Logic

One of the Matts (Parrino? Bove?) recently brought up the idea of the Bills trading for Chris Olave or Jordan Addison on his podcast. It was followed up by some Twitter accounts of varying (but predominantly scant) credibility claiming things were happening behind the scenes. As far as I can tell, no actual, credible reporting is suggesting that this is going to happen. I think it's just content creators connecting the dots between WRs about whom there have been trade chatter and a team with extra draft picks, in order to fill the long weeks until the draft. I'd love if it happened, don't get me wrong. I'd be so thrilled. I just...don't really buy that there's anything to it other than bored writers looking for clicks.

Savvy move, but we'll just use water and food coloring to replace whatever we take

Ohhhh *****. Dad's gonna be gone! Inmates running the asylum. Quick, someone snag his credit card so we can order skin flicks on PPV and call 1-900 numbers!

I'm not sure how much flexibility there is in this year's throw back and alternate uniform rules, but... It would be AMAZING if the Bills could wear the standing buffalo throwbacks twice and the 90s throwbacks twice. I'm fairly certain that the league only usually allows one official throwback jersey, but maybe they could be cool for once in their ***** lives and let the Bills use the 90s set as their "alternate" uni? I dunno. I'm just sick of seeing the Bills not capitalize on the rabid hunger by the fan base to see the 90s throwbacks, and there will never be a more logical year to roll them out than the final year of this current stadium.

If that's your stance, you may prefer keeper leagues or something with salary cap/financial considerations. I think the term "dynasty" in dynasty league COMES from the allure of building a really good team that competes for multiple championships. In my experience in dynasty leagues so far, there's plenty of player movement. Those that regularly contend often try to load up on players by trading away future picks. Those that AREN'T doing so hot make trades or try to acquire draft picks to rebuild. Some dynasty owners even love undertaking a full-on rebuild, piling up draft picks and scouting rookies. The thing is: If the "loading up on draft picks" guy HITS on those picks, HE can become the perennial contender pretty quickly. And if the "trade away all my picks for players" guy's players age out or start getting injured, his team can crash and burn pretty quickly. As for player movement: other than the draft and waiver wire, the only real way to acquire star players is to trade with other teams. In my experience (at least in a good and active dynasty league), you have a league full of people who find roster building and tinkering fun, and trade talks themselves are fun, so you end up having quite a bit of interaction and trading. Nevertheless, I understand the allure of salary cap and being forced to cut players and all that. There's certainly a market for that type of thing. That's just not what I'm envisioning this being.

I could kiss you for recognizing that about yourself and announcing it! I won’t, because that would be unpleasant for you. But….I could. you sound like the perfect league mate 😆

First off, thanks to everyone who's replied so far. I wasn't sure we'd get enough interest to get this thing off the ground. Now it seems that we probably have enough interest to form TWO or even THREE leagues if we wanted to do so. To answer a few questions I've seen mentioned so far. Maybe this will cause a few people not to be as interested as thought, or maybe vice versa. - Seeing the amount of interest, and after a few DM conversations, I think the buy-in would likely be more like $50 or above per season. It simply keeps people more committed/active/interested. - To be clear, this is a dynasty league, not a keeper league. There is no mandate to drop X amount of players each year. You draft your team, you keep your team. Obviously you can add/drop/trade/draft players, but there's no component of "well I have to choose one of my three top players to drop each year". - Along those lines, I don't have plans to incorporate any kind of salary cap or contracts or financial considerations. I want this league to be all about the football side of dynasty, not having to worry about contracts. No disrespect whatsoever to those who run these types of leagues -- I have several friends who are in them and love them -- but that's just not what this is intended to be. - Would be a classic snake draft, with draft order chosen at random, with rookies included in the startup draft player pool. After year one, we'd have a rookie draft each year with either 3 or 4 rounds, depending on what everyone preferred. - Waivers would be an FAAB system. You get $100 of imaginary money during the offseason to put blind bids on whatever waiver wire players you want. High bid gets the player. FAAB budget resets back to $100 for everyone once the season kicks off. - Would prefer not to have more than 12 teams per league. It just waters down the talent pool too much and makes waiver wires too barren. Like I said, maybe this forum can support SEVERAL leagues, so that all interested parties can play. All of the above having been said, once the basic structure is in place, there would be regular league votes every offseason on rules tweaks, bylaws, etc. I want it to be a democracy, not a dictatorship, where everyone feels like they have ownership of the league.

