CBS: Free vs Commissioner

[bigh0rt]

So I'm thinking of moving the league I commish over to CBS this season, and I'm wondering if it's worth shelling out the cash for the pay version vs. the Free, and looking to hear some testimonials from those who have used CBS previously to assist. It's not a keeper leagues, so the specifications for keeper formats isn't necessary, but I'd love to have customizable stats (a wide range) if possible, along with divisions, so on and so forth. What's offered with the Free vs Commissioner versions?

Also, has anyone played their Fantasy College Football, and how was it?

Thanks, in advance.

[dream_017]

So I'm thinking of moving the league I commish over to CBS this season, and I'm wondering if it's worth shelling out the cash for the pay version vs. the Free, and looking to hear some testimonials from those who have used CBS previously to assist. It's not a keeper leagues, so the specifications for keeper formats isn't necessary, but I'd love to have customizable stats (a wide range) if possible, along with divisions, so on and so forth. What's offered with the Free vs Commissioner versions?

Also, has anyone played their Fantasy College Football, and how was it?

Thanks, in advance.

One of my leagues(I'm not the commish) still plays on the pay CBS site. It is really expensive, but I do like the set-up of the site and all that it offers. For the money I would switch to MFL if it were me. MFL is less expensive and I think a much better set-up and customization. If you don't mind the cost, I don't think you will have any other complaints about using the pay CBS site. I played the free version a couple years ago, so I'm not sure how it is now, but I'm sure there have been changes - I didn't pay that much attention to it as it was just a league with some guys messing around. It wasn't bad from what I remember, for a free site, I recommend fleaflicker.

[mattb47]

I agree.

Free = Fleaflicker
Pay = My Fantasy League

[bigh0rt]

Thanks for the replies guys, strongly considering switching to MFL, as the price isn't an obstacle at all. Everyone's willing to pay for good service. With MFL, is it nice and easy to set lineups, check FA, etc. the way it is on Yahoo!? Appreciate the help, again, in advance. I've checked out some of the sample MFL sites and they're badass looking, but I can't really look deep beyond just the front pages...

[dream_017]

Thanks for the replies guys, strongly considering switching to MFL, as the price isn't an obstacle at all. Everyone's willing to pay for good service. With MFL, is it nice and easy to set lineups, check FA, etc. the way it is on Yahoo!? Appreciate the help, again, in advance. I've checked out some of the sample MFL sites and they're badass looking, but I can't really look deep beyond just the front pages...

Once you get the hang of it, yes. Each owner can customize their own home page, so you can have a module to set line-up (it will show your roster and a check box - just check the players you want to start), checking free agents, there are many ways to sort them, there is a nice easy roster page to look at - for the money it is the best site out there

[biju]

There are going to be a lot of people who are going to suggest MFL like they get paid a million dollars per referral. For me, I think the "highly customizable" home page lacks heavily in usability and it's a learning curve to get it to look half way normal. And those nice customizable stats that CBS has certainly doesn't exist on MFL.

Yes, CBS is overpriced and as it turns out there are a ton of people who wouldn't touch it because of that fact. I think however if they were priced the same (and of course you're not playing in a keeper league, because that is the advantage of MFL) you would be hard pressed to really want to choose MFL over CBS.

If I were you, I would try it out first before making the switch. MFL really isn't as nice as people try to make it out to be, and unless your league has hours and hours of free time to get that "perfect" home page it will *never* be nearly as good as CBS.

[bigh0rt]

There are going to be a lot of people who are going to suggest MFL like they get paid a million dollars per referral. For me, I think the "highly customizable" home page lacks heavily in usability and it's a learning curve to get it to look half way normal. And those nice customizable stats that CBS has certainly doesn't exist on MFL.

Yes, CBS is overpriced and as it turns out there are a ton of people who wouldn't touch it because of that fact. I think however if they were priced the same (and of course you're not playing in a keeper league, because that is the advantage of MFL) you would be hard pressed to really want to choose MFL over CBS.

If I were you, I would try it out first before making the switch. MFL really isn't as nice as people try to make it out to be, and unless your league has hours and hours of free time to get that "perfect" home page it will *never* be nearly as good as CBS.

I'm continuing to do research. Not even opposed to sticking with Yahoo!, who I noticed is now offering customized schedules, which is something my league really wants to go with their divisions.

[dmacblue]

I really like CBS but I hate beign taken for granted and taken advantage off by a provider whether it be bar/restaurant/cable/chick

Really enjoyed MFL last year, and it is better value than CBS if value is a concern.

If if was purely based on preference of product, i'd lean with CBS as i'm much more familair with it.

But, for the price, they can kiss my grits

[dream_017]

i'm much more familair with it.

Most of the posts about how people feel about a site is mostly going to be based on how familiar they are with it. I've been playing on CBS since 2002, so I am pretty familiar with them, but when I see that I can get the same info for cheaper and not lose much if any in the process, I think you have to go for it. That is why MFL is the way to go, some people are going to say it is too cumbersome, all they are saying is that they know their current site provider and feel comfortable with it and don't want to learn something new. Why do you think Yahoo still gets away with charging money for live scoring...because people are familiar with the site and don't want to change...even though fleaflicker has much more to offer and live scoring is included in the price....Oh, that price....FREE

And those nice customizable stats that CBS has certainly doesn't exist on MFL.

Really, what does CBS have that MFL doesn't?

[Dan Lambskin]

i'm much more familair with it.

Most of the posts about how people feel about a site is mostly going to be based on how familiar they are with it. I've been playing on CBS since 2002, so I am pretty familiar with them, but when I see that I can get the same info for cheaper and not lose much if any in the process, I think you have to go for it. That is why MFL is the way to go, some people are going to say it is too cumbersome, all they are saying is that they know their current site provider and feel comfortable with it and don't want to learn something new. Why do you think Yahoo still gets away with charging money for live scoring...because people are familiar with the site and don't want to change...even though fleaflicker has much more to offer and live scoring is included in the price....Oh, that price....FREE

And those nice customizable stats that CBS has certainly doesn't exist on MFL.

Really, what does CBS have that MFL doesn't?

projections...i like their player news better too, on MFL i have to open up each player in a new tab or window, whereas CBS just opens on my homepage. i play on both and like both, but MFL is definately the better value