PFFL Logo

TrashTalk

What you see below is a bunch of smack. Think you bring a better game to the table than your opponent for the week? Did someone just make a boneheaded waiver? Want to beat people down with words when you can't do it in a game? This is the place to show your stuff. Enter your trash in the appropriate field, and click "Post Your Trash" to submit it.

TrashTalk
You must be logged in to post to the TrashTalk Live page. Please log in.
Talker Trash
Jeremy Golibersuch Posted at 08:50PM on August 20
1. Yes 2.yes 3. Yes 4. No 5 yes 6 no
Krystof Kage Posted at 08:01PM on August 20
Rule 1: 8-4 (Passes); Rule 3 passed to overrule Rule 2; Rule 4: 5-7 (cannot pass as a tie means it is dead); Rule 5 passed and Rule 6 failed. All rules are now done and will be added to the rules page tomorrow in red ink. Thanks everyone!
Leslie Gray Posted at 07:24PM on August 20
1. Yes 2. Yes 3. No 4. Yes 5. Yes 6. No
Krystof Kage Posted at 03:09PM on August 20
With only Leslie, Rory and Jeremy left to vote:

Rule 1: 7-4; Rule 2: Overruled by... Rule 3: 8-3 (Passes); Rule 4: 4-7; Rule 5: 8-3 (Passes) and Rule 6: 2-9 (Fails)
Stephen P. Smith Posted at 10:55AM on August 20
1. Yes 2. Yes 3. Yes 4. Yes 5. Yes. 6. Yes
Krystof Kage Posted at 11:12PM on August 19
Rule 1: 6-4; Rule 2 Passed; Rule 3: 7-3; Rule 4: 3-7; Rule 5: 7-3; Rule 6: 1-9 (Failed)...4 more people need to vote...
John Schultz Posted at 10:57AM on August 19
Hey All, sorry for the delay. These are the votes for both Kierston and I (we just went through them rule by rule): 1: J-N, K-N; 2: J-Y, K-Y; 3: J-Y, K-Y; 4: J-N, K-N; 5: J-N, K-Y; 6: J-N, K-N.
Matt Sewell Posted at 10:16PM on August 18
Have we settled on a place yet? Is there anything I can help with?
Krystof Kage Posted at 06:31PM on August 18
*sorry... Not Mike...Rory
Krystof Kage Posted at 06:30PM on August 18
Updated vote count: Rule 1: 6-2; Rule 2: 8-0 (passes); Rule 3: 5-3; Rule 4: 3-5; Rule 5:6-2; Rule 6: 1-7...

Still to vote: John, Kierston, Leslie, Stephen, Mike and Jeremy
Randy Kamenicky Posted at 11:53AM on August 18
My vote: 1.NO 2.Yes 3.No 4.No 5.No 6.No
Justin Adams Posted at 08:50PM on August 17
Just realized I haven't voted on Rule 6--sorry about that. I vote nay. *sparkle*
Avery Jackson Posted at 06:05PM on August 17
OK 1 no, 2 yes, 3 no, 4 no, 5 no 6 no
Krystof Kage Posted at 06:04PM on August 17
Testing...
Krystof Kage Posted at 01:14AM on August 17
Well that is actually better than it is now cuz you get 4pts when you get 9 receptions... When before you get 0...
Matt Sewell Posted at 09:52PM on August 16
Which is actually worse imho...because you don’t get the points until you get the 2 reception increments
Krystof Kage Posted at 07:34PM on August 16
Well it wouldn't actually be half points. It would be a point per two receptions, which is equal to 5pt bonus for 10 receptions. But yes, I'm in favor of full ppr tbh
Matt Sewell Posted at 06:35PM on August 16
Seriously??? You have to be kidding me. Moving to full PPR vs. the half point is really going to shift your entire strategy? Come on folks...this is basic stuff here. Why go half way there? Do it all the way and it make easier for scoring too. No on likes dealing with 1/2 points anyway. Also, if everyone is in favor anyway, what since does it make to delay it a year and you have one way of scoring this year and another next. If you are aligned with the principle, make it so. There is still adequate time to adjust you winning strategy.
Krystof Kage* Posted at 10:35AM on August 15
And so do John, Avery, Stephen, Leslie, Mike, Kierston and Rory
Krystof Kage* Posted at 10:29AM on August 15
And deadline for voting is August 19, just in case anyone is wondering, which gives everyone plenty of time to prep.
Krystof Kage* Posted at 10:28AM on August 15
The rule changes listed on the page are to be voted for THIS season. The full PPR was an idea presented a few days after registration and voting began, so I am fine with delaying that option. However, the HALF PPR rule is still something we are voting on for this season, and has a negligible effect on overall rankings as we are talking about 2-3pts on average increase per receiving player. PPR would swing it more like 5-6pts.

