JOE WEBB - QB/WR Eligible - Fantasy Football Cafe 2014 Fantasy Football Cafe


Return to Football Talk

JOE WEBB - QB/WR Eligible

Moderator: Football Moderators

Re: JOE WEBB - QB/WR Eligible

Postby DaShiz23 » Wed Dec 22, 2010 12:31 am

u_fig_eater wrote:
CBMGreatOne wrote:
GoodOl'Days wrote:
No, it's not. But it is possibly improperly used more than any other word. http://hotword.dictionary.com/ironic/


Whether or not "being ridiculous intentionally" is the most apt definition of the word irony, it was the verbiage I needed to make my point. I used my term (irony) and his (ridiculous) in the same clause.

I know irony encompasses saying one thing while meaning another, like:

"Brett Favre is an American hero." and meaning "Brett Favre is a total jackass, but at least he is screwing over all the bums who stooped to a Joe Webb play."

So yeah, irony. I think I've got a handle on it, but thanks.

LOL, this thread has spiraled out of control, I love it.
Anyways, there is no problem with starting him at WR, unless you are looking for points. :-D
For your statement, "Brett Favre is an American hero," to be ironic, Favre must have been doing something unheroic. Therefore, for it to be ironic, him starting over Webb must have been an unheroic act. However, according to you, you meant: "Brett Favre is a total jackass, but at least he is screwing over all the bums who stooped to a Joe Webb play."

So it wasn't ironic. He was doing something good, in your mind, by starting over Webb.
Image
DaShiz23
Special Teams Staff
Special Teams Staff


Posts: 302
Joined: 3 Apr 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: South Bend; Home of the Fighting Irish!

Re: JOE WEBB - QB/WR Eligible

Postby buffalobillsrul2002 » Wed Dec 22, 2010 1:40 am

OK, I have some "real" Joe Webb questions. it looks very likely that Joe Webb is actually going to start this week, against the Eagles. What do we think he puts up this week, AND how does this affect the rest of the Vikings?

My guess as of now:

Peterson gains value
Shiancoe gains value
Harvin loses some value (but not much, has maybe No.3 WR/flex value?)
Rice loses value (though he could catch a bomb or two, but is an incredibly risky play)

Lastly, Webb is probably a good play again this week if Favre sits. 150/50/2 TD/2 turnovers too much to ask?

Any other thoughts?
buffalobillsrul2002
Defensive Assistant
Defensive Assistant


Posts: 635
Joined: 17 Jun 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball

Re: JOE WEBB - QB/WR Eligible

Postby CBMGreatOne » Wed Dec 22, 2010 5:28 pm

u_fig_eater wrote:
CBMGreatOne wrote:
GoodOl'Days wrote:
No, it's not. But it is possibly improperly used more than any other word. http://hotword.dictionary.com/ironic/


Whether or not "being ridiculous intentionally" is the most apt definition of the word irony, it was the verbiage I needed to make my point. I used my term (irony) and his (ridiculous) in the same clause.

I know irony encompasses saying one thing while meaning another, like:

"Brett Favre is an American hero." and meaning "Brett Favre is a total jackass, but at least he is screwing over all the bums who stooped to a Joe Webb play."

So yeah, irony. I think I've got a handle on it, but thanks.


For your statement, "Brett Favre is an American hero," to be ironic, Favre must have been doing something unheroic. Therefore, for it to be ironic, him starting over Webb must have been an unheroic act. However, according to you, you meant: "Brett Favre is a total jackass, but at least he is screwing over all the bums who stooped to a Joe Webb play."

The situation, in your opinion, was ironic. It was ironic that a bad man (Favre) was doing a good thing (punishing Webb owners). But your statement wasn't ironic. He was doing something good (in your mind) and you called him a hero.


Hey thanks a lot. From now on I'll be sure to ask you what I meant every time I write something.

