Funny. Everyone in my league is calling me a genious for picking him up before week 1. I think I've had trade offers from 9 of the other 11 teams by now for him. At this point, I'm almost ready to give up Jeremy Shockey and let Colston play TE full time for the rest of the season.
This was the first week I've actually played him at TE, though. (to fill in bye)
no, he should be played at TE. If someone drafted him as such, you are going to screw him?
The fact is, no one would dream of making rosters bigger/smaller, changing scoring or changing naything else after teams have been drafted, player positions shouldn't change to be more restrictive than when they started.
I would have been livid if something erupted during the Slash year like this.
If the league has him listed as a TE, then you are free to play him as a tight end. Everyone could see the eligibility, this is how it was once the games started, and that should be that. Granted, in real life he isn't a WR, but it is "fantasy" football, not "real life" football simulator.
The opening scene of the movie "Saving Private Ryan" is loosely based on games of dodgeball Brian Dawkins played in second grade.
But here lies the problem eagles. Most people didn't draft him. They picked him up. At the time when most drafts happened he was already listed as a WR. and Conwell was the #1 TE with Hilton on everyone's watch list. Most of the moaning is coming from other people seeing on the ww and getting to play TE while he is actually a WR.
This is gonna be a debate that goes all year long. My stance is that if he is eligible with the site then it should be good to go. Everyone had the same chance to grab him as a TE.
Moreso, and this goes into the questions surrounding the situation, why is everyone so against him as a TE? If it were a complete error such as LT being a kicker, then yes I can see that argument as could 99% of people. But this is not the case here. Case in point. Colston was a TE in college. Colston was drafted as a TE. Colston still lines up as a TE on certain plays. Granted he lines up split wide the majority of the time, but if that is your distinguishing factor, then what about Gates/Shockey/Witten? They have all lined up as WR's but this argument isn't there for them? Is there a certain number of times you must line up standing up to be considered a WR before a TE?
Moreso, what about KWII the first two games where he lined up split more often because Edwards was injured? Let's just assume Edwards gets hurt for the season and Cle. decides to line KWII up wide from here on out? Does he become a WR then?
Just a few things to think about. I can see how people are upset about the numbers Colston is putting up, but I stand by the fact that using him as a TE is not cheating. Not by the sites rules, and really not even if you really look at the situation.
well true, but I remmber that eligiblity (unless I am crazy) being before the first game. I may be wrong, so this isn't snarky, just trying to be honest. I remember him as a TE/WR in yahoo for a while now. Dual eligiblity players are rare in fantasy, but if someone is listed as something, them's the breaks. No one bitched about cooley, even though it wasn't a particularly helpful eligiligy issue. And if mcihael robinson ever ends up starting, then the same thing.
My point is, I don't think its fair to retroactively change eligiblity after games have started and roster moves have been made.
IF someone has a weird eligiblity in fantasy, you jsut go with it.
Alfonso Soriano wasn't "really" an OF, but no one in fantasy baseball bithced at people for starting him there. And trust me, that is pretty damn pronounced advantage.
And I think to some degree this is a stupid debate. Fantasy kind of pigeon holes some players and nothing you can do about it. Tony Gonzalez was no more a tight end in the traditional sense than this colston guy is. Tony G was basically an atypical WR who lined up in TE formations. In real life, he was more of a receiver than a "strict tight end", but people don't complain about that.
Christ, with how much westrbook is going to catch, he should be listed as a receiver too.
I know those examples were silly to an extent, but I think this is mcuh ado abotu nothing.
Once the season starts, ad hoc changes and rules alterations should not become MORE restrictive. Its not fair to the people who made roster decisions based upon one set of facts (the listed TE) positon. One guy in one of my leagues had shcokey and this colston guy. Traded Shockey. How fair would it be to take away colston now? Not at all.
Ultiamtely, I don't make the in hosue fantasy decisions on positions OR the real life decisions on positions. If the game lists somebody as something, then the game does.
And in Yahoo, they have a specific written policy about it. I think its fairly open and shut honestly.
The opening scene of the movie "Saving Private Ryan" is loosely based on games of dodgeball Brian Dawkins played in second grade.
Eagles I am not saying you don't have a point, I am saying 90% of the people who got Colston as a TE/WR are using him at TE to gain an advantage over the system. Which in my opion is wrong. Call it good strategy or what you will, but if I was the commish 1)I wouldn't have waited this long to change him and 2) I would have made it clear to the league he is a WR not a Te and will be played inthat position.
And whomever said he was a TE in college was wrong. He was a WR.....
Bowie wrote:By agreeing to play in a Yahoo league, they also agreed to play by Yahoo rules. End of story.
Well put, if they dont like the yahoo "loopholes" then maybe your league should look to relocate to a new FF host next year, until then you play the way yahoo says you do (minus the limited customizability).
The only way I could see this being an issue is if the commish clarified at the beginning of the season that you had to start a player based on what position he currently plays. If he didn't then there is no moral issue here.
Exactly, In fantasy baseball nobody complains when a player has multi-position eligibility. Nor should they complain in this situation. It's not your fault, and your league should quit being babies.
If I had to guess, I would say that you are one of the leaders of your league, because I know for a fact they would not bitch if you weren't.
shagworth wrote:Exactly, In fantasy baseball nobody complains when a player has multi-position eligibility. Nor should they complain in this situation. It's not your fault, and your league should quit being babies.
If I had to guess, I would say that you are one of the leaders of your league, because I know for a fact they would not bitch if you weren't.
Cafe Home
Fantasy Baseball
Fantasy Basketball
Fantasy Hockey
by slacker317 » Mon Oct 02, 2006 10:22 am 
