|
||||||||||||
|
Title: "3 Strike Ruling" on jimmyc Post by StegRock on Jan 20th, 2006, 1:21am This thread is where you can cast your vote on this issue and/or where I will report the tally of any votes sent to me privately. The question is... Should Jimmy Carver be removed from the league for breaking the "3 Strike Rule"? The possible answers are... 1) Yes, he should be removed! 2) No, he should not be removed! 3) I ABSTAIN. Here is how the votes will be tallied... Like all GBRFL matters, the determination is made by a majority of those who voted "Yes" or "No". Abstentions, whether stated or due to failure to respond are completely removed from consideration. So, hypothetically, if five dudes abstained or just neglected to vote; three voted "Yes", and two voted "No", "Yes" would prevail. Discussion may be conducted on this thread, BUT please make sure the casting of your vote is clear. All votes are to be submitted and discussion is to close on this issue at 11:59 a.m. on Sunday, January 29th. |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: "3 Strike Ruling" on jimmyc Post by Tony_O on Jan 20th, 2006, 3:59am The one thing that I am passionate about in all the of the fantasy leagues I participate in is PARTICIPATION(this includes voting, so I expect the other owners to "sack up" and vote). I think participation is the most vital part of a successful league. Even more so in this league which is highly visable, your only as strong as your weakest competitor. My vote is only based on this, participation, nothing personal. I vote for the removal of Jimmy C. No hard feelings, I only hope your lack of participation wasn't caused by any personal problems or situation. |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: "3 Strike Ruling" on jimmyc Post by Chumpzilla on Jan 20th, 2006, 5:28am Participation is critical in this league (as in all leagues). I questioned several owners on the inactivity of this team because it was basically like playing with 9 teams. Not only from a game perspective, but it influenced FA picks as well (passing on players with the #1 pick every week). Wouldn't Samkon Gado (among a dozen other players) have been a "slight" upgrade over a player like Justin Fargas?? I am also disheartened by what this will do to a new owner. In this format, the damage to this team will be a steep challenge for a new owner to overcome. I am not looking at this scenerio over the three game period in reference. I AM looking at this scenerio over the three year period this league has been in existence. This team has fallen to shit over this three year period due to the inactivity. JC, I have nothing personally against you but I would like to take this opprotunity to get a "hard-core" fantasy football owner. Therefore, I agree with the removal of Jimmy C. |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: "3 Strike Ruling" on jimmyc Post by PrimeTime on Jan 20th, 2006, 8:02am Yes, he should be removed. |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: "3 Strike Ruling" on jimmyc Post by BarnabyWilde on Jan 20th, 2006, 8:56am I am going to have to agree here with my fellow GBRFL2ers here and ask for jimmyc to be removed. Tony said it best;participation is the KEY to the GBRFL leagues. You have to stay on top on it each and every week, with trade requests, free agency and most importantly, lineup submissions. Jimmy did none of that. |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: "3 Strike Ruling" on jimmyc Post by Philly on Jan 20th, 2006, 11:04am My vote: (1) Yes, remove him. I've been very turned off by his lack of activity from jump. I've proposed a number of trades to him, some were never responded to and others took far too long to hear a response on. The fact that he didn't submit a lineup 5 times this year is troubling. He's finished at the bottom every year and doesn't seem to learn from his mistakes. I'd at least like someone here who tries to be competitive. A last place team should be all over the waiver wire each week. Let's get someone more active in here. (And the fact that he snubbed the CBFL offer, a league that is perfect for his absentee management style, really is the icing on the cake.) |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: "3 Strike Ruling" on jimmyc Post by captainpurple on Jan 20th, 2006, 2:17pm Ray hit the nail on the head from my perspective. The damage to this team may be irreperable w/o supplemental