Which reminds me, Randy, that you need to vote.
Justin Adams* Posted at 10:13AM on August 15
Also, welcome Jeremy! *sparkle*
Justin Adams* Posted at 10:10AM on August 15
I agree with Randy on the point of delaying policy changes for a year. *sparkle*
Randy Kamenicky* Posted at 09:28AM on August 15
I would be prone to vote yes on full PPR (and the defensive switch) if it is to go into place next year. To have such a big change when our draft is mere weeks away is tough when you have already started planning strategies. I'm in, but for next year, not this year.
Krystof Kage* Posted at 05:54PM on August 14
Vote Count (If you haven't yet voted - please do so):

Rule 1: 6-0; Rule 2: 6-0; Rule 3: 5-1; Rule 4: 3-3; Rule 5: 6-0; Rule 6: 1-4
Krystof Kage* Posted at 10:09AM on August 14
Even on non-TD double turnovers, the Defense has been getting 2pts for the fumble recovery by an offensive player on double turnovers because the stat line does not separate fumble recoveries between offensive and defensive players. The defense got the initial turnover for 2pts - and then the initial team that turned it over and recovered second fumble for 2pts.
Krystof Kage* Posted at 10:06AM on August 14
The key behind Rule 4 is that is how we have been scoring it for a while - the offensive player always gets the points. What has been happening, though, is that it is usually offensive lineman. When an offensive player scores on a fumble return for a TD, that player gets 6pts. However, the Defense ALSO gets 6pts if it is a double turnover - and that is actually how we have been scoring it for years.
Daniel Gray* Posted at 09:59AM on August 14
A clarification on my "No" vote on 4. I don't like the defense getting credit for a TD because the offense committed a turnover and lucked into getting it back. Basically, its worth more points for an offensive player to score off a double turnover than it is for a running back to score on a run. That just seems off to me. I DO agree w/ the first part of the rule change, however. The player should get points for scoring.
Krystof Kage* Posted at 09:58AM on August 14
"A couple of hours" he says...LOL...We are averaging 6...
Krystof Kage* Posted at 09:58AM on August 14
"A couple of hours" he says...LOL...We are averaging 6...
Daniel Gray* Posted at 09:57AM on August 14
Votes on rule changes: 1. Yes 2. Yes 3. Yes 4. No 5. Yes 6. No
Randy Kamenicky* Posted at 09:26AM on August 14
Unfortunately, the conference room at Nettally is now the real estate office that I work for. Which is good for me, bad for draft. I have a couple of public options but we need a method of testing the wifi. I talked to one hotel, they want too much for that.
Matt Sewell* Posted at 08:37PM on August 13
Ideas for location. 1) can we had Randy’s network Tally office again. Like we did on the old days? 2) Does anyone have a a clubhouse we can use...as part of an HOA or something? 3) Is there a local bar or Pub that allows you to do the draft at their table as long as you order food and beverages? It has become quite a big deal here on Denver. 4) worst case...I am sure that there is a local hotel that has a space we can rent for a couple of hours. If you can get some quotes and tie off with me offline perhaps this is something I can help out with.
Jeremy Golibersuch* Posted at 06:20PM on August 13
What’s up everyone
Krystof Kage* Posted at 03:42PM on August 13
Current Vote Counts with Krystof, Justin, Matt, Christian and Mike voting. Still waiting on votes from MANY others so please vote soon! Remember - 7 YES votes passes a resolution:

Rule 1: 5-0; Rule 2: 5-0; Rule 3: 4-1; Rule 4: 3-2; Rule 5: 5-0; Rule 6: 1-3
Krystof Kage* Posted at 03:30PM on August 13
The draft location has not yet been determined. We (John, Randy and myself) are currently looking around for someplace; however, internets are hardly ever reliable in public places. We may just go back to having it at my place this year if there are no other logical options.
Michael Hall Posted at 03:09PM on August 13
1. Yes. 2 yes. 3 yes 4 no. 5 yes. 6 no. The time is coming!!
Christian Smith Posted at 06:29PM on August 12
Where is this place with better WiFi? Is that decided yet?
Christian Smith Posted at 06:26PM on August 12
Full PPR would be my preference too. Otherwise: My votes: Rule 1: YES; Rule 2: YES; Rule 3: YES; Rule 4: YES; Rule 5: YES; Rule 6: YES
Krystof Kage* Posted at 03:01PM on August 10
Dang...Guice already gone for the year. That is an evil start to the preseason! And yes, I would get behind a full PPR if it had the support. I was throwing out HALF PPR to gauge that support. However it looks like only 3 of us have even voted for anything so far...
John Schultz* Posted at 05:02PM on August 9
I echo Matt, Justin, and Krystof. Is there any momentum to just make us a PPR at one point and be done with it? BTW, 24 days from RIGHT NOW, we'll be drafting!! I can't wait!!!!
Matt Sewell* Posted at 10:22AM on August 8
My Votes: 1=Yes, 2 or 3 = Yes (with that said, in the event to onbtaom feedback, what about doing 1 pt per reception and just cancel the old 5 point bonus for TE, RB, WR thing all together? No change to QBs IMHO) 4 = No, 5 = Yes and finally 6 = No
Krystof Kage* Posted at 05:04PM on August 6
My votes: Rule 1: YES; Rule 2: YES; Rule 3: YES; Rule 4: YES; Rule 5: YES; Rule 6: NO - but I am willing to see how Rule 1 affects negative scores and may support something like this next season.
Krystof Kage* Posted at 05:02PM on August 6
And yeah, that -5pts from Baltimore's D last year (the only time they had ever scored negative points) was because they gave up 44pts against Jacksonville in London. They deserved those negative points that day lol...
Krystof Kage* Posted at 04:44PM on August 6
No, it doesn't totally stop negative points, but it does GREATLY reduce the chance of it happening, especially considering the worst that can happen is now -5 instead of -10 on the yardage.

Just did some quick research. Since 2011, Defenses scored negative points 91 times out of 1568 possible matchups for a rate of 5.8%. This works out to an average of ~3 negative scores per team for their career. However, in 2017, 28 scores were negative and 21 of them were defenses. I see your argument. 5 were kickers, 1 was McCown and one was OJ Howard.
Randy Kamenicky* Posted at 04:10PM on August 6
Well no other position scores negative points as often as the defense does, despite their opportunity. Yes, it is a serious request as I don't think it is a good thing the way it is now. I'm not sure about combining the rushing and the passing defense. That would make it better as for as any of the automated scoring systems as that is the only major difference for most of them. But that doesn't really stop a defense from getting negative scores, does it? Possibly I guess.
Krystof Kage* Posted at 03:37PM on August 6
Oops... -9pts is the record... But I will add this to the ballot. I thought the scoring adjustments for the defense that I made up would address the concerns expressed in your TrashTalk post.
Krystof Kage* Posted at 03:35PM on August 6
Sorry, Randy - I didn't know that was an official rule request. Every position has a chance at negative points throughout the season (-8pts is the record, and that was set by a QB), so you want Defenses to be special?
Randy Kamenicky Posted at 12:40PM on August 6
Can we get my proposed rule about the defense not being able to score less than zero total points on that rule change ballet please?
Justin Adams Posted at 11:30AM on August 3
Dammit, I thought there'd be a line break between each of the votes--sorry about that. To clarify, I'm voting in favor of all proposed rule changes except #3. *sparkle*