And yes, of course I don't agree with anything you wrote above, for reasons I could explain, but that you wouldn't understand, yet again.
CBMGreatOne
Head Coach
Head Coach

User avatar

Posts: 1845
(Past Year: 11)
Joined: 30 May 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball

Re: JOE WEBB - QB/WR Eligible

Postby Maris09 » Wed Dec 22, 2010 6:03 pm

I liked it better when we were calling people bad human beings for using a perfectly legal Joe Webb. This word definition stuff is boring.
Maris09
Head Coach
Head Coach

User avatar

Posts: 1000
Joined: 3 Jun 2008
Home Cafe: Baseball

Re: JOE WEBB - QB/WR Eligible

Postby CBMGreatOne » Wed Dec 22, 2010 6:24 pm

Maris09 wrote:I liked it better when we were calling people bad human beings for using a perfectly legal Joe Webb. This word definition stuff is boring.


I don't think you're a bad person if you start Joe Webb. I just don't think it's the best thing to do in the "spirit" of competition. I may have overstated my case a little bit in my message board rant which I cut and pasted from my league, but I stand by the sentiment.

I'm not, by a longshot, the only one who thought/think that starting Webb was/is a morally questionable play.

Paul Charchian: Fantasy Football Weekly

http://www.kfan.com/podcast/FantasyFBWeekly.xml

Follow the link and listen to the top of 12/18, hour number 2.

Matthew Berry: ESPN Fantasy Focus Football

http://games.espn.go.com/frontpage/football

Follow the Fantasy Focus link near the bottom of your screen and listen to the 12/20 show skip ahead to the 55 minute mark (It may be more like 56)

Follow the same ESPN link and listen to the very beginning of the 12/21 show and you'll hear another take from a worker at ESPN.

I don't claim outright victory in the debate, nor did I attempt to prohibit the play in my own league. I just thought it would be better if we could come to a gentlemen's agreement that it would be best for the league if a starting QB not be activated in a starting WR position. Just because Yahoo allows it doesn't mean that somebody has to do it.

As a commissioner, if I had been the one starting Joe Webb and my opponent had a problem with it, I'd have a hard time going ahead with the move with a clear conscience. That's just me.
CBMGreatOne
Head Coach
Head Coach

User avatar

Posts: 1845
(Past Year: 11)
Joined: 30 May 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball

Re: JOE WEBB - QB/WR Eligible

Postby ABA316 » Wed Dec 22, 2010 10:48 pm

Well just found this thread ;-D

I commish a 12 to 14 team keeper league and have a co-commish. We have a constitution that is reviewed and/or revised yearly. There exist in this league a couple of armchair lawyers/general rabble rousers.

I can honestly say that dual eligibility during the year has never been brought up/fussed about, which mildly surprises me knowing the previous sentence :-b

Our stance has always been for eligibility in current year, the hosting site (in this case Yahoo) determines that and is the final word. We keep up to 2 players and they must play 2 different positions. If said player (in this case Webb) was to carry over dual eligibility, the commish will make a call on what position he is considered for keeper purposes ONLY, AKA the Colston Rule. In the Webb case, he'd be considered a QB for keeper purposes and the team keeping him couldn't keep another QB but Webb could be played as QB or WR during matchups. Also, Webb is considered QB for position limits during the draft.

The leagues where this is being discussed, my advice would be to have a ruling on it inserted into your constitution the following year..PM me for a copy of the verbage my league uses if you wish. We also have the CYA clause that commish reserves the right to make a ruling on something that causes an issue during the year that may not be specifically addressed clearly (though we haven't had to use that thank God).

Just for S and G, a couple of other dual examples that I didn't see:

2010 Dexter McCluster, RB/WR. I drafted McCluster this year and at the draft it was determined that McCluster is considered a WR for roster limit reasons (can't carry more than 6 WR) but can be used as RB or WR.

2006 or 2007 (I think?) Michael Robinson, 49ers..Rb/WR.
ABA316 Beginner
Special Teams Staff
Special Teams Staff


Posts: 252
Joined: 24 Aug 2006
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: MA

Re: JOE WEBB - QB/WR Eligible

Postby u_fig_eater » Thu Dec 23, 2010 12:53 am

CBMGreatOne wrote:Hey thanks a lot. From now on I'll be sure to ask you what I meant every time I write something.

And yes, of course I don't agree with anything you wrote above, for reasons I could explain, but that you wouldn't understand, yet again.


