MP: Getting rid of Mid-Week Files...

[Dutch]

Does anybody look forward to these stages???

What would it take to get rid of them and should Jim seriously look at this as an issue?

[Sgran]

I think they're good to have in the beginning of the season, at least until the trade deadline. After that they're a waste of time.

[Ben E Lou]

With 2-3 guys on every roster who suck and who are at the right weight, you could get rid of midweeks pretty safely.

[ShaneTheMaster]

If he adds practice squads, then the midweek stage files can be eliminated. This will give you more players to use if you get hit hard at one position, and you can safely sign FAs to the practice squads during game stages, since it won't affect your game roster.

[MrDNA]

I have to say I'm in the anti-midweek stage group, as well. A practice squad would be awesome, as well.

[CU Tiger]

A practice squad I could fill wih undrafted rookies and groom like a baseball farm system would rock.

Especially if kids developed on the practice squad

[stevew]

With 2-3 guys on every roster who suck and who are at the right weight, you could get rid of midweeks pretty safely.

Exactly, the main problem is that people build irresponsible rosters, and then have to be all "nilly nilly I have to have a midweek" cause they gotta hold onto that one 10/37 player that'll never be shit.

[Sgran]

Those are all good points, and I think you're right. It's hard to imagine a nightmare scenario (say: having two injuries at the same position and being outbid for a free agent, and thus being stuck with a tight end at guard) occuring more than once per season.

[MIJB#19]

Exactly, the main problem is that people build irresponsible rosters, and then have to be all "nilly nilly I have to have a midweek" cause they gotta hold onto that one 10/37 player that'll never be shit.I don't buy the 2-3 crap players, slash 10/37 player that'll never be shit excuse. Aside from my 2nd-year-league WOOF team, I haven't seen any of these kind of players on my MP rosters in a loooooong time.

That doesn't mean there's no room to find a way around mid-week files, but using that as an excuse only proves that some people are just bad at building depth.

[Ben E Lou]

Aside from my 2nd-year-league WOOF team, I haven't seen any of these kind of players on my MP rosters in a loooooong time.
Maybe that's because your other leagues were started with imbalanced roster sets, and FOF2K7 leagues are different, eh?

[MIJB#19]

Maybe that's because your other leagues were started with imbalanced roster sets, and FOF2K7 leagues are different, eh?And your point is? That's the reailty for like 95% of the FOF leagues out there.

[QuikSand]

It seems to me that maybe the best way for a league to get to this point (if it really wanted to -- not that some people want to change, and others don't) -- the best avenue is to just do it. Pass a new rule to stop doing midweek FA files, and give everyone a full preseason of notice.

Presumably, you'd have owners behaving differently knowing this was the rule. Some indeed might start carrying "gimps" of certain weights who would suffice to toss into the starting lineup when someone gets hurt and a slot needs to be filled. Others might be willing to just think a little more deeply about the balance of their inactive roster, and be more conscious to keep around an extra player who could be used in the case of just about any injury.

Recall -- if you processed free agents on the same stage as game day, your teams with a gap at (say) WR would still be able to submit a 45-active roster, and make a claim for a free gent to play wide receiver for that week. He just wouldn't be in the depth chart for that first week (not wholly unrealistic) and there would remain some modest chance that the team would get outbid for a certain player. In the sizable majority of cases, this would at least stave off the need for the game's AI to step in and rearrange the depth chart.

I'm not sure it's an ideal solution -- but if I played in a league where this was the agreed-to system, I'd change the way I build my roster depth a little bit, and if I chose to take a certain risk here or there in order to keep that 52nd and 53rd player around -- I'd do so with my eyes open.

[Ben E Lou]

And your point is? That's the reailty for like 95% of the FOF leagues out there.

My point is that stevew has a point, and dismissing him was just plain thoughtless.

[Ben E Lou]

I'm not sure it's an ideal solution -- but if I played in a league where this was the agreed-to system, I'd change the way I build my roster depth a little bit, and if I chose to take a certain risk here or there in order to keep that 52nd and 53rd player around -- I'd do so with my eyes open.Exactly. Keeping player #53 around in the FOFL this year has allowed me to pretty much render midweek stages unnecessary, thankfully.

[wade moore]

I would be completely on board if a league I was in decided to go this route.