There would absolutely be rookie draft picks, with the ability to trade away future picks, yes. One of my current leagues has three round rookie drafts each year, while the other has four rounds. In both cases, you can trade picks up to two years into the future. So this year, owners can trade picks as far out as the 2027 draft. One measure that can be helpful with this, though, is asking that if any owner trades a future 1st, they pay their league dues (or half their league dues) for that year up front. That helps prevent people from trading away all their future draft picks and then leaving the league, in which case it can be very hard to find a new owner to replace the departed owner, since the cupboard of draft picks is bare.

With the 18th pick in the 2025 TSW Mock Draft, the Seattle Seahawks select Tetairoa McMillan, WR, Arizona. Interior offensive line is far and away our biggest need, but with two 2nd and two 3rd round picks, we feel we can wait and still find good players there. Meanwhile, after trading away DK Metcalf, we're thrilled to add an imposing outside receiver with tremendous size and athletic ability to replace him. After JSN, our only real receivers of note are Cooper Kupp and Marquez Valdez Scantling. Both are on the wrong side of 30, and neither are dynamic enough at this stage in their careers to keep us from taking a prospect with as high a ceiling as McMillan. Metcalf and Lockett? Meet McMillan and Smith-Njigba. The value was great, the player is dynamic, and the need is there. John Schneider and Mike McDonald are high-fiving in the Seahawks war room. @Bill from NYC and the Tampa Bay Baker-neers are now on the clock.

haha no worries. I’m leaving this up for a full 24 hours so everyone has a chance to respond. Then I’ll be DMing everyone that indicated interest just to see what their level of experience and willingness to commit is. And yes, tenure on the board definitely helps. I wanna try as hard as possible to get a consistent and committed group, though good people are definitely gonna get left out just by the nature of things, unfortunately.

Yeah I like a higher buy-in too, I just didn’t want it to be a barrier for entry to people who aren’t as economically fortunate. After a few DM discussions, I’m doubtful that it would be anything less than $50.

I still remember when the Jags drafted a punter in the 3rd round in 2012 and he didn't even see a second contract with the team. Yikes.

If Will Campbell is still on the board when the Dolphins pick on draft night, I'll eat my hat.

Transfer of ownership is possible, it can just be hard to find players who want to take over someone ELSE'S dynasty team, ya know? Most of the fun is in the building of the team, so asking someone to have full buy-in and commitment to a team they didn't build can be tough sometimes. Replacing owners can certainly be done, but of course it's always best to start off with a strong foundation of owners so that it's more the rare exception than a regularity.

I don't think the Tweet or article were worded in such a way as to confirm or deny the veracity of these statements. In other words: Does the technology trigger when the ball crosses the first down line and electronically signal "first down" before the refs can even spot the ball? Seems like more information is needed to form a conclusion.