It's not my opinion of what you meant, I quoted your own explanation of your own statement. The only point of dispute is the meaning of irony. I wouldn't make a fuss about it if you didn't insult my intelligence (again) saying I was too dumb to understand it. Clearly you are the one who does not.
Ball Breaker Keeper League: Beast Mode 8-5 #2 seed
u_fig_eater
Offensive Coordinator
Offensive Coordinator

User avatar
Mock(ing) Drafter
Posts: 913
Joined: 6 Mar 2006
Home Cafe: Football

Re: JOE WEBB - QB/WR Eligible

Postby CBMGreatOne » Thu Dec 23, 2010 12:59 am

I'm sorry dude, truly, but my original statement was meant to be ironic. I'm 100% confident that I fulfilled the definition of irony in describing it as such, so the fact that you disagree with me has no influence on my opinion of the matter. But if you're going to call me out on calling Brett Favre an American hero, showing no inkling that I don't actually think he's an American hero, then what else can I say? That's not what I meant.

And this has to be incredibly boring for anyone coming to this thread hoping for Joe Webb commentary.
CBMGreatOne
Head Coach
Head Coach

User avatar

Posts: 1845
(Past Year: 11)
Joined: 30 May 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball

Re: JOE WEBB - QB/WR Eligible

Postby Maris09 » Thu Dec 23, 2010 1:52 am

CBMGreatOne wrote:Matthew Berry: ESPN Fantasy Focus Football

http://games.espn.go.com/frontpage/football

Follow the Fantasy Focus link near the bottom of your screen and listen to the 12/20 show skip ahead to the 55 minute mark (It may be more like 56)

Follow the same ESPN link and listen to the very beginning of the 12/21 show and you'll hear another take from a worker at ESPN.

For every person I've heard who's had a problem with this, I've heard one who doesn't think it's wrong, or simply doesn't care.

And if you listen to Nate Ravitz who does the show with Mathew Berry, he sees no problem at all with it. The "co-worker" who they brought on the show the next day to sound like a raving lunatic, was just some dude who was beaten by a team with Webb on it (even though the guy didn't even end up needing him).

So again, for the most part it's more a matter of each individuals personal situation than anything else.

It's like Ravitz said. He was DRAFTED AS A WIDE RECEIVER. Up till that point, he had played more WR, and at kickoff return, than at Quarterback.
He had every reason to be in the system as a WR. Kudos to those that paid enough attention to see that he was listed as a WR, and was potentially going to play QB that week. And let's not forget, he almost screwed everyone that took a chance on him when he didn't end up starting.
It was looking quite IRONIC there for a minute. Get it?
It was a high risk, high reward decision. Just like many other fantasy related decisions we make each week.

Let's not forget, this also happens every single season in baseball. A player has eligibility at a position he's never played, or a position he may have played last year, but not this year. This is all nothing new. The person more on top of things is going to benefit. It's always been that way, it always will.
Maris09
Head Coach
Head Coach

User avatar

Posts: 1000
Joined: 3 Jun 2008
Home Cafe: Baseball

Re: JOE WEBB - QB/WR Eligible

Postby CBMGreatOne » Thu Dec 23, 2010 2:57 pm

I do agree with every point you're making. I'm just saying that there has never (to my knowledge) been a starting QB who qualified at any other position in fantasy, so in that specific sense it is unprecedented. It is also a particulary huge advantage, orders of magnitude more of an advantage than any Woodhead, McCluster, even perhaps Colston situation.

Some people have no problem with it, and as with you I concede their points, but I think with the Joe Webb situation, every league had the opportunity to say "We aren't going to do this just because Yahoo allows it." I think given the circumstances, and although it is admittedly a gray area, it would be ideal to refrain from using a starting QB at any other position.

Again, I never had any intention of changing the rules (more like adding a rule) this year, but I will institute a ban on using any dual eligible starting QB at any position other than QB going forward. In the real NFL, they came up with the "Bert Emmanuel Rule" about 10 years ago. In my fantasy league, this year we've come up with the "Joe Webb Rule" which will be put into effect next year.
CBMGreatOne
Head Coach
Head Coach

User avatar

Posts: 1845
(Past Year: 11)
Joined: 30 May 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball

PreviousNext

Return to Football Talk

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests

Forums Articles & Tips Start & Sit Sleepers Rankings Leagues


Get Ready...
The 2014 NFL season kicks off in 15:14 hours
(and 44 days)
2014 NFL Schedule


  • Fantasy Football
  • Article Submissions
  • Privacy Statement
  • Site Survey 
  • Contact