I think the biggest problem you would have, as I've seen in all of my leagues already, to try and make a significant change like this you're just not going to get enough owners to agree to it for it to pass in most constitutions. I figure the benefit in it is that you could run game weeks faster, well - some people don't want that. You could do a M-W-F game days with no mid-weeks without a problem, but all you really eliminate there is the need to do an export on Saturday/Sunday. Would a league possibly go to M-T-W-Th-F being gameday exports? That would appeal to many, but there are others that would revolt at that idea.

I like the ideas being thrown out and I've said in pre-season discussions in my leagues that mid-weeks are really not needed - but people even pushed against this idea for pre-season when you can carry 60 players and imo there is just NO need for a mid-week.

From a roster management perspective, I think it is very reasonable. I think that a large percentage of the time, if you manage your roster correctly, you can avoid the AI messing with your roster. There will be some unique instances where it may happen, but I think it's pretty damned avoidable. Yeah, you might have to have a LB playing DE for a week - but as QS said (from a "realism" perspective), if you're signing a guy mid-week does it make sense for him to slip right into your roster anyway?

Anyway. I almost feel like you would have to have yet another new league (FastFL?! ;) ) with these rules from the get-go unless you have a commish/league administration that is willing to dictate a new rule like this.

[Subby]

Getting rid of the need for midweeks is another major bullet point for my "What Needs to Get Fixed in the FOF MP Admin Module" memo I am having my crack team of midgets prepare.

[Subby]

dola

please do not tell fritz that I have a crack team of midgets at my disposal

[Passacaglia]

It seems to me that maybe the best way for a league to get to this point (if it really wanted to -- not that some people want to change, and others don't) -- the best avenue is to just do it. Pass a new rule to stop doing midweek FA files, and give everyone a full preseason of notice.

Presumably, you'd have owners behaving differently knowing this was the rule. Some indeed might start carrying "gimps" of certain weights who would suffice to toss into the starting lineup when someone gets hurt and a slot needs to be filled. Others might be willing to just think a little more deeply about the balance of their inactive roster, and be more conscious to keep around an extra player who could be used in the case of just about any injury.

Recall -- if you processed free agents on the same stage as game day, your teams with a gap at (say) WR would still be able to submit a 45-active roster, and make a claim for a free gent to play wide receiver for that week. He just wouldn't be in the depth chart for that first week (not wholly unrealistic) and there would remain some modest chance that the team would get outbid for a certain player. In the sizable majority of cases, this would at least stave off the need for the game's AI to step in and rearrange the depth chart.

I'm not sure it's an ideal solution -- but if I played in a league where this was the agreed-to system, I'd change the way I build my roster depth a little bit, and if I chose to take a certain risk here or there in order to keep that 52nd and 53rd player around -- I'd do so with my eyes open.

Last I knew, the eNFL didn't have midweeks. It was a sticking point for people who came in from other leagues, but for the most part, people just dealt with it.

[gstelmack]

Another thing to consider is that FOF is much better about not screwing TOO much with your roster as of 2k7. So even if it does need to correct, it only does so mildly. Probably not as minimalist as everyone would like, but it's much better about not cutting guys than it used to be.

Even in WOOF, where we've got 2-3 teams per sim that get the AI treatment, there just aren't that many transactions by the AI like their used to be. You still end up with some depth chart weirdness, but it's MUCH better than it used to be.

[MIJB#19]

My point is that stevew has a point, and dismissing him was just plain thoughtless.How does keeping or not keeping a 10/37 player change that facts that some people manage their roster better and are not happy with the thought of leaving depth chart slots open because a rash of injuries required going Russian roulette.

Last season in GEFL I carried 3 TEs around and 3 Ss (in total 9 DBs). Yet a rash of injuries at both positions really needed me to get to sign players at both positions. In SP it would have been an easy fix, in MP, this is exactly where you're going to need that mid-week file. Mathematically you simply can't carry around a spare player for every position, the game doesn't allow it.

Edit: I count up to 45 slots required to fill in case of 1 injury per position (not counting a 4th QB given the 3rd Qb injured on DC function). To cover for two injuries at same position problem a team would require 60 players on roster.

[Ben E Lou]

How does keeping or not keeping a 10/37 player change that facts that some people manage their roster better and are not happy with the thought of leaving depth chart slots open because a rash of injuries required going Russian roulette.

Last season in GEFL I carried 3 TEs around and 3 Ss (in total 9 DBs). Yet a rash of injuries at both positions really needed me to get to sign players at both positions. In SP it would have been an easy fix, in MP, this is exactly where you're going to need that mid-week file. Mathematically you simply can't carry around a spare player for every position, the game doesn't allow it.

