commissioner making drastic structural changes

[hjernazian]

So, I want to gage if I am unwarranted in my frustration here, and whether or not to continue my dynasty league.

Little bit of background: 10 man PPR, 26 roster spots, auction draft, hard cap with salaries.

Starting 1 QB 2 RB 3 WR 1 TE 2 FLEX-WR-RB-TE K/DEF

most league members and I have been close friends for many years, our start-up was an in-person auction draft. even with this, the comiss (who is a close friend of mine) required a 3 year commitment, we are now in year 2. with that said, he sent out an email today for proposed changes coming to the league in year 4, requiring a new commitment.

most of the changes were cool and I was kinda into: rookie starter replaces K/DEF, additional roster spot, increasing cap amount.

however, one change really did not sit well with me.

He's going 2 QB... I Know he's not changing rules up during the commitment but lots of deals and draft picks would have went significantly differently had we known 2 QB was on the horizon. Personally, for me, it helps, as Cam went from being considered for a drop (salary is high) to a valuable asset. Historically, I would not have dealt D. Watson this season if I knew it was 2 QB, the owner of Brees would not have dealt him to me for peanuts earlier on in the year. It significantly changes how we've thus far structured our future, because as we know, in dynasty, the more years you can think ahead the stronger your team becomes.

Although the comish is my good friend for many years, I feel like he's getting a little power hungry. I have the reputation and track record for making the most deals thus far, in fact, of my 26 players only 6 are ones that I actually drafted in the startup. yup. and i can't help but feel pissed that I spent nearly two years trying to put together a strong team (which I have) and he can pull some bleep like that and change the variables around on me.

What do you guys think? Do I have the right to be pissed and consider leaving? Or are drastic changes like this typical to dynasty? In a redraft league I've been in for nearly 10 years every year we add a new variable to keep it challenging and fun. league went from a single QB non PPR to a dual QB league where we start 15 players.... but we get a new team every year and draft according to the structure.

This is only my second year in dynasty but feel it's not right.

Oh, he also went from saying we can go over cap 1 out of every 3 years, so I strategized on being over next year, and since it's year 3, year 4 as well, giving me back-to-back years of studs without consideration for cap to make a real run.

[Tsunami]

There are some leagues that are run like the NFL, where the owners take active part in voting on rule changes collectively and everything is fair. Then there are some leagues where it is Bob's league and you are joining Bob's league and Bob does whatever Bob wants with Bob's league. This type of league is certainly not always fair, but it's not necessarily less fun. So if you are a competitive person then you might want to avoid leagues like this that don't have a set of rules and a policy that prevents this kind of thing. But if it's still fun then consider just rolling with it.

[UnsafeAtAnySpd]

Since most of you are friends, I wouldn't leave. Provide your input but go with whatever develops. Then get involved in some more leagues, which I think will alleviate some of these particular frustrations. Just a thought.

[sloth8u]

Any changes should be discussed and voted on. It's then up to you if you want to play with any changes or walk away. It is not "normal" to have rule changes.

In a league I commish (5 or 6 years), a few members have mentioned dropping kicker and dst to eliminate the randomness of those 2 positions. We currently have a group discussion going on now, but my sense is that to keep everything fair for all....we should just keep them. (Even though I personally would like to see them removed). The discussion has turned to potentially eliminating 1 but not the other... the goal of the change was to eliminate positions who carry little to no value, instead it's turning into whether or not you have a strong kicker or dst.

I'm likely to just keep things as is....Starting requirements really shouldn't be changed anyways imo.

[hjernazian]

Any changes should be discussed and voted on. It's then up to you if you want to play with any changes or walk away. It is not "normal" to have rule changes.

In a league I commish (5 or 6 years), a few members have mentioned dropping kicker and dst to eliminate the randomness of those 2 positions. We currently have a group discussion going on now, but my sense is that to keep everything fair for all....we should just keep them. (Even though I personally would like to see them removed). The discussion has turned to potentially eliminating 1 but not the other... the goal of the change was to eliminate positions who carry little to no value, instead it's turning into whether or not you have a strong kicker or dst.

I'm likely to just keep things as is....Starting requirements really shouldn't be changed anyways imo.

agreed. and I can roll with most changes. but going from 1 to 2 QB changes the value of ALL players imo. no secret that in 1 QB leagues they are not that valued, in 2 QB leagues, they present an opportunity to have a weekly 50-60 points. It's a game changer.

