only way to get this is to find a 186# WR and move him to FB)

LB - 229 - 7 pounds below ideal weight = 90 max SP (only way to get this is to find a 179# generated DB and move him to LB - good luck)


I don't have a problem with this at all. I would also be okay if this took place next season or the season after. As long as teams understand that next season they should be working towards the goal of the weight restrictions.

Re: Rule Porposals

By Meatmen
2/28/2021 7:49 pm
I will throw my hat in the ring. I am in agreement as well......................MM

Re: Rule Porposals

By VillagerChris
3/08/2021 9:38 am
I agree. I think most people can get things in order through the season and be ready to implement this next season.

I would also like to propose a rule for trading.

Once a trade has been reversed through the trade committee after being challenged. The two parties involved in the trade have only one more opportunity to complete a trade. If the second trade between the two parties is also reversed, those two GM's are NOT allowed to trade for the rest of that season.

So basically you have two chances to get it right. If your trade is reversed and you are unsure of how to bring things more in line, I'm sure people are going to post why they thought the trade was overly lopsided and you can use that as a measuring stick for the final attempt. Or just ask.

Re: Rule Porposals

By MVRowner - League Admin
9/27/2021 2:52 pm
I would like to propose an experimental rule for the 1991 season. I propose the ability of using a linebacker as an defensive end ("edge rusher") on 3rd/4th down situations. Now rule, 6-7 clearly state that, "Defensive line players may only include players whose primary position is a defensive lineman who weighs at least 276 lbs." and "LB may only include players whose primary position is LB or S." My proposal is on all 3-4 and 4-3 defenses, users have the ability ONLY on 3rd and 4th down situations to use an override to position ONE linebacker to a defensive end. Hopefully this will prevent a season where a LB got 34 sacks* in an entire season but also at least provide a decent amount of pressure without having to call on a blitz in order to use a LB to go after the QB and leave one area open for a wide open receiver.

I will detail further in the rules debate if this is seconded and third.

* https://paydirt.myfootballnow.com/player/7455