Edit: I count up to 45 slots required to fill in case of 1 injury per position (not counting a 4th QB given the 3rd Qb injured on DC function). To cover for two injuries at same position problem a team would require 60 players on roster.

No. Just one or two who you position-switch around when necessary, but never play.

[MIJB#19]

position-switch around... just meh... I didn't jump into MP FOF to end up playing 51-roster spots FOF and fooling around with one or two players as crash dummies.

[wade moore]

position-switch around... just meh... I didn't jump into MP FOF to end up playing 51-roster spots FOF and fooling around with one or two players as crash dummies.

Like I said, it would probably never fly in existing leagues.

I think this is very workable with what we have now. Mid-Weeks are pretty silly and take up so much time. But, there's just very little chance you get an existing league to make the change.

[Nwobhm]

We've never used midweeks in the eNFL. Whenever the idea of using midweeks has surfaced, there's never been enough support for us to change. We'd likely have to slow the 3games/week pace of the league down with them, which isn't a popular idea. I've found that as long as you have the right number of personnel for each position group, that it's very unlikely you'll run into any roster trouble.

We had one owner complain that he was screwed because 2 of his 8 Dlinemen we're listed as "out". He had deactivated both of them before attempting to fill out his depth chart, when he got the warning he needed 7 Dlinemen for him to make an export file. All he needed to do was to keep one of the injured players active, and the game will allow you to fill out the depth chart manually. It won't allow you to fill out the chart with the "recommend" option, but it's still manageable.

As long as people are aware of the ways to work around issues like that, there's little need for midweeks in my view.

[Joe]

the only time not having a midweek has been an issue for me is when I've had a punter or kicker get injured, which happened two times total. you are stuck with your punter doing all the kicking or vice versa in that situation if you only carry one of each.

[stevew]

Like I said, it would probably never fly in existing leagues.

I think this is very workable with what we have now. Mid-Weeks are pretty silly and take up so much time. But, there's just very little chance you get an existing league to make the change.

Like you said, they are silly.

[MIJB#19]

Silly or not, I do not see a good way around mid-week files that wouldn't allow the game to mess with my roster.

[MIJB#19]

We had one owner complain that he was screwed because 2 of his 8 Dlinemen we're listed as "out". He had deactivated both of them before attempting to fill out his depth chart, when he got the warning he needed 7 Dlinemen for him to make an export file. All he needed to do was to keep one of the injured players active, and the game will allow you to fill out the depth chart manually. It won't allow you to fill out the chart with the "recommend" option, but it's still manageable.I tried it, in FOF2004 that worked, in FOF2007 not anymore. Players listed as "out" no longer count towards the active players requirements. When you have 3 tight ends and 2 are listed as out, there's no choice but to sign a new tight end and either release someone else or IR one of the two injured guys.

[Ben E Lou]

I tried it, in FOF2004 that worked, in FOF2007 not anymore. Players listed as "out" no longer count towards the active players requirements. When you have 3 tight ends and 2 are listed as out, there's no choice but to sign a new tight end and either release someone else or IR one of the two injured guys.

Wrong again. You can always position-switch your super-specialist into the slot.

http://www.younglifenorthdekalb.com/fof/webercard.jpg

[MIJB#19]

Okay, am I the only one who thinks using your 53rd player as a position switch around is:
A - silly
B - an exploit
C - doesn't fit into staying within realism
D - all of the above

[Ben E Lou]

Okay, am I the only one who thinks using your 53rd player as a position switch around is:
A - silly
B - an exploit
C - doesn't fit into staying within realism
D - all of the above

a. So are midweek stages
b. Can't say for sure, but the fact that Jim relaxed the position-switch-per-year limit certainly makes me wonder if it was done specifically to allow that
c. neither does the way a whole bunch of other stuff in FOF works, but I don't hear you whining about that

[wade moore]

Yeesh, so much hostility.

I think MIJB and SD both have good points. I think SD is completely accurate in that this is a reasonable way, given what we have, to cut the number of exports we have to do in half. However, MIJB is right that by doing so we are certainly mucking with the intent/realism of things. However, if it is approved by a league to manage it in this way - I don't see it so much as an "exploit" because the whole league is doing it for the benefit of the whole.

