Apolyton Fantasy Football

[Ben Kenobi]

He probably felt better as soon as Albert picked Peyton Manning.

[Guynemer]

Brees, Jennings, and Sproles = IDP Profit!

[Berzerker]

dumb me, I figured Sproles would take a couple games to get into the mix

[SlowwHand]

Running is running, no matter where you run.

[Guynemer]

Another TD for Brees!

[Berzerker]

Ryan Grant

where are you?

Jesus, I started Grant over Sproles in 1 league

[MRT144]

What a great game. Fantasy wise.

[demonbinder]

What a great game. Fantasy wise.

Yeah, Drew Brees was great even though they didn't win game.

[Ben Kenobi]

60 points for Bresus!

Brees, Jennings, and Sproles = IDP Profit!

I saw your team. Probably set a record this week.

[Ben Kenobi]

God, 100.36 - 0. Aren't we supposed to be nice to the newbies, Guy?

On pace for 190 this week. Glad I ain't playing you.

[Al B. Sure!]

Not penalizing for INTs is idiotic.

I thought it was strange too but the logic was that they never want a situation where starting a guy hurts you. It's rare but you can get in situations where you'd be better off playing no one than playing a guy who turns the ball over (maybe a guy who gets laid out, fumbles, and is taking off in a stretcher). In an Apolyton league in 2006, I lost Trent Green in week 1 and had to start Kerry Collins. Kerry's bum ass gave me negative points on his day; like -5 or something.

Think about it with defenses as well. I'm sure you can imagine quite often there are times when you'd be better off not playing a defense than playing one that will give you negative points. You can probably predict this in advance, as well. Then you get into some strange situations where a guy doesn't play a defense and that can be very problematic if there aren't rules set up for this.


These are all 'out-there' situations though. I did try to get them to punish INTs and fumbles but it's not my league. They've been doing this for over a decade and they don't want to change.

[Sparrowhawk]

God, 100.36 - 0. Aren't we supposed to be nice to the newbies, Guy?

On pace for 190 this week. Glad I ain't playing you.

Guy shouldn't get too cocky...this newbie has never lost a head to head matchup...when losing by over 100 points...after the first night!!!



/me

[Guynemer]

Touche.

[MRT144]

Colston out with a broken Collar Bone. I gotta start checking my rosters and see if I have overlaps with Al's ill fated team.

[SlowwHand]

Crap.

[Al B. Sure!]

WHAT THE ****?!

I bet I know when it happened, too. He caught a diving pass on the final drive and landed hard on his shoulder. I noticed that. He came up favoring it and I got scared that he was hurt but he played the next 25 seconds of the game. ****.

[-Jrabbit]

I thought it was strange too but the logic was that they never want a situation where starting a guy hurts you. It's rare but you can get in situations where you'd be better off playing no one than playing a guy who turns the ball over (maybe a guy who gets laid out, fumbles, and is taking off in a stretcher). In an Apolyton league in 2006, I lost Trent Green in week 1 and had to start Kerry Collins. Kerry's bum ass gave me negative points on his day; like -5 or something.

Think about it with defenses as well. I'm sure you can imagine quite often there are times when you'd be better off not playing a defense than playing one that will give you negative points. You can probably predict this in advance, as well. Then you get into some strange situations where a guy doesn't play a defense and that can be very problematic if there aren't rules set up for this.

These are all 'out-there' situations though. I did try to get them to punish INTs and fumbles but it's not my league. They've been doing this for over a decade and they don't want to change.

There's no logic there. This isn't even a thought process; it's just "because we don't do that." It makes INT-heavy QBs and all fumble-rific players far more relevant than they should be. I guess it's nice to not worry about it 5-6 fumbles for guys like Benson, Hillis and Bradshaw, or the 25 INTs that Eli threw, but it eliminates one of the main differentiators between guys of otherwise equal talent.

Stupid.

I've been through those days with negative QB points. It's not like there's a big difference between zero and -5.2 when your opponent is rolling for a standard 30-40.

[Al B. Sure!]

I was looking to deal Colston too. There goes his trade value

[Al B. Sure!]

There's no logic there. This isn't even a thought process; it's just "because we don't do that." It makes INT-heavy QBs and all fumble-rific players far more relevant than they should be. I guess it's nice to not worry about it 5-6 fumbles for guys like Benson, Hillis and Bradshaw, or the 25 INTs that Eli threw, but it eliminates one of the main differentiators between guys of otherwise equal talent.

Stupid.

I've been through those days with negative QB points. It's not like there's a big difference between zero and -5.2 when your opponent is rolling for a standard 30-40.

I know. I know. When I first played in the league in 2007 (I skipped a few years til last year), I made the comment that QB's like Grossman and Culpepper were too good. You just need a reckless slinging QB on a team with a terrible defense... you know he'll keep throwing and it doesn't matter if he throws 2 picks a game. But that's how they do it.

[MRT144]

Eli shoulda had 17 ints last year. **** his WRs.

[Ben Kenobi]

Colston out with a broken Collar Bone. I gotta start checking my rosters and see if I have overlaps with Al's ill fated team.

What was that, Albert? I said that Henderson and Meachem would be WR1 and WR2 specifically. Good thing I grabbed Meachem.

[Ben Kenobi]

Colston out with a broken Collar Bone. I gotta start checking my rosters and see if I have overlaps with Al's ill fated team.

I have zero of Albert's players.

[Ben Kenobi]

Henderson and Meachem will outproduce Colston this year

[demonbinder]

Crap - that's the first I heard of this (have him in the FFZ offline league). Latest report is he will probably be out about four weeks.

[Al B. Sure!]

You got lucky, Ben. With 4 less weeks of production, your prediction may come true but only because of injury.

[Ben Kenobi]

You got lucky, Ben. With 4 less weeks of production, your prediction may come true but only because of injury.

I did own Colston for 2 years, I should think I have some insight.

[SlowwHand]

You got lucky, Ben. With 4 less weeks of production, your prediction may come true but only because of injury.

And if he had said to not go outside too long because you might get a sunburn, he would only be right because the sun was out.

[Al B. Sure!]

And if he had said to not go outside too long because you might get a sunburn, he would only be right because the sun was out.

Sunburn? You actually don't go outside too long for fear of sunburn? What is too long?

[Ben Kenobi]

Sunburn? You actually don't go outside too long for fear of sunburn? What is too long?

Uh, this is TX. Plenty of sun.

[Ben Kenobi]

Yeah that Kerry Collins is such a great play, Ben. How many points are you getting for sack fumbles?

Robomanager started Cutler. Robomanager is winning.