Empire league: Expansion and Contraction

[MilkSpiller22]

Should we do it??

IMO all good dynasties need rules for it...

 

[TKOSpikes]

I voted "don't care". Although I would prefer to phrase it as, "either way is fine for me".

 

[MilkSpiller22]

I voted "don't care". Although I would prefer to phrase it as, "either way is fine for me".

personally, i think Expansion and contraction rules are the most important thing for dynasty leagues... and imo you can't have one without the other...

 

[obxyankeefan]

I voted don't care, but if it gets voted in we need to have some rules in place.

 

[broncosmitty]

Please

 

[MilkSpiller22]

forgot to make the poll public... so i don't know who has voted or not...

i do wonder why people are voting NO to contraction...

 

[broncosmitty]

forgot to make the poll public... so i don't know who has voted or not...

i do wonder why people are voting NO to contraction...

If someone quits, I'd like it to be automatic. But I don't really want teams being contracted against their will or anything.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

If someone quits, I'd like it to be automatic. But I don't really want teams being contracted against their will or anything.

of course not... We don't kick people out unless they deserve to be kicked out... contraction is more just the rules need to be put into place if WE CANT find the replacement owner...

 

[jwolt92]

I voted yes for expansion but no to contraction. If an owner bails, it's easy to find a replacement, I'd rather not have a bunch of players thrown back in

 

[jwolt92]

of course not... We don't kick people out unless they deserve to be kicked out... contraction is more just the rules need to be put into place if WE CANT find the replacement owner...

If it's an absolute cannot then I wouldn't say no to contraction, but I'd like to see options exhausted before it just becomes "oh well"

 

[MilkSpiller22]

If it's an absolute cannot then I wouldn't say no to contraction, but I'd like to see options exhausted before it just becomes "oh well"

thats a given... we will always search for the replacement...

 

[jwolt92]

thats a given... we will always search for the replacement...

Then I'm going to go change my vote....

 

[broncosmitty]

of course not... We don't kick people out unless they deserve to be kicked out... contraction is more just the rules need to be put into place if WE CANT find the replacement owner...

I vote no replacement owners.

 

[broncosmitty]

Pro new owners, just not replacement ones.

 

[broncosmitty]

I voted yes for expansion but no to contraction. If an owner bails, it's easy to find a replacement, I'd rather not have a bunch of players thrown back in

Why?

This is exactly opposite of what I've wanted to do for years.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

Pro new owners, just not replacement ones.

i semi agree... and will be part of the future talks if this passes...

 

[broncosmitty]

i semi agree... and will be part of the future talks if this passes...

Doubt we get to it.

 

[jwolt92]

Why?

This is exactly opposite of what I've wanted to do for years.

Hypothetically, a team finishes in last 2 years in a row then the owner quits. He's got 1 good player and it's Trout (all a hypothetical example of course), why should one person have the ability to draft him AFTER their keepers just because one guy quit?

 

[MilkSpiller22]

Hypothetically, a team finishes in last 2 years in a row then the owner quits. He's got 1 good player and it's Trout (all a hypothetical example of course), why should one person have the ability to draft him AFTER their keepers just because one guy quit?

with FAAB it is not as big of a deal... Part of the reason FAAB is so awesome...

 

[jwolt92]

with FAAB it is not as big of a deal... Part of the reason FAAB is so awesome...

If the players are going into free agency then that's perfect, if they go into the draft then it's tough to be a fan of contraction.