I can certainly respect MIJB's perspective that he doesn't want to have his roster size cut down to 51 - especially because I know that MIJB is someone that would use 70 players if they were available to him.

Again, this is why I see this as something that will be hard to implement in existing leagues. If you do it in a new league then you have a group of owners that know this is how things will be managed from the get-go, so if they don't like it they won't join.

I did not know the eNFL was doing this. I'd be curious to hear from more of their owners, but it sounds like they have been very successful. Maybe it would be good for some of them to post how they've made it work, since it sounds like they have done it without even needing to use SD's idea for a strategy.

[Sgran]

I have a team in the eNFL. I didn't miss the mid-week files at all, but then again my team was irrelevant from Day 1 so I wasn't too concerned about getting the AI treatment.
I have to say that Skydog's argument is pretty convincing, and his switcheroo is not that unrealistic. Troy Brown comes to mind. I've also seen Walter Payton take several snaps at QB in a real game, and who could forget Joe Theisman's punt. the only difference is that Eric Weber is not allowed to be penciled in as the back-up FB and SLB, which is a shame and maybe something we should ask for.
I'm now for eliminating mid-weeks in all my leagues, or if not, then after the trade deadline.

[WSUCougar]

I agree with Matthijs. Anything less is just trying to cram more things that take a week in real life (NFL) into one export. The game is also severely limited in terms of roster management in that players are designated as having but one position. Skydog's "super specialist" is realistic in the sense that NFL players can obviously play more than one position, but in FOF terms it's a workaround, plain and simple.

Few things bother me more in the game more than AI roster-f'ing.

[wade moore]

I appreciate that Jim made roster requirements more fluid in this version, but it seems like even more fluidity may be appropriate so that we can eliminate the mid-weeks. That seems like the "simplest" (without knowing how it's coded) compared to adding practice squads, etc.

[gstelmack]

I will once again point out that FOF simple does not mess with your roster much in 2k7 unless it really has to. That should be a consideration.

And I agree that FOF's roster restrictions about who can play where are silly. I understand that a lot of statistics are wrapped up in this and why a FB's Breakaway Speed may not match a RB's Breakaway Speed, or a FB's Pass Blocking does not match a LT's Pass Blocking, but it doesn't mean I have to like it. If I have 11 players healthy, I should be able to field and play a (sucky) team.

If a guy gets hurt, I should be able to fill in the depth chart regardless of positional requirements, and sign a guy to the practice squad for the following week, or assign him to a specific open depth chart spot once he does get signed.

But on a separate note, in WOOF I have maybe 3 submissions per midweek, and at least one of those is usually a regular game turn. There aren't that many transactions from these. I have an office league with 5 owners, and maybe run 3 TOTAL midweeks during the entire season. It's a lot of work for a commish to run these midweeks for a minimal payoff. I think you could get by with signing a guy on a game turn for those critical issues (P, K, QB) and making sure you have room and having the AI do a reasonable job on your depth chart.

Basically, once or twice a season someone is going to REALLY wish they had this, but is it really worth the slowdown to the league and the extra workload on the commissioner for those occasional issues?

[stevew]

Super specialist, I like that.

[Synovia]

I appreciate that Jim made roster requirements more fluid in this version, but it seems like even more fluidity may be appropriate so that we can eliminate the mid-weeks. That seems like the "simplest" (without knowing how it's coded) compared to adding practice squads, etc.


I agree. The rosters are still too constricted. If I have 4 RBs and 4 WR on roster, and one of my WRs goes down, I should be able to just play the RB at the 4th WR slot. He shouldnt necessarily be all that good, but the game shouldnt start cutting players automatically. <br><br> I should be able to have a FB play TE. A WLB play DE, or a DE play LB, or DT. <br><br><br>The roster restrictions are the problem here, and the only real reason theres need for the midweek. I have no problem with not being able to put a newly signed FA into the depth chart.

[stevew]

Hopefully the next version will have some sort of "server side" type setup, whereby you can dowload the most current iteration of the league file, and upload your export. That way, you could theoretically sign a street FA in the game, insert them in your lineups, and then upload your stage file. And then nobody else could sign that particular FA.

[Synovia]

Steve, I Wouldnt have a problem with that. The whole "bidding on FA" thing is totally artificial, except in the designated FA period. Once the season starts, they'll play for whoever will give them some $$

[QuikSand]

Super specialist, I like that.

I still prefer "gimp" myself.

[marcmoustache]

I have to say as a commish I could do without the midweek turns, and my wife would certainly agree.