[hjernazian]

Since most of you are friends, I wouldn't leave. Provide your input but go with whatever develops. Then get involved in some more leagues, which I think will alleviate some of these particular frustrations. Just a thought.

sometimes simplicity is the best answer, and you are right. i love your response. i'm incredibly competitive and look for any edge i can get. i'm going to be starting my own startup (which I had posted about for feedback before, and it was much appreciated) that is going to boast a superflex type format with 1 starter required at each position, along with 7 flexes. i think it'll cause me to obsess less with this one and let things go. it's just bleep frustrating to know I had the future in Watson and knowing I traded him away (even for a great deal in Dalvin and a mid first) when I wouldn't have knowing he was my rock for the next decade in a 2 QB.

I'll roll with it, but I'm going to give this guy hell. Probably blast him in a response to his email with everyone CC'ed.

[hjernazian]

There are some leagues that are run like the NFL, where the owners take active part in voting on rule changes collectively and everything is fair. Then there are some leagues where it is Bob's league and you are joining Bob's league and Bob does whatever Bob wants with Bob's league. This type of league is certainly not always fair, but it's not necessarily less fun. So if you are a competitive person then you might want to avoid leagues like this that don't have a set of rules and a policy that prevents this kind of thing. But if it's still fun then consider just rolling with it.

thanks for that and agreed - it's not just a league it's something to talk about when we watch football and our wives and kids play with one another. it's fun. what i'm afraid of is losing and unconsciously blaming moves made prior to knowledge of SIGNIFICANT league changes.

also, i don't doubt the comish's ethics, but maybe there's a reason he rostered 4 QB's in a single QB league knowing this was down the pipeline???

I'm very competitive, and you're right, I need more dynasty.

[onetwothree]

Make all QBs free agents or allow teams to keep only 1 QB then put the rest in a draft (part of rookie draft or special restocking draft). Can you imagine having to decide between Saquon and Watson?

Can't change league so drastically without some type of reset. It completely changes the strategy and value of players.

A 10 team league probably should be 2 QB but it needs to be done in a fair way, not just something planned by the commissioner that he was able to prepare for in advance by hoarding the position prior to announcing the decision. I can only assume his team hasn't been winning up to this point hence the introduction of such a big change.

[IR1]

really should have a league vote. Atleast he's giving everyone a 1 year heads up, but 2 years may be a little more fair.

[BigBawseRoss]

ya there should be a league vote with 3 options. 2qb. superflex. no change.

any commish making changes cuz he wants to is not doing it right

[Oddball456]

If the league decides to go to 2 QB, there is no way it should start being 2 QB in 2018 (unless there is a reset in the QB as mentioned above i.e. each team can only keep 1 QB and all the rest of the QB go into the FA/Rookie draft).

I would think the best way would be 2018 = no change, 2019 = add SuperFlex, 2020 = SF becomes 2 QB

[DJB]

Like other have said, this needs to be voted on by rest of the league .

I a, curious however, can you post every trade the commissioner made this year? Did he make any free agent QB pickups at all which may be at the time made you raise an eye brow ? Because it might show he was planning on going 2QB and used this season to get a head start which is unfair ,

[DJB]

Multiple post

[Balzac]

Since most of you are friends, I wouldn't leave. Provide your input but go with whatever develops. Then get involved in some more leagues, which I think will alleviate some of these particular frustrations. Just a thought.

This right hear. I started out in a friends league, and the commish was power hungry and it only got worse over time. After some shady dealings we set up a "Counsel", and more league votes to help reign in his power. Eventually I got tired of every terrible rule idea he had turning into an argument so I pretty much have let him do what he wants. Saved a friendship and saved my sanity. No I can sit back and take advantage of all the loop holes he comes up with.

As weird as it is, random leagues with people on the internet are much more structured, and if worse comes to worse you can leave with no heart ache.

[kamihamster]

I feel your pain. My home league commish really thinks he's the King and he can do what he pleases. He's a good friend but he doesn't realize that any rule change has ripple effect because it's dynasty. He's still in the redraft mindset. It's frustrating because I can argue logically that rule changes need to be voted on, but he cries that he's the commish and wants to do commish things. He may be stepping down next year so I have hope that my frustration will end, but if he stays I may have to leave because I can't put up with his willy nilly attitude. It's a game we're playing and games need some resemblance of consistency in their rules. If changes are made, they should be made with plenty of time to adjust depending on how drastic the change is. My commish just announces one day "hey guys, this is a new rule". That pisses me off... I argue, we both get pissed. It's really not worth it. Hope you can talk some sense into your commish.