current rule: No bye players are allowed in your lineup.

History: We had some issues last year, where teams didn't have non-bye players to use. So they could not put in a full lineup..and got zero's for the week as a team. That has always been the rule in this league.

So, you need to vote if we can allow players on byes to be used in a lineup.

__________________
Expert on nothing, opinionated on everything...

Officially I vote no here. Why? As an owner it should be your responsibility to have enough players to allow you to cover your bye weeks. Especially since we haven't even drafted yet. I know some will say isn't the 0 for the player enough of a punishment? I say no. Why? Because it allows the owners to just keep the same lineups in week after week and not do anywork to change it. Which means we could have owners just painting by numbers late in the season if they are doing poorly.

Yes, as sometimes if you have a TE, K or DEF on bye and don't want to drop anyone of your current roster just for a one week pick-up. If someone wants to take the 0 point hit then that should be up to them as owners. If an owner is just inactive then that should be dealt with separately.

Yes, as was discussed at length during last season. I for one, was left out of the playoffs last year because I didn't set my lineups for the Thursday game and could not pick up a replacement player for someone who did play thursday. Instead of winning that week, I was given a 0 and took a loss.

I don't think any of the owners would have any reason to tank purposefully.

My vote is no, simply because it is a redraft league and I see no reason to change the rule.

Everybody has the opportunity to cover bye weeks via the draft and/or free agency, and everyone has the ability to know when there is a Thursday game so the lineups can be sent in early.

I could care less about the rule either way, but since I is already this way, I don't see a legitimate reason to change it.

It's not just about the owners who get a big fat goose-egg; it's affects the whole league standings when someone forfeits a game. Although this hasn't happened to me (yet), I think if my 10 players can beat your 11 players, let me at them.

I vote yes.

This is my reasoning also. Come the end of the season, I don't want to be the team fighting to get into the playoffs with another team whose opponent just got DQ'd. Odds are with 10 players that team is not going to win, but there is always a chance, I'd want that chance if it came down to me getting into the playoffs or not.

Gee...so you don't want teams DQed...but you don't want the owners to be responsible and make sure they get a line up in and draft accordingly to protect for byes?

Someone...please explain that logic to me. Seriously.

You want to see the logic read the post above yours.

The only reason I can think of to tank your team is to get that 1st overall pick in next years draft. There are a multitude of reasons for an owner not to change a player on bye, no one better to pick-up. The Def/ST doesn't score enough to bother. Family emergency...ect. I've seen Bye's go bothe ways. We had a team with 2 players on Bye and the team still won by a good margin, much to the opponents dismay, it knocked him out of the Playoffs,lol.
The MUFF DIVERS needed to go down in my opinion. I may pick up another DEF/ST for the Bye, but I usually let it ride the whole season, even on the bye week. The points I recieve from my DEF/ST are bonus points and not part of my base score. To me, playing a person on Bye is like when a Team is down to it's alternate QB after the other 3 have been knocked out. The slot is filled but you really do not expect anything.

Alright, this I don't particularly agree with. I normally try to get a roster full of interchangable stars. I want the guys on the bench to be just as good as the guys in the game. Of course, my first couple of picks would be definate starters, but as far as WR's and TE's go, I like to have a lot of depth there. Sure, this makes for a difficult desicion on game day but I know that who ever I send in is going to bring me back plenty of points.

As far as your DEF/ST getting you "bonus" points, clearly you did not have Chicago last year.

no there is no logic there. Once again its I want my cake and eat it too.

Seriously folks....is it too much to ask..to put your Fantasy football ability to the test ...to have you responsible to draft for bye weeks AND put a line up in each week?

That is what you are fighting against here. The ability not to have to protect for byes.........

That is supposed to be part of the challenge.

Sure I did. I had Benson, Jones, Berrian and Gould which helped me win the Yahoo League I was in. As for DEF/ST I used The Ravens. RR

Don't the teams need to set the lineup each week regardless? i.e. MFL will not allow you to carry over the roster from each to the next like yahoo would.

If so, it is pretty clear which teams did not make an effor to set their lineups for the week vs. those that chose not to put in a particular player.

No, what I'm fighting for is that it is absolute bullshit that the rest of the league gets punished for one person screwing up. You can sit there and make any excuse you want, but as I said earlier, if you are fighting for the last spot in the playoffs against, say me, and I face a team who gets DQ'd I bet you'd be singing a different tune if the only player on that team I was facing who had a bye week was, say, there kicker.

You want people who know how to draft for the entire year including bye weeks, injury possibilities, etc. get owners who know what they are doing. Period. End of story.

No. If you set the league, you can now have lineups carry over, and allow for bye players being started. It was not always the case...but seems to be now.

No, I would hope every friggen owner would be smart enough to draft for that reason. Obviously I expect too much from some.

Funny I thought I did......woes me.

well, i voted to change it, but to be honest i'm not sure. i agree with phic that it sucks when someone doesn't care enough to cover their byes, and i think that is an important part of the game. at the same time, i agree with danny, that a forfeit can hurt the whole league in terms of the playoffs. basically, i'll be ok with either outcome.

You know what, you can be as sarcastic as you want. If you want to go ahead and insult my intellegence, so be it. The simple truth here is that you wanted the league's input and that's what this is.

At the moment, it would seem that league is leaning towards my argument and away from yours. "Woe's me."

If you're going to get in an uproar if people disagree with your way of thinking, I'd make one simple suggestion to you here, don't ask.

There have been two solid reasons giving for the rule change.

1. - Owner's choice. I've actually done this a couple of times in different leagues. I had a kicker, TE or DEF on bye. The available FAs weren't that attractive. To make for a one week wunderkind I would be forced to drop a player I knew I would have a hard time reacquiring the following week. So I bit the bullet and took the goose egg for the week. I can't remember if I won or lost but I do remember it didn't effect the outcome of the games.

2. - Cheap Victories - When and if a team forfeits a game that gives the other team an easy victory. This could impact other team's playoff hopes. That would be a hard bullet to bite, that your team didn't make the postseason because some owner who doesn't care failed to submit a valid lineup.

I think either one of those reasons is cause enough for the change. If an owner is lazy, inattentive or trying to tank then deal with that owner but don't punish everyone else for their misdeeds.