[Ben E Lou]

I still prefer "gimp" myself.

Yes yes.

Only one healthy TE???

BRING OUT THE GIMP!!!

[MIJB#19]

a. So are midweek stages
b. Can't say for sure, but the fact that Jim relaxed the position-switch-per-year limit certainly makes me wonder if it was done specifically to allow that
c. neither does the way a whole bunch of other stuff in FOF works, but I don't hear you whining about thatDon't twist my words now.
A - I'm not questioning the silliness of the mid-week file, I'm pointing out why I'd still like to having the extra sim over letting the AI handle things or sacrifice a roster spot.
B - "blah blah Jim", sorry, just because you (or anyone) thinks he knows what Jim was thinking when he put something into the game is not a good argument.
C - So? We're discussing mid-week files here. There is plenty of other stuff in FOF that could use upgrades and that we could agree or disagree about, but right now we're discussing mid-weeks files and how to get rid of them.

[Ben E Lou]

Don't twist my words now.
A - I'm not questioning the silliness of the mid-week file, I'm pointing out why I'd still like to having the extra sim over letting the AI handle things or sacrifice a roster spot.
B - "blah blah Jim", sorry, just because you (or anyone) thinks he knows what Jim was thinking when he put something into the game is not a good argument.
C - So? We're discussing mid-week files here. There is plenty of other stuff in FOF that could use upgrades and that we could agree or disagree about, but right now we're discussing mid-weeks files and how to get rid of them.

Got it. You want it to be realistic when YOU want it realistic. OK.

[Ajaxab]

BRING OUT THE GIMP!!!

I believe I have a whole team of gimps.

[MIJB#19]

Got it. You want it to be realistic when YOU want it realistic. OK.*caugh*That's where your "specialist" comes into play. You position-switch him to meet the requirements, but leave him off the depth chart and special teams. It doesn't cover every possible scenario, but it sure does cover most. But like I said earlier, the sticking point for me would be figuring out how this works for P/K.

[Ben E Lou]

Not realistic for a guy to play multiple positions in a time of need, or are you trying to make some other point that I'm missing, or is it just that you can't stand the idea that someone else might DARE to suggest that there might be a better way of doing things?

[MIJB#19]

C'mon SD, you have the exact same concern about the nuking of mid-weeks, but instead of admitting it, you act like my complaints are misplaced. Yeah, that pissed me off big time.

[Ben E Lou]

C'mon SD, you have the exact same concern about the nuking of mid-weeks, but instead of admitting it, you act like my complaints are misplaced. Yeah, that pissed me off big time.

Ummmm...I don't have the exact same concern. The P/K issue is the only one that I need to see figured out before I'd be 100% behind the idea.

[Synovia]

Ummmm...I don't have the exact same concern. The P/K issue is the only one that I need to see figured out before I'd be 100% behind the idea.


Kickers can punt, and punters can kick, so you sign a guy, he just can't play.

[stevew]

If anyone needs a kicker bad enough, ie, theirs is injured, you simply run an emergency midweek for that team. Boom, problem solved. How often do kickers get hurt anyways? I'm looking through a 70+ year old career of mine, and I see one punter who was injured. That's it. We're talking super super small chance of a kicker injury.

The eNFL's got this figured out, more leagues should follow suit.

[Dutch]

You could do a M-W-F game days with no mid-weeks without a problem, but all you really eliminate there is the need to do an export on Saturday/Sunday. Would a league possibly go to M-T-W-Th-F being gameday exports? That would appeal to many, but there are others that would revolt at that idea.

I would offer another suggestion. A 4-day game-wee of M-T-W-T with F-S-S off. Friday can easily substitue for any Monday holidays and/or Commish days that he/she can't make it.

The key to this setup would be a regular season that lasted exactly 4-weeks. It wouldn't be over-taxing.

And using IHOF as an example, it's current season began on June 12th. Week #17 is scheduled for Aug 9th. A four-game week would end on July 9th. Same ammount of exports, 30 days faster.

[Passacaglia]

The roster restrictions are the problem here, and the only real reason theres need for the midweek. I have no problem with not being able to put a newly signed FA into the depth chart.

I agree with this. I see no need for my roster to be restricted, anyway. If I want no TEs on roster, I should be able to have no TEs on roster.

[Synovia]

I agree with this. I see no need for my roster to be restricted, anyway. If I want no TEs on roster, I should be able to have no TEs on roster.