I agree that active and well vetted membership is important to a good dynasty league. I was planning to direct message all those who said they were interested and ask what their history in dynasty leagues was like, whether they felt comfortable committing to multiple years, etc. It's seeming like more people are likely to reply to this than there will be available spaces, and unfortunately there won't be room for everyone. But I couldn't agree more than securing active and committed ownership is key to success and fun. I was planning to go with a classic snake draft. No auction, no round reversal. To be honest, while I agree that auction drafts have great virtue, they are not as user friendly. That is: skilled, veteran dynasty owners are often really good at them, while others that are newer to the format are awful at them. You can end up with 2-3 really good teams and a bunch of awful teams pretty quickly. In the name of parity and of not weeding out potentially committed and active owners in the name of what I consider to be a less intuitive draft format, snake draft was the plan. Given that I imagine board members live all over the country and it seems to be extremely hard to get even real life friends on the same page for hanging out, let alone strangers...it seems next to impossible to try to organize any kind of in-person draft. I had planned on a virtual draft. We would all vote on and agree upon a date and time, and I'd be checking in with everyone ahead of it to make sure they were ready. I'm not opposed to some kind of simultaneous video chat sort of thing, but someone more savvy with that type of thing than myself would have to set it up.

I was planning to wait until I was sure there was sufficient interest and then sort of see what everyone was comfortable with. I want it to be enough $ that there's a decent prize for the winner and runner-up and that people feel invested, but not so much that it's a barrier for entry to people. So...nothing crazy. $25? Something like that. Would be open to input from interested parties.

I know you didn't have time to read that post before replying 😅 Dude saw "dynasty league" and was like "IN!". My kinda fantasy football degenerate 😋

Please move this thread if it's in the wrong place. I co-commissioner a couple of dynasty leagues currently, and I love it. I've been looking to add one more league, and I figure what better group of people to play with than TBDers? Without getting too far into the weeds, the basics would be: - 12 teams - Non-superflex - Start 1 QB, 2 RB, 2 WR, 1 TE, 2 FLEX, 1 Defense, 1 K. - Half-PPR. 6 point passing TDs. - Would use the Sleeper App. - Startup draft would likely occur sometime in May or June, with this year's rookie crop as part of the draft pool. There would be a modest cash buy-in. Without one, I find that it's just too easy for people to lose interest or abandon their team when the going gets rough. Here's the catch: a Dynasty league is ONLY as good as its members. Having inactive, uninterested, or flakey owners can pretty quickly be the death knell of any dynasty league. So ideally, I'd want board members who've been here for a while. No offense to any newbies, but I figure someone who has been on this forum for years has more investment in honoring a league commitment than someone who just joined last month. Experienced players would also be a plus, but not a necessity. A good dynasty league can go on for many years, so I'd only want people who are willing to commit to giving this thing a go beyond this year. Perhaps even asking for two seasons' worth of dues (which, again, would be modest) up front. If it seems like there's enough interest, we can move forward to actually assembling the league and having everyone pay into LeagueSafe. If it doesn't seem like there's enough interest, then we can just forget I ever asked. What say you, TBDers?

And yet...I DO think the "style over substance" statement the drafter made is pretty accurate with regard to the Dolphins. They've neglected and mismanaged their o-line for years now. I can only hope, as a fan of their divisional foe, that they continue to do so.

Is Will Campbell still on the board at 14, or is my gummy just kicking in?

The NFL is pretty cagey with what data they do and don't let get out into the world regarding player safety. So no, I don't have data to support my statement. My position is that they do surface level things like change the kickoff, begrudgingly allow guardian helmets to be worn during games, and add more stringent concussion protocols to give LIP SERVICE to the idea of player safety, when in reality, many of their other actions show that it's not really a priority for them. Put differently, I think they're willing to make player safety changes SO LONG AS it doesn't affect their bottom line. None of the above three changes I just mentioned take money out of the owners' pockets. Meanwhile, they're willing to do things that ADD to their bottom line even IF they fly in the face of player safety. I think the amount of short weeks they make players play on, Thursday night games (which are universally despised by players), adding extra regular season games, etc, are all inherently antithetical to the idea of protecting player safety. But they all increase revenue, so the league pushes them through. If they can appease the public with safety measures that don't cost them profit, they will. That way, when they do things that are not conducive to player safety, they can point to the things they DO do and say "No. See? Look! We're doing things!". Oh, and then there's the issue of turf being less safe to play on than natural grass, for which there DOES seem to be plenty of data. And yet...