1996 Rule Change Voting Results

Ron Yeany

FFL Proposed Rules Changes
Here are the RESULTS of the FFL rule modifications proposed by individual owners and the Commissioner. Each franchise received 1 vote. Each franchise voted. One proposal ended in a tie, with the commissioner declining to change the rule.

A few of the rules changes have further, minor implications. These will all be worked out by the permanent rules committee (Commissioner Trzeciak, Mr. Fisher and Mr. Yeany) and will be instituted for Fall 1997.

 

SECTION ONE: “Over and done” Rules
A majority vote will officially change these rules immediately. If a tie should occur, the commissioner will cast the deciding vote.

  • NEW/MODIFIED RULE – Elimination of “Experience Cap” policy.
    Rationale: Moving the roster to 14 effectively added a lot of player movement. Created more transaction dollars. Result: PASSED.
  • NEW/MODIFIED RULE – Allow teams to drop/add Quarterbacks and Kickers only during weeks 15 and 16. Result: PASSED.
    Restrictions: All regular season drop/add rules are still in effect. Player must not be on a roster from week 14 on.
    Rationale: This will allow teams some flexibility if they encounter late season injuries.
  • NEW/MODIFIED RULE – Eliminate the mandatory drop before week 4 of the regular season. 14 rounds of drafting. 14 active players maintained on each roster. Result: PASSED.
    Rationale: If you draft well, you keep your players. If you do not draft well you do not get “pennies from heaven” from teams that did draft well. Draft 14 players and let more transaction money go into the pot for teams to manage their rosters.
  • NEW/MODIFIED RULE – Weekly team rosters include any 6 back/receiver combination from eligible players on team rosters. Result: REJECTED.
    Restrictions: Each roster submission must include 1 back and 1 receiver. All other roster submission rules apply.
    Rationale: Allows for more flexibility when determining which player within each position to play each week. (i.e. deciding to play a player who may get one carry be day as opposed to two) Running Back shortage since expansion. Teams without a regularly scoring Running Back can play a receiver who may have a better opportunity for a big play.
  • NEW/MODIFIED RULE – Institute the same scoring rules for Backs and Receivers. (Use Present Back structure) Result: REJECTED.
    Rationale: Easier to figure out scores each week. Potentially increases total points scoring.
  • NEW/MODIFIED RULE – Once a season, each franchise will be responsible for verifying weekly scores with the commissioner. Weekly scores will not be considered official until verification takes place. Result: REJECTED.
    Rationale: There are 14 weeks of the regular season. There are 14 franchises. Scores should be verified to ensure correctness.
  • NEW/MODIFIED RULE – Any PERSON that is not on the roster of a college football team may be drafted. Result: PASSED.
    Rationale: Ends any disputes over suspended, unsigned, retired/unretired/comeback players.
  • NEW/MODIFIED RULE – Eliminate the requirement that an added player must be kept on a roster for 2 weeks. Result: PASSED.
    Rationale: It is an arbitrarily constrictive rule. It makes no sense to not be able to pick up a player for just one week. This would also open the door for more transaction money in the pot.
  • NEW/MODIFIED RULE – Increase the number of drop/add transactions allowed from 2 per week to 3 per week. Result: PASSED.
    Rationale: With a 14-man roster, a little more flexibility is necessary. This would also open the door for more transaction money in the pot.

 

SECTION TWO – “Further Implication” RulesAt least 2/3 of the franchises must vote to make these changes. Further examination of the effects this rule change will have on all FFL policies will need to be addressed if this change passes.

  • NEW/MODIFIED RULE – Redraft full roster each year. Result: REJECTED.
    Influenced: Many rules will be affected by making this change.

 

SECTION THREE – “Decide how” RulesA majority vote will officially change these rules. If a tie should occur, the commissioner will cast the deciding vote. Another vote will be necessary to implement change. Suggestions will be collected and another vote will be held to determine new policies.

  • NEW/MODIFIED RULE – Institute a tie-breaker for games where home field advantage is not earned/predetermined. Result: PASSED.
    Rationale: Rewards teams that are solid overall. Could encourage teams to keep extra kickers, potentially increasing availability of other players. The team with good depth would have a better chance of winning. “Or, perhaps now I should keep that extra kicker, just in case.” Ties are stupid. College football has even eliminated them.
  • NEW/MODIFIED RULE – Develop new policies for tie-breakers when considering who makes the playoffs and as what seed. Result: PASSED.
    Rationale: Determine team strength/success by total points, not common opponents. They are overly complicated. There is no defense in the FFL. It is all offense and that means scoring. We are in a league where scoring the most points is the objective, both during the week and for the season. With NFL off-weeks, both “records against common opponents” and “schedule strength” does not accurately reflect anything on any given week.