That I agree with. If I want to run an offense thats really spread, and dont want to carry a 2nd TE, that should be my option. If I wanna run some really wierd offense and play an extra T at TE, that should be my decision too.

[stevew]

I wish players would accrue positions that they are capable of playing at, and then hopefully that would aid in giving you less strict roster requirements. Obviously TE/FB are not the same position, but some schemes have players that more or less play both roles.

[-Mojo Jojo-]

Having played more than a dozen seasons in the eNFL, I have never had a week where I really felt like I needed a mid-week sim. At worst there have been times where I wanted to bring someone in off the street directly into the lineup and instead had to go with a backup or a player playing out of position for one game, and then played the FA the next week. I've never actually had to do a position change, nor has the AI ever messed with my lineup. I'm not saying that odd scenarios can't come up where these things happen, but I have to think they're pretty rare unless you're keeping an unusual roster distribution.

[MIJB#19]

Having played more than a dozen seasons in the eNFL, I have never had a week where I really felt like I needed a mid-week sim. At worst there have been times where I wanted to bring someone in off the street directly into the lineup and instead had to go with a backup or a player playing out of position for one game, and then played the FA the next week. I've never actually had to do a position change, nor has the AI ever messed with my lineup. I'm not saying that odd scenarios can't come up where these things happen, but I have to think they're pretty rare unless you're keeping an unusual roster distribution.I guess you've been lucky in not having an FA choosing a different team or completely turning down your contract offer? Because if that happens you'll be stuck with an illeglible roster and in effect getting the AI treatment as people seem to call it. To avoid this trouble some people actually try to sign 2 or 3 players at the same position and adjust their game day file based on whom they managed to sign.

[gstelmack]

I guess you've been lucky in not having an FA ... completely turning down your contract offer?

The only people I've ever seen this one happen to were trying to be cheapskates. If it's in-season, give the guy what he's asking for for crying out loud! And if he's too expensive, then you need to find a min-wage rookie to fill in.

[QuikSand]

To avoid this trouble some people actually try to sign 2 or 3 players at the same position and adjust their game day file based on whom they managed to sign.

I guess this is a sort of reverse logic at work... I'm sure that in leagues where the mid-week FA stage is built in and treated as an entitlement, many teams do indeed make cavalier decisions like signing three or four guys when they only need one, and then releasing the surplus immediately afterwards.

But just because people do this because they can doesn't necessarily mean it's a practice that ought to be jealously guarded as essential.


I agree that there are some trade-offs involved with this sort of acceleration. But I confess that I'm pretty persuaded by the people from the league who has done this since the beginning that it's not the end of the world. It just requres a modest amount of different planning than we're used to in leagues that accommodate an extra 24 file stages per season for this.

[Celeval]

It just requres a modest amount of different planning than we're used to in leagues that accommodate an extra 24 file stages per season for this.

A resulting question is if all those 24 file stages would be replaced by sims? For one, I know that a four-game-a-week schedule like Dutch suggested would be honestly too much. I spend time on my gameplan and scouting between each game; and that's time I don't have every night. Midweek stages don't slow the game down much for me, personally - obviously there are plenty of different opinions out there, but the amount of time saved would, I think, vary by league.

[QuikSand]

A resulting question is if all those 24 file stages would be replaced by sims?

Fair question. I don't claim to be the standard-bearer for one side here, personally. I realize that plenty of people enjoy a "leisurely" pace.

To me, the essence of this thread is to explore whether it's feasible to run a league without mid-week FA stages. Whether the purpose for doing so is to accelerate the league a great deal, or just to lessen the administrative burdens on the simmer(s), I'm not sure it's essential to answer in order to still have this discussion.

[Celeval]

Fair question. I don't claim to be the standard-bearer for one side here, personally. I realize that plenty of people enjoy a "leisurely" pace.

To me, the essence of this thread is to explore whether it's feasible to run a league without mid-week FA stages. Whether the purpose for doing so is to accelerate the league a great deal, or just to lessen the administrative burdens on the simmer(s), I'm not sure it's essential to answer in order to still have this discussion.

Agreed. I was just looking to keep speed out of it. :)

[wade moore]

Agreed. I was just looking to keep speed out of it. :)

I think there's an element of how much time it takes the commish to run the mid-week stages also, not just the pace of the season.

[MIJB#19]

I guess this is a sort of reverse logic at work... I'm sure that in leagues where the mid-week FA stage is built in and treated as an entitlement, many teams do indeed make cavalier decisions like signing three or four guys when they only need one, and then releasing the surplus immediately afterwards.

But just because people do this because they can doesn't necessarily mean it's a practice that ought to be jealously guarded as essential.No offense, but I think you're doing the reverse thinking here. What I am talking about is making multiple FA offers in case someone else turns out to be after the same player. In SP, the AI teams won't interfere when you make an attempt to sign a player, but in MP you'll have to wait and see whether someone else is trying to get the same player. And this SP to MP transition has been the reason why Mid-Weeks have been installed in the first place. Have people who were in the first seasons of IHOF or other long-standing leagues forgotton about the mess that commisshes had to go through?

[QuikSand]

No offense, but I think you're doing the reverse thinking here. What I am talking about is making multiple FA offers in case someone else turns out to be after the same player.

I'm perfectly aware of that...and my point is that the only reason owners are going around offering multiple contracts is because there's no downside to doing so in a league that lets you just dump all the guys you don't need at the next half stage.

If your league didn't allow the luxury of mid-week stages, you'd do something else. Either you would plan your team around handling injuries better than you might in a league that gives you all the mid-week stages to handle stuff like this, or else you'd put in a FA bid that was essentially guaranteed to work for you -- either offer to a lousy FA that nobody else would be targeting, or else put in a fat offer to the best guy out there that nobody would be likely to outbid.

So, my point is that behavior that comes about as a function of having mid-week stages... seeing people change that behavior is not in itself a deal-breaking argument. So, teams wouldn't be making multiple bids for surplus FA players any more? So what?


Again -- we get it. You don't like the idea. I'm not sure that anyone thinks it's perfect. I don't. Most would agree that it has a downside. I do.

[QuikSand]

Okay - let's just say that your team is in the *dire* situation of not having enough players at a specific position to field a legal roster. Maybe you're short at DE, due to an injury.

First, you can field a legitimate starting roster even if you are short on DEs -- as usual, you can cover the position with players from DT or OLB, so the immediate thing that faces you is just picking up any old DE.

In a league with mid-week stages, you can put in three or four offers to free agents, see who signs (usually all of them), cut the guys you don't want, and then decide who should be in the depth chart for that week. By all accounts, that leaves almost nobody in the spot of *needing* to make position switches and so forth to fill in.

What if you don't have a mid-week file? Are you going to be at the complete mercy of the roster-ruining AI? Hardly.

For this week, put in a FA claim on a garbage DE. Hell, if you're that worried that the 9/9 rated free agent DE is going to suddenly be seeing multiple offers in week 9 of your season -- then come up with some sort of "hands off' thread for the league to ensure that you always get your junk FA signee.

Submit a legal depth chart, and a roster of 45, and your claim for the DE who makes your complete roster legal. Done for that week.

Next week, if there's a pretty good DE out there that you'd like to have more, put in a claim for him, with a contingent cut of the garbage DE. Your roster will still be legal, regardless of whether you get that better player.

Repeat as needed - in the unlikely event that the waiver wire is some massive hotbed of activity at this point, it might take you two or three weeks to get a new guy into your lineup -- but is that either (1) a massive inconvenience, or (2) completely unrealistic?



And of course, this is just if you choose to follow the *safest* approach -- in most cases, that "best DE available" has been sitting out there for weeks anyway, and putting in your claim for him has a high likelihood of succeeding. But there is always a super-safe course of action like this available to make sure you don't get the AI treatment.


Bottom line is -- no midweek files is the system your league uses, there are perfectly acceptable ways to avoid the AI treatment. And knowing that your league uses rules to this effect, you would probably carry a different sort of player depth to account for it, I'd think.

That, to me, is the essential question -- can it work? Not would it work perfectly.

[Ben E Lou]

STOP THINKING OUTSIDE OF THE BOX, QUIKSAND!!!

[gstelmack]

[stevew]

If the commish's don't want to run these stages, then they just need to say no. Tough shit to those that think they need them, but life will go on. If people want to quit, then let them.

I'm just happy that people like Greg run the leagues as many days per week as they do, cause I'm sure it's a major pain in the ass. And he's very reliable at getting the sims done around the same time.

[SFL Cat]

I hate to confess that I've never really paid attention to it, but is there any change of injured players' status during mid week stages (i.e. moving from say questionable to probable)?

[Vinatieri for Prez]

Does anybody think it would be feasible in running a no mid-week sim league, to allow a team to request a separate sim from the commish to meet position requirements. It could only be made available to a team that has dipped below position requirements via injury and only to sign one guy to fill in the spot. I don't see why this wouldn't be feasible and would seem to remedy the concern some people have. I don't see any competitive advantage here for the one team (especially if you require him to sign a scrub during this stage), since he's already been robbed by injury to have to make this happen. This would be a safeguard and I bet would only need to be done a few times. It could also be done same day by communicating with the commish and wouldn't slow up a regular schedule that was running games every 2-3 days.

[Vinatieri for Prez]

I hate to confess that I've never really paid attention to it, but is there any change of injured players' status during mid week stages (i.e. moving from say questionable to probable)?

No. Absolutely nothing changes. Not injuries, ratings, etc.

[stevew]

Does anybody think it would be feasible in running a no mid-week sim league, to allow a team to request a separate sim from the commish to meet position requirements. It could only be made available to a team that has dipped below position requirements via injury and only to sign one guy to fill in the spot. I don't see why this wouldn't be feasible and would seem to remedy the concern some people have. I don't see any competitive advantage here for the one team (especially if you require him to sign a scrub during this stage), since he's already been robbed by injury to have to make this happen. This would be a safeguard and I bet would only need to be done a few times. It could also be done same day by communicating with the commish and wouldn't slow up a regular schedule that was running games every 2-3 days.

I definitely think that's feasible, just as long as it doesn't turn into a weekly thing.

[Sgran]

At RealDeal the owners just voted overwhelmingly to keep mid-weeks until the trading deadline, and then have them after that solely on request. I like this thinking because people can make trades without worrying about coming up short at a position, and they have the safety blanket of knowing that if they're really in a pickle they can get an extra turn. The Commish, who has two small kids at home, is grateful.

[Sgran]

How ironic that I was the person to post in this thread. Over at eNFL I made a trade that sent away two players for draft picks. Because the league doesn't have midweeks I was at the mercy of the AI. My starting center had a concussion, so of course I had him inactive. But the AI put him back in the game and he became a vegetable. Gone forever.
So come on SkyDog, tell me: how to prevent that? Should I have changed his position to safety for the week?

[Subby]

How ironic that I was the person to post in this thread. Over at eNFL I made a trade that sent away two players for draft picks. Because the league doesn't have midweeks I was at the mercy of the AI. My starting center had a concussion, so of course I had him inactive. But the AI put him back in the game and he became a vegetable. Gone forever.
So come on SkyDog, tell me: how to prevent that? Should I have changed his position to safety for the week?
In FOFL the person making the transaction notifies the commisioner. The commisioner processes the trade and adjusts the depth charts per the owner's instructions. Now that the commish can access gameplans and depth charts without having to enter the game as the team in question it makes the elimination of midweeks even easier.

We run three games per week in FOFL with an "export day" every Tuesday. There is a good chance we will get rid of all midweeks/export days after the trade deadline next season.

[Eaglesfan27]

How ironic that I was the person to post in this thread. Over at eNFL I made a trade that sent away two players for draft picks. Because the league doesn't have midweeks I was at the mercy of the AI. My starting center had a concussion, so of course I had him inactive. But the AI put him back in the game and he became a vegetable. Gone forever.
So come on SkyDog, tell me: how to prevent that? Should I have changed his position to safety for the week?

If you signed a center, the AI wouldn't have had to activate your center. It still is a tough blow to have that happen to your guy.

Edit: Or Subby's solution which is much better.

[Ben E Lou]

Yup. Sign a second center with the gameday export, and your guy doesn't play.

[korme]

Subby, tell VPI about how it runs in FOFL and make him do that at GEFL

[Sgran]

I like the FOFL solution better.

[marcmoustache]

I like the FOFL solution better.

I don't more work for me ;)

[Subby]

I don't more work for me ;)
Not when you figure in the midweeks that don't have to be run.

The rule in FOFL is I only make changes as a last resort. If you have an injury that would put you in violation of FOF's roster rules, then I'll adjust your depth charts after the FA pickup that happens when files are imported pre-sim.

[Tormaz]

I personally hate midweeks. I use them just because they are there to send in my game plans, but when I do that I don't send a file on game day.

Honestly I think for the work a commish has to do it would be cool for leagues to not have them run the extra files when in most cases they aren't even needed.