draft picks. It could take 5 years with a dedicated, committed owner to make it competitive again. The week Pepp went down (the day the lights went out in Minny ;D ), I was efforting a trade to ensure I got the #1 FA pick so I could get BJ. Jimmy didn't want/need/care for the FA pick in our trade, and threw it in w/o any thought. As it is, I ended up with Warner & BJ, he got Stephen Davis, and the rest is history. I didn't know Davis was going to plummett like he did, so it's not like I tried to screw him, but if it were me, it would've take a LOT more to get that FA pick. I don't have the history you guys do in this league, so I haven't had a front row seat to the demise of this team. But I'm invested going forward, and am really jazzed by this format. It takes 10 teams in a format like this to make the league stellar. We're operating with 9. I vote for removing him. |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: "3 Strike Ruling" on jimmyc Post by jimmyc on Jan 20th, 2006, 8:15pm at this point i officially resign from GBRFL2. i have enjoyed playing with you guys and apologize for my lack of participation. this team will be competitive next year and is not SHIT as some of you have proclaimed and will not take the 3-5 years to reach the next level as next year will prove. the fact that i turned down CBFL is an issue unto itself and has no bearing on anything in this discussion - so much for icing on the cake. as far as my trades or lack there of: ill take s. davis for k.warner plus an FA pick anyday. thanks again steg for letting me participate in the league. as was said before participation is key and i didnt keep my side of the bargain. good luck to all of you and ill be keeping track of "my team" in the future. dont be surprised if i post a comment or two... |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: "3 Strike Ruling" on jimmyc Post by StegRock on Jan 20th, 2006, 9:20pm on 01/20/06 at 20:15:55, jimmyc wrote:
Jim, this is a day late and a dollar short, bro. I mean... at this point (after you are already mathematically eliminated) this wasn't the "big" thing to do (anymore). As a matter of fact,... at this point it's kind of... cheese :-/ Quote:
This, I don't totally disagree with. I don't know about next year, but... Quote:
Oh,... but it does, man! :-/ It may not be of "direct" significance to the limited scope of this vote, but it does speak loudly to the "bigger picture", which is ultimately most important. I mean the way this whole endgame played out, which involved my offering you the CBFL as an olive branch of sorts, does matter. You just left me hangin'. Common courtesy does matter. When you were owed absolutely nothing, I was frantically trying to contact you mainly in an effort to keep you "in 'the Gridiron' fold" and extend that gift to you. You did not even let me do it. Your course of action resulted in the twarting of a kind action directed toward you. That does matter! You exhibited a pattern of behavior that this endgame was just further corroboration of. :-/ It all "matters" and is worth reflecting on... Quote:
This is a tricky one, bro. Your claiming this is actually proof in the pudding. I mean in a vacuum I don't totally disagree with you. But, in the GBRFL context... :-/ If you can read between the lines, the bigger point being made is that because you simply weren't using your #1 free-agent picks, you weren't valuing them nearly to the degree that they should be in the GBRFL context. That potentially made you exploitable in a way that affects league balance. That's the insidious snowball effect a non-participating, not clued-in owner has. Quote:
You're welcome. :-/ But, I wish it didn't have to come to this. Quote:
Understand, though, all things considered, that we probably won't be holding our collective breath on this one. ;) ... In any event, best of luck... |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: "3 Strike Ruling" on jimmyc Post by Walker Boh on Jan 20th, 2006, 9:26pm Jimmy, I'm glad that you finally put an end to this. I did not feel good about having to vote you out, even if it was the right thing to do. I have the benefit of knowing you personally, and value your friendship. I know you cared about your Duds :-X, I mean Spuds ;D, but this format just wasn't right for you. I know we will play in future leagues together and look forward to beating your ass once again! |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: "3 Strike Ruling" on jimmyc Post by StegRock on Jan 20th, 2006, 10:37pm Jamo,... the rest... fine. BUT, this... on 01/20/06 at 21:26:02, Walker Boh wrote:
...come on, bro. :-/ At the point of his post, he had already been voted out (the last three dudes' votes couldn't change a thing). |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: "3 Strike Ruling" on jimmyc Post by BarnabyWilde on Jan 20th, 2006, 10:40pm Okay let's move on. I am more interested in the naming of jimmy's replacement. Quit [smiley=deadhorse.gif] already... (And I mean that in the niceset way possible) ;) |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: "3 Strike Ruling" on jimmyc Post by StegRock on Jan 20th, 2006, 11:36pm on 01/20/06 at 22:40:56, BarnabyWilde wrote:
That's not going to be for A WHILE, based on a number of factors, not the least of which is the fact that I don't want to deal with it until I have the time to deal with it properly. I have a process I want to implement, which is going to incorporate you guys, but is going to be time-consuming (like this was on me; for you, BW, it's a couple sentences and out; for me,... it's an ordeal; so, it's a little easier for you to give the sanctimonious "move on" spiel). |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: "3 Strike Ruling" on jimmyc Post by BarnabyWilde on Jan 20th, 2006, 11:44pm on 01/20/06 at 23:36:43, StegRock wrote:
I figured as much. Wishful thinking on my part. :) Quote:
I know. I like short answers;you on the other hand, would only get to one question on the final round of Family Feud, since there is only a 20 second time limit! ;D And I would not trade spots with you for anything...except maybe a GBRFL2 championship. ;) Keep up the good work Steggie. [smiley=headbanger.gif] |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: "3 Strike Ruling" on jimmyc Post by Walker Boh on Jan 21st, 2006, 1:09am on 01/20/06 at 22:37:47, StegRock wrote:
Would it have been better if he never came back at all? I know he could have handled this situation much better, but at least he did the right thing in the end. He apologized, admitted he was wrong, and thanked you for allowing him to play. I respect that. |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: "3 Strike Ruling" on jimmyc Post by StegRock on Jan 21st, 2006, 2:07am on 01/21/06 at 01:09:25, Walker Boh wrote:
Jamo, first of all, take a deep breath... I said, "The rest is fine." It was your specific statement: "Jimmy, I'm glad that you finally put an end to this," that I object to and was VERY disappointing to me. He was already voted out when he "resigned", for Christ's sake. This particular element, the timing of his "bowing out", which, mind you, is a bit of an overriding element, remains lame, period. The rest is,... well,... cordial. But, what if the vote was kind of close-ish? Granted, he may have done the same thing. But, that begs the question. Maybe he wouldn't have. The bottom line is he didn't. And, "after the fact" statements pale in comparison to "proactively stepping up", and even come off as passive-aggressive (even if it's not). It just makes the sentiments more hollow, man. ... I mean,... sure,... Jamo,... I guess what he did is better than nothing, BUT to go as far as to give HIM credit for "finally putting this to an end",... [smiley=pullleeeeeeeze.gif] COME ON!!! Nothing was put to an end until the writing was on the wall and after I was forced to dump HOURS and HOURS of time dealing with it (in the most just manner possible). :-/ |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: "3 Strike Ruling" on jimmyc Post by Philly on Jan 23rd, 2006, 8:47am In the immortal words of BW... [smiley=deadhorse.gif] |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: "3 Strike Ruling" on jimmyc Post by StegRock on Jan 24th, 2006, 3:38am on 01/23/06 at 08:47:59, Philly wrote:
[smiley=deadhorse.gif] (Slightly revised repost.) |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: "3 Strike Ruling" on jimmyc Post by Philly on Jan 27th, 2006, 3:13pm [smiley=broncofan.gif] [smiley=broncofan.gif] [smiley=broncofan.gif] |
||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: "3 Strike Ruling" on jimmyc Post by StegRock on Jan 27th, 2006, 7:26pm I think... [smiley=horse.gif] [smiley=stilldunno.gif] |
||||||||||||
|
Fantasyfootballer.com's Gridiron » Powered by YaBB 1 Gold - SP 1.1! YaBB © 2000-2002, Xnull. All Rights Reserved. |