View Full Version : FOFCL: The basics #1 Actual or fictional players.
HornedFrog Purple
10-22-2003, 05:04 PM
GrantDawg suggested we start with the very basics and go from there. The question is:
Do we start with actual players or fictional players?
Please type in your response and vote for one or the other. Thanks!
My vote is for fictional.
Ben E Lou
10-22-2003, 05:04 PM
Fictional.
albionmoonlight
10-22-2003, 05:05 PM
Fictional.
Darkiller
10-22-2003, 05:05 PM
actual
Daimyo
10-22-2003, 05:05 PM
Fictional
SackAttack
10-22-2003, 05:12 PM
actual
TroyF
10-22-2003, 05:17 PM
fictional
Fritz
10-22-2003, 05:32 PM
fictional*
*I don't mind chipping $2 in for Vegas Vic, but I aint splitting even one real NFL player's salary with anyone.
GrantDawg
10-22-2003, 05:40 PM
actual
Vince
10-22-2003, 05:53 PM
Fictional.
Subby
10-22-2003, 06:02 PM
Fictional.
FBPro
10-22-2003, 06:09 PM
I can play with either but would rather use real, but ficitional are fine also.
mckerney
10-22-2003, 06:12 PM
Changing vote to:
Real
Senator
10-22-2003, 06:25 PM
Always the damn underdog.
Actual.
cuervo72
10-22-2003, 07:59 PM
Fictional.
Buccaneer
10-22-2003, 08:10 PM
Actual
Anthony
10-22-2003, 09:32 PM
actual
Celeval
10-22-2003, 09:40 PM
Abstain. I'm good either way.
Vince
10-23-2003, 02:10 AM
11-7 in favor of Fictional at this point...
Chief Rum
10-23-2003, 03:06 AM
Fictional (although I am quite fine with either).
cr
Vegas Vic
10-23-2003, 03:07 AM
"Fictional" appears to be heading for a victory here, and I think that's a good thing. As QuikSand has aptly pointed out in his past dynasties, fictional players come without any pre-conceived notions. It allows for greater game immersion, and with the X-factor you won't be subject to watching players like Charlie Batch winning league MVP honors.
SackAttack
10-23-2003, 04:11 AM
Let's do a little math here. 53 players per team, 32 teams. That's just shy of 1,700 players in the league, not counting free agents.
Having to wade through 1,700 players before the inaugural season, particularly under a set of circumstances where things are moving along at a set schedule, isn't my definition of 'immersive.'
The word 'tedious' comes to mind, though.
MIJB#19
10-23-2003, 06:12 AM
actual
Preferring that only to make the start up easier.
Samdari
10-23-2003, 07:20 AM
Originally posted by SackAttack
Having to wade through 1,700 players before the inaugural season, particularly under a set of circumstances where things are moving along at a set schedule, isn't my definition of 'immersive.'
Actually, I think that would be a very good definition of immersive. If you are not immersed after doing that, when would you be? I would say this errs on the side of too immersive.
Fictional.
Buzzbee
10-23-2003, 07:20 AM
Originally posted by SackAttack
Let's do a little math here. 53 players per team, 32 teams. That's just shy of 1,700 players in the league, not counting free agents.
Having to wade through 1,700 players before the inaugural season, particularly under a set of circumstances where things are moving along at a set schedule, isn't my definition of 'immersive.'
The word 'tedious' comes to mind, though.
I think there is a flaw in your argument. The total number of players drafted does not equal the number of players you would have to "wade" through. As one team owner you are only going to make 53 picks, and most likely we would only be able to manage 10 or so rounds of an actuall draft, if that. So you will most likely only have to evaluate players for 10 or fewer picks. How many players will you actually evaluate for those picks? Who knows? 40? 50? 100? My guess is that early on people would look at the best overall players available and then look at a few specific positions they'd like to target. So to say we'd have to wade through 1700 players is a little overstated.
Also, using actual players might help some, but I would imagine we would use a full X-factor which would make the players a little less familar.
Also, if we use actual players, does that mean you aren't going to look through them anyway?
Buzzbee
10-23-2003, 07:23 AM
Dola -
I'd probably prefer fictional, but really don't care which is chosen.
KWhit
10-23-2003, 08:42 AM
Fictional
cthomer5000
10-23-2003, 08:55 AM
fictional.
MrIllini
10-23-2003, 11:25 AM
if we don't use fictional players, I'll quit
QuikSand
10-23-2003, 11:28 AM
fictional
Originally posted by MrIllini
if we don't use fictional players, I'll quit
Can I change my vote to real? ;)
MrIllini
10-23-2003, 11:55 AM
Originally posted by Bee
Can I change my vote to real? ;)
no
Subby
10-23-2003, 12:03 PM
Originally posted by MrIllini
no I am going to have to ask you for some identification, son.
MrIllini
10-23-2003, 12:12 PM
here's my identification
*finger*
HornedFrog Purple
10-23-2003, 12:25 PM
Well we have 17 fictional votes, so it looks like fictional is the choice.
Kodos
10-23-2003, 12:49 PM
I'll jump on the fictional bandwagon, because I like to be on the winning team.
SackAttack
10-23-2003, 02:17 PM
Originally posted by Buzzbee
Also, using actual players might help some, but I would imagine we would use a full X-factor which would make the players a little less familar.
Also, if we use actual players, does that mean you aren't going to look through them anyway?
Didn't say that. But if we're using actual players, as you mention, there's already at least some familiarity there. Yes, an X-factor would change things some, but it still puts us ahead of the 8 ball in terms of getting ANY evaluation done.
Buzzbee
10-23-2003, 03:12 PM
Originally posted by SackAttack
Didn't say that. But if we're using actual players, as you mention, there's already at least some familiarity there. Yes, an X-factor would change things some, but it still puts us ahead of the 8 ball in terms of getting ANY evaluation done.
Yes, I'll give you that it does add to the familiarity and probably makes the evaluation a little easier and quicker. I just wanted to point out that it wasn't quite as extreme as you presented. The familiarity just doesn't seem like it will make a huge difference.
Of course it looks like this point is moot now anyway.
Samdari
10-23-2003, 04:25 PM
Originally posted by Buzzbee
Of course it looks like this point is moot now anyway.
You made me so happy by not saying mute, as is internet custom :)
Kodos
10-23-2003, 04:58 PM
Originally posted by Samdari
You made me so happy by not saying mute, as is internet custom :)
Irregardless, my team will be dominate after they turn things around 360 degrees and go nucular on every one.
Buzzbee
10-23-2003, 06:04 PM
Originally posted by Samdari
You made me so happy by not saying mute, as is internet custom :)
One of my pet peeves too. The word is moot. Rhymes with boot. Simple enough. :)
Buzzbee
10-23-2003, 06:07 PM
Originally posted by Kodos
Irregardless, my team will be dominate after they turn things around 360 degrees and go nucular on every one.
Supposively the league is voting to ban nuclear weapons at the stadiums. I guess they didn't axe your opinion.
Samdari
10-24-2003, 09:36 AM
Originally posted by Buzzbee
Supposively the league is voting to ban nuclear weapons at the stadiums. I guess they didn't axe your opinion.
LOL, I hope you weren't making fun of nuclear, the incorrect pronunciation.
Buzzbee
10-24-2003, 12:46 PM
Originally posted by Samdari
LOL, I hope you weren't making fun of nuclear, the incorrect pronunciation.
Awwww MAAAN!!! I didn't even THINK of Nuculer.
Kodos
10-24-2003, 01:00 PM
It's nucular, Lisa, NUCUUUUULAR...
Senator
10-24-2003, 01:01 PM
splunge
Samdari
10-24-2003, 05:12 PM
Originally posted by Buzzbee
Awwww MAAAN!!! I didn't even THINK of Nuculer.
Too bad, its a slam dunk there.
vBulletin v3.6.0, Copyright